"\u003C!DOCTYPE html\u003E\u003Chtml xmlns:xlink=\u0022http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\u0022 xmlns:xsi=\u0022http://www.w3.org/2007/XMLSchema-instance\u0022 xmlns:mml=\u0022http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML\u0022\u003E\n  \u003Chead\u003E\n    \u003CMETA http-equiv=\u0022Content-Type\u0022 content=\u0022text/html; charset=utf-16\u0022\u003E\n    \u003Cmeta name=\u0022viewport\u0022 content=\u0022width=device-width, initial-scale=1\u0022\u003E\n  \u003C/head\u003E\n  \u003Cbody style=\u0022font-family:sans-serif; font-size:100%;\u0022\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000001\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022864a55eb59d74c4ab45dcad5183aa2fa\u0022\u003ETuesday, 29 June 2004\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000003\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022088bdb0c1e5c423db73b78deebbbf5ad\u0022\u003ETuesday, 29 June 2004\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000002\u0022\u003EMr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000004\u0022\u003EPrayers.\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000005\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022e34edc7df47341ab82e4ea4bcacea82f\u0022\u003EPersonal Explanations\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000006\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002255cf52b2e52e420796a14b1de5d7496a\u0022\u003EScampi Fishery\u2014Allegations\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022 data-id=\u002242c8bb7ff133473e96742d118edf413d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000007\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002242c8bb7ff133473e96742d118edf413d\u0022\u003ERt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader\u2014NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E Allegations were made against me during my absence from New Zealand last week. Those allegations are baseless and ridiculous, and I immediately instructed my legal counsel to take action seeking damages and costs from those organisations and individuals who promulgated those allegations. Accordingly, papers were lodged in the High Court in Auckland today seeking damages and costs from Television New Zealand, Radio New Zealand, Yvonne Dossetter, Ken Shirley MP, and David Carter MP. Those who would publish or repeat such allegations either do not know me or know nothing of what I have achieved in my political career. My only other comment is to say:\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000008\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003EWho steals my purse steals trash; \u2019tis something, nothing;\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000009\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u2019Twas mine, \u2019tis his, and has been slave to thousands; \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000010\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003EBut he that filches from me my good name\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000011\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003ERobs me of that which not enriches him,\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000012\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003EAnd makes me poor indeed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000013\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00224ebf8836a44f4decb889e2208c1ee2d9\u0022\u003EPoints of Order\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000014\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022e18ff896a96743b08b5f84d8baeb11ce\u0022\u003EQuestions for Oral Answer\u2014Corrections to Answers\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022 data-id=\u00223ba3fb4d3e7f4e569658d21c49afb21c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000015\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223ba3fb4d3e7f4e569658d21c49afb21c\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON (National\u2014Pakuranga):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I seek your guidance in a matter for which I would like some redress. It concerns an answer given in this House on 25 May by the Hon Pete Hodgson, Minister of Transport. During the course of question No. 7 that day he claimed that the numbers I had used for the amount of money that had been spent on new State highways and local roads in the Auckland area were incorrect\u2014\u201Cin error\u201D were his words. Mr Speaker, at the time when I raised it you told me it was a debatable point, but I have to say that any mathematician I have spoken to knows that whether one number is bigger or smaller than another is not debatable. Given that those numbers were provided by the Minister himself in answer to questions for written answer Nos 628 to 632, I then took a breach of privilege case to you, but you have declined to act on it. I now seek your guidance on how I can have this matter corrected, as the figures do show that the amount of money spent on new roading in the last year of the National Government was higher in real dollar terms than the amount spent in any year since that time. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000016\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ecdb9dd403ab4bcbb5ffc500ac8efd2b\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: If a member disputes the accuracy of a question, that is a matter for debate. This issue is still a matter for debate. [Interruption] If I hear any comment like that, the member will leave the Chamber. I rule having taken careful advice on issues, and I make sure I do that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022 data-id=\u00227e42058e78c344e09a0ade1631b976ea\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000017\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227e42058e78c344e09a0ade1631b976ea\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON (National\u2014Pakuranga):\u003C/span\u003E I seek leave, then, to table both the letters I wrote to you, which include, in great colour, tables and graphs showing that the expenditure was higher in National\u2019s last year in Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000018\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EDocuments, by leave, laid on the Table of the House. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u00226da5b6ac9a3249f0be0200da8d2a7201\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000019\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226da5b6ac9a3249f0be0200da8d2a7201\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader\u2014National):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I would ask you to give us a bit of a stronger lead on what we are supposed to do if we know, in fact, that a Minister is dodging the effect of a question by choosing to give information to the House that is patently incorrect. We understand that the only recourse we have is to seek a privilege hearing. But if matters of privilege are going to be thrown away on the basis that they have been brought on a debating point, then, effectively, question time is not worth having. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022 data-id=\u0022ad8c6f58222a4cf4a4ffd499a8f98bb2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000020\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ad8c6f58222a4cf4a4ffd499a8f98bb2\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Let me just say to the member that I inspect every breach of privilege allegation very carefully, and take very careful advice from experts on the subject. I determined that there was no breach. That is where the matter ends. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022 data-id=\u00229f03db5e462d421abb82b1da81136942\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000021\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229f03db5e462d421abb82b1da81136942\u0022\u003EJOHN CARTER (Senior Whip\u2014National):\u003C/span\u003E I want to seek the leave of the House, and let me explain very briefly what it is about. There has been a number of occasions recently\u2014which are becoming more regular\u2014when the answers given by Ministers have been inaccurate. The Standing Orders state that Ministers have to come down at the first possible opportunity and make those corrections to the House. The consequence of that is that the member who asked the question often is not here when the corrected answer is given. As a consequence, I seek leave that we suspend the Standing Orders so that Ministers, when they make any correction to answers that were given incorrectly, give those corrections at the beginning of the next question time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022872eaf4ebac949e093af7f50422bf6cb\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought to suspend the Standing Orders. Is there any objection? There is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000023\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022da4927f592a04659994079705aed32b5\u0022\u003EQuestions for Oral Answer\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000024\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002278665451d218404e95b05f243e09cf59\u0022\u003EQuestions to Ministers\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000025\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022dc1c167b77e647f9a7c92d997ad21a0d\u0022\u003EParole Board\u2014Confidence\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000026\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225d1c67f9feeb4d78a96a23484b2cd701\u0022\u003E1. Hon TONY RYALL (National\u2014Bay of Plenty)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Justice: Does he have full confidence in the Parole Board; if so, why?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022 data-id=\u0022139a0891f6174748a1ed6dbdc4c416c9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000027\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022139a0891f6174748a1ed6dbdc4c416c9\u0022\u003EHon PHIL GOFF (Minister of Justice):\u003C/span\u003E In most respects. Both the Minister of Corrections and I have, however, foreshadowed a review of some aspects of the Parole Board, and of home detention as introduced in 1999 by the very member who is asking this question. I do have confidence that the Parole Act of 2002 gives a very clear direction to the Parole Board that the safety of the community should be the paramount consideration in every decision, and that an inmate who poses an undue risk should not be released.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000028\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227c36aed10ac249b58296f2ad718d7f67\u0022\u003EHon Tony Ryall\u003C/span\u003E: What was the Minister\u2019s reaction to the comments of the chairman of the New Zealand Parole Board, who yesterday indicated he was unaware that for most offenders on parole, their parole amounts to nothing more than weekly, then, very quickly, monthly contact with their parole officer; and when the Minister appointed the Parole Board, why did he not ensure that the board was properly briefed?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000029\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002260f9f7414fc64b22862156fe8899db96\u0022\u003EHon PHIL GOFF\u003C/span\u003E: My reaction to that comment is that the frequency with which the probation service will meet with the person who is on parole will depend on the risk that that released inmate is deemed to pose and also the amount of time that that person has been out in the community. The probation service sees every released person within 72 hours. That is what I am informed. It will then see the person weekly, then fortnightly, then monthly, but that will vary according to the circumstances, the perceived risk, and the situation that the parolee is in.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000030\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9a94bf3-a948-4410-8413-403a7454114b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fea4c0ea743d46a59c210e7c0442295a\u0022\u003ETim Barnett\u003C/span\u003E: What actions have been taken around the ability of the Community Probation Service to carry out its role in terms of the implementation of Parole Board decisions?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000031\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002223b47702bb3d4554953d2e4ed1a1ceaf\u0022\u003EHon PHIL GOFF\u003C/span\u003E: In Budget 2003 the Government voted more than $19 million over 2 years to boost the number of community probation officers by over 100\u2014that is, 22 percent\u2014and to increase the training budget for Community Probation Service officers by over 80 percent. That resourcing was particularly important after many years of neglect of the service by the previous National Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000032\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ffa71cc39fb14e12a63d1da7cba3efdf\u0022\u003EDail Jones\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Minister accept that it is the Government\u2019s responsibility to appoint the Parole Board in terms of section 111 of the Act; and, bearing in mind that the chairman of the Parole Board now says that he acts on the basis of taking risks, when the Act itself makes it clear that risks should not be taken, what steps will the Minister take to dissolve this board and appoint a new one?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000033\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228c587ccdfe9e4491b596e55e69eee321\u0022\u003EHon PHIL GOFF\u003C/span\u003E: The Parole Board is appointed by the Attorney-General for a term of office. I saw the transcript of the interview that the member refers to. The only form of risk that the Parole Board under law is able to take is to make an assessment as to whether the person to be released constitutes, or not, an \u201Cundue risk\u201D. Anybody who constitutes an undue risk cannot, by statute, be released, and I would be very concerned if the Parole Board were releasing any such person. But I do not think that that is what the judge was trying to say in the interview. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000034\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c2d6ad2c28a74f898731a8ecb4d46158\u0022\u003EDeborah Coddington\u003C/span\u003E: Why should the Parole Board not insist on knowing that the probation service will reliably enforce and administer parole conditions, before granting parole?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000035\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002296662444e1ab4bbda6396431af186384\u0022\u003EHon PHIL GOFF\u003C/span\u003E: The role of the Parole Board, if I can repeat it, is to make an assessment as to whether the release of the person concerned would detrimentally affect the safety of the community, and as to whether that person constitutes an undue risk. That is where the Parole Board\u2019s responsibilities begin and end, but there is nothing to stop the chair of the Parole Board asking the question of the Community Probation Service as to whether it is able to deal with the conditions set down. I would imagine that the Department of Corrections would advise the Parole Board if it were not able to do that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000036\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226d994ec1047c4064980cd33a1772a8bc\u0022\u003EMarc Alexander\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Minister believe that the New Zealand public have been given any reason at all for maintaining confidence in New Zealand\u2019s parole process, given that we have an 86 percent recidivism rate in 5 years, that recently there was an admission that the legality of 220 parole hearings needs to be reviewed, and that we now hear from the board chairman\u2014in a confirmation of our worst fears\u2014that the board takes risks about whether the people released on parole are properly monitored; and does he think it is acceptable that the victims of the crimes involved are left without any reassurance that their concerns are being given the respect they deserve?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000037\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226cc423944def41318b444c1fbfe852e3\u0022\u003EHon PHIL GOFF\u003C/span\u003E: Firstly, the Parole Board must take into account whether the release of the inmate would affect, detrimentally, the safety of any individual. That usually means the victim. Indeed, the Parole Board will often set in place an order that requires the offender not to go anywhere near the victim. With regard to the oversight by the Community Probation Service of the person on parole, I say that that is the role of the service itself. Although that is not my responsibility as Minister of Justice, I am informed that the probation service believes that the extra resources that it has, and its additional training, will make a huge difference in how the service is able to look after people on parole. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000038\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003EBut I go right back to the beginning: the Parole Board should not release anyone who is deemed to be an undue risk. The statute is absolutely clear, in contrast with the previous statute, which just said the Parole Board could release anybody it thought should be released. Now, the board is given a very clear direction by this Parliament.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000039\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002270c2983ef509464da76872ae9811cae1\u0022\u003EHon Tony Ryall\u003C/span\u003E: With reference to the Minister\u2019s answer to my first supplementary question, in which parts of the Parole Board or its performance does he not have confidence?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000040\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228f027bc2adf54686a2ce41b2c6e0976e\u0022\u003EHon PHIL GOFF\u003C/span\u003E: The area that the Minister of Corrections and I have already drawn attention to is the ability of the Parole Board to communicate with the public. It very much needs to be improved, so that there is transparency and accountability. That is what the review is about.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000041\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220c60d180e18344a38130537e9261e469\u0022\u003EStephen Franks\u003C/span\u003E: Referring to the Minister\u2019s answer previously\u2014that the Parole Board need not satisfy itself about the performance of the probation service\u2014how can the board be confident about the risk presented by any offender, given that it moderates that risk with conditions, and if it has not inquired about, and does not know, the reliability and performance of the probation service?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000042\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022930c0aa47fa547d2a71c904168df5045\u0022\u003EHon PHIL GOFF\u003C/span\u003E: The Parole Board will, of course, be informed by the Department of Corrections if there is anything that is set down as a condition of parole that the Community Probation Service is not able to carry out effectively. Obviously, with the additional resources the service will be able to do that job much better than it has ever been able to do in the past.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229e2eb7086b8346cba46b9274e28131f0\u0022\u003EHon Tony Ryall\u003C/span\u003E: In light of the fact that the vast majority of offenders released on parole reoffend, how does monthly contact with a parole officer stop an offender on parole committing more crime?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000044\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225987ecd0ce384f71955aa5678e987572\u0022\u003EHon PHIL GOFF\u003C/span\u003E: If the member looks at the annual report of the Department of Corrections for the last year\u2014the most recent that is available\u2014he will see that those people who are released on discretionary parole have the lowest rate of reoffending of any category set out there. Corrective training, the one area that people used to be sentenced to, and which the member insisted on keeping in place when he was in Government, had a reoffending rate of about 92 percent, I think it was, within a year. That is how good the National Government was!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000045\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022900eba3764f1422c98161b2ed68578ab\u0022\u003EHeather Roy\u003C/span\u003E: What proportion of paroled offenders fail to comply with all the conditions of their parole, as it is easy enough to find out what happens after parole, according to the Minister?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000046\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dd07935def734e278cc10c2970ae94c9\u0022\u003EHon PHIL GOFF\u003C/span\u003E: Looking at just one aspect of where the Parole Board directs people to\u2014that is, home detention\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000047\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e7f7cb0224564f029cdb0e6bec33e54d\u0022\u003EStephen Franks\u003C/span\u003E: Not all of them. What proportion?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000048\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229587c1e3449449ee94c3bcb07dc14427\u0022\u003EHon PHIL GOFF\u003C/span\u003E: If the member wants to ask a question, I suggest he takes the call instead of interrupting the answer I am trying to give to his colleague. If she looks at the question of home detention, she will see that the reoffending rate on home detention is about 1.9 percent. Let me make this point clear to the member who asked the question: if somebody breaches the conditions of his or her parole, that person would be immediately recalled, as Justice Ellis said yesterday. The board would recall that person \u201Cat the drop of a hat\u201D. That was the term used by Justice Ellis. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000049\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022172797cf5df143e1b662deb7ed9bfdbf\u0022\u003EHeather Roy\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. My question was very clear, but was not addressed at all by the Minister. It was: \u201CWhat proportion of paroled offenders fail to comply with all the conditions of their parole?\u201D, and then I followed it with a comment that he himself had made.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000050\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227aebf7dd1a064e099cb4f21a85ffc6c1\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The Minister responded with a comment that got to the first part of the question. I invite him to continue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000051\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b77d4483256c42df8cfe47f964f6e015\u0022\u003EHon PHIL GOFF\u003C/span\u003E: I point out that I am not the Minister of Corrections, so I am not responsible for parole matters. Therefore, I cannot give those specific answers. If the member wants those answers, she should direct the question to the appropriate Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000052\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e782e5a8288e4370b06b7ea6eb2a9c61\u0022\u003EHon Tony Ryall\u003C/span\u003E: Why is the Minister more concerned about the spin that the Parole Board puts around its decisions than he is about explaining the very poor and sporadic level of supervision of quite serious offenders on parole?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000053\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ee4b5187637b40c3b19e9506f19d397e\u0022\u003EHon PHIL GOFF\u003C/span\u003E: I am not in the least concerned about the spin the member alleges the Parole Board puts out. What I am concerned about is that when the Parole Board is asked why an individual has been deemed not to constitute an undue risk, a clear answer should be given. What I have to say about the supervision aspect that the member raised is that we increased staffing by 22 percent and training by 80 percent\u2014so what does that say about the state of the department that that member left to the successor Government?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000054\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227174dcc9391f4a10aadcb831012c33ea\u0022\u003EHon Tony Ryall\u003C/span\u003E: How long has the Minister himself known that parole for most offenders amounts to sporadic contact with their parole officers?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000055\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ab9b285c4fa64e0aac88e6d5ca722876\u0022\u003EHon PHIL GOFF\u003C/span\u003E: As I said in my initial answer to the member, that depends on the level of need and risk that the Community Probation Service deems to exist in relation to the particular individual. Can I say further that one marked change that will make a real difference\u2014and is in a bill before this Parliament\u2014is electronic monitoring, which will certainly help with the surveillance of people released on parole.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000056\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e87bc38fb91c4d3c8f812c6434a400d3\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The Minister was asked a specific question. The Minister wants to address that part of the answer. I would appreciate it if he did so.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000057\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bf9f4d3a3eeb4ab0a433a0e56872d4e9\u0022\u003EHon PHIL GOFF\u003C/span\u003E: I was under the impression that I had answered the member\u2019s question, but if there is some aspect that he wants to ask again, then I am happy to hear it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000058\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002234747cc37d64477a89cb6698d6352ee3\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The member can restate the question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000059\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e36e1413d81e496a9370c90918637839\u0022\u003EHon Tony Ryall\u003C/span\u003E: How long has the Minister himself known that for most offenders on parole, their parole amounts to sporadic supervision by the authorities?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000060\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022876c757243a54c5bb6eeb02d26bdf8fe\u0022\u003EHon PHIL GOFF\u003C/span\u003E: I answered that question. I said that the degree of supervision depends on the nature of the person on parole, and if that person needs regular contact, he or she will get it. That is the answer I gave the member the first time. It did answer his question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000061\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e7a278af32154969ad4b6625623ae1d9\u0022\u003ERon Mark\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order\u2014I am sorry was Mr Ryall about to\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000062\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022830babdfcd3e465b802b225f8e75adfc\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The member called a point of order and he was the first to call.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000063\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ede0b76fb0724a828a47b70e43c386b3\u0022\u003ERon Mark\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Speaker, you know that it is customary that if one is seeking to table documents then one does so after the final supplementary question. I was not sure whether Mr Ryall was seeking a further supplementary question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000064\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226c20111a48d245cd95ae29b616520cae\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Does the member have another supplementary question?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000065\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229908d10448ea44c7994a0e4237a8fd18\u0022\u003EHon Tony Ryall\u003C/span\u003E: No, Mr Speaker, it is a point of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000066\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ebf5773bdb18444f82fdb04e656bed0f\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: In that case, I was correct.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000067\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e87ebe2a44274d33ab965b4f48033fd5\u0022\u003ERon Mark\u003C/span\u003E: In light of the Minister\u2019s comments that if offenders who breach parole or home detention are recalled at the drop of a hat, I seek leave to table answers to written questions from Ministers that show quite clearly that people who breach home detention and parole are not necessarily charged, and that some who are charged and convicted are given community service.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000068\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002204b35c972a384b038b97d12a46752e3e\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought to table those answers. Is there any objection? There is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000069\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223363ef1e820344d9a2956ccc78a50792\u0022\u003EHon PHIL GOFF\u003C/span\u003E: I seek leave to table the record of Justice Ellis, who said that one of the important things to remember is that a significant part of the parole system is the ability to recall, and that that is done at the drop of a hat and on very slight misdemeanours.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000070\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003EDocument, by leave, laid on the Table of the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000071\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022ecd5c2e8fdda4fbe8b275baf567dc24a\u0022\u003EDistrict Health Boards\u2014Funding Petition\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000072\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003E2. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fc848d45119843a1b58a48bb3bdde27b\u0022\u003ESUE KEDGLEY (Green)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Health: Is she going to act on the call of 125,000 New Zealanders who have signed a petition calling on the Government to fund district health boards so they can pay nurses fairly and ensure safe staffing levels; if not, why not?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022 data-id=\u00220ec1b5a8c95046ff8e06a56e96fa1433\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000073\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220ec1b5a8c95046ff8e06a56e96fa1433\u0022\u003EHon ANNETTE KING (Minister of Health):\u003C/span\u003E I understand the petition is yet to be tabled in Parliament. I will await the select committee deliberations and the Cabinet consideration of any recommendations from the committee. However, I can say that this Government wants New Zealand to be a place where we can all work for fair pay.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000074\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cce4f9ad74644a088fdd06b835c86857\u0022\u003ESue Kedgley\u003C/span\u003E: Is the Minister aware that the gender pay gap in the health sector is 36 percent, and, given this, will she commit to addressing the pay gap in this financial year, commencing with a pay equity settlement for nurses?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000075\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227eb0d70678564d84abac5b995ad7f01d\u0022\u003EHon ANNETTE KING\u003C/span\u003E: I think it is well known that there is a pay gap for many women in New Zealand. No, the Government will not have a pay equity settlement in this year, but it has made it clear that it is committed to pay equity. As the Prime Minister said yesterday, nurses are at the early stage of salary negotiations. They are also mindful that following the review of pay equity issues in the public sector, the Government is looking at a process of moving them forward from there, and that is what will happen.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000076\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220e7e8da2-a6a1-41bb-aeb0-a49be255a293\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002262dddb48b3044b1c911442c0e1f900dd\u0022\u003ENanaia Mahuta\u003C/span\u003E: What increase has there been in the numbers of nurses employed in district health boards under this Government?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000077\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002236d905901eec426fa83decfb9c386ce2\u0022\u003EHon ANNETTE KING\u003C/span\u003E: Under this Government, nursing fulltime-equivalents for all district health boards have increased by over 17 percent.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000078\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220daaf9fb-1a1f-4d31-848a-fd13cb1a2c5a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022467d95e3e97346d68f467b418c48e3b6\u0022\u003EBarbara Stewart\u003C/span\u003E: If money is to be made available to district health boards to pay nurses fairly and ensure safe staffing levels, will she ensure that the money is dedicated to addressing only the nurses\u2019 pay and cannot be used by district health boards to address perceived shortfalls in other areas?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000079\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ecc86bd0e65a4e0cac7e123e85d95fc1\u0022\u003EHon ANNETTE KING\u003C/span\u003E: I am pleased to say that the perceived shortfalls are far less than they were, with the district health boards coming in on target in terms of the predicted deficit. However, any pay equity claim that is made and settled in the future would be settled on nurses\u2019 pay.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000080\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002240a770749842422bbce67ab0749b01c8\u0022\u003ESue Kedgley\u003C/span\u003E: Does she agree with the three in four New Zealanders who have said in polls that they believe nurses should earn at least as much as teachers, police, and junior doctors; if so, where is the money to back up such a commitment?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000081\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e41ef38d9dab4d338ffb24b27d25d1e5\u0022\u003EHon ANNETTE KING\u003C/span\u003E: As I said in my primary answer, the Government has committed itself to pay equity in the public sector. In terms of preparing a pay equity claim, nurses are already the first out of the blocks. That claim will be addressed in terms of the pay equity criteria that will be established. The money for that would then be the responsibility of the Government as a whole.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000082\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002253836adc6d0a449da1bcb6da96a5c357\u0022\u003ESue Kedgley\u003C/span\u003E: Is she aware of the large amount of research that shows that nurse staffing levels directly affect patient safety and health; if so, why is the hospital system still 2,000 nurses short?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000083\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022446d6a51b5114ef7980c9dcb452828d4\u0022\u003EHon ANNETTE KING\u003C/span\u003E: There is certainly dispute about the shortage figure of 2,000. However, I can tell that member that we are encouraging boards to work with their clinical staff to ensure appropriate staffing levels. However, as the Royal College of Nursing noted last year, the capacity of the nursing workforce to provide good quality care does not depend solely on the number of staff. Other considerations such as organisational culture and clinical leadership are of fundamental importance as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a8e4f4dd68894290affaa55bea4a8759\u0022\u003EEconomy\u2014Reports\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000085\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003E3. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002271328ba5f7fb4719ae435ccc6cf64438\u0022\u003ECLAYTON COSGROVE (Labour\u2014Waimakariri)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on the New Zealand economy?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022 data-id=\u00226e57b68539404896adc38efb8d960789\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000086\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226e57b68539404896adc38efb8d960789\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Minister of Finance):\u003C/span\u003E The May trade balance out yesterday showed a surplus of $656 million. That is some seven times the $91 million figure economists were expecting. The New Zealand Herald described it as whopping, and said it continued a string of dazzling economic news. The reference list to the March quarter current account and gross domestic product figures, released last week, shows both of those are also at the top end of, or above, market expectations.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e465ce02c7f44d12a8085960623ae667\u0022\u003EClayton Cosgrove\u003C/span\u003E: What further reports has he received on the economy?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000088\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227845ebb0fb2846558ce9465b469af98e\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: I was delighted to see yesterday that the leader of the National Party was forced, on the back of that data, to stop the Jeremiah act and to concede the economy was \u201Cgoing well\u201D. That was after moaning in his Budget speech, and around the country, that Government policies were destroying growth. I hope that he is feeling very uncomfortable about that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000089\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fab6f7121646417db424c8a31aae40d2\u0022\u003EJohn Key\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Minister believe that the recent growth rate is primarily as a result of the policies of this Government, or of those of the Governments of the 1980s and the 1990s, and if he does think it is primarily as a result of the actions of this Government, could he possibly give the House an indication of when it is likely that New Zealand will achieve the Government\u2019s stated goal of getting back into the top half of the OECD?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000090\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228e0cb98dcf6646ceacbfb07f6a5169b2\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: I am pleased to say that we are already in the top half of the OECD on more than two-thirds of all the social indices. That is what actually counts, for many New Zealanders. It is, of course, the story from the National Party that this Government has merely been lucky. If we are always lucky, then I invite New Zealanders to continue to vote for luck, rather than the ill luck that has always dogged Dr Brash during his career.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000091\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c85eaeb0604d4aa09c53adc09a7ea755\u0022\u003EJohn Key\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I did not really ask the Minister that question. I asked him whether he could give us an indication of when this Government would get us back into the top half of the OECD.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000092\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d45fbbc3dbc244278923f2c93f25f00d\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The Minister did address that part of the question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000093\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d61102893d5f4162b0c97da6363a87c9\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: Is the Minister aware, amongst all those reports of, for example, the Singaporean people exporting $65,000 per capita per annum, against New Zealand\u2019s under-$8,000 per annum, or of the Irish economy last year coming in at $159 billion in exports, as opposed to New Zealand\u2019s $29 billion; and amongst those figures what would disguise the fact that we are heading for the Third World?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000094\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a030cc6eb2d34d7b93c56d61911691db\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: For the last 3 years we have had one of the highest growth rates in the First World, not the Third World. We are catching up. Our exports are higher per capita than those of, for example, Australia or the United States.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000095\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b0d8b0e0-3ece-4865-9145-5eb5983fc54c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229a233f9467eb4f15ad875af56fe48774\u0022\u003EHon Richard Prebble\u003C/span\u003E: Has the Minister of Finance sought any reports on the increased growth and prosperity of the New Zealand economy that would occur on the introduction of a low flat rate of tax; if not, why not?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000096\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cf22bb2dd2eb4d34b1ec071295a5e9d8\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: If ACT\u2019s new leader cares to write to me giving his permission, I would be very happy to run through the Treasury taxation model ACT\u2019s proposal to give a $6.5 billion tax cut with no corresponding reduction in expenditure, and to model that through.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000097\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225cee6a89-68e3-40fd-b2d8-d8adb0ba5da0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002226948403b261482fa07ac1e393cc1c77\u0022\u003EGordon Copeland\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Minister acknowledge that a two-speed economy remains in New Zealand; if so, given the favourable economic conditions that currently exist, will he now concentrate on addressing the ongoing problems hindering our export economy\u2014for example, the remaining $4 million charge on exports that is to be imposed with the bill that is No. 2 on today\u2019s Order Paper?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000098\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ce46420dd6934d69b57da25f860116fb\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: Our exports run into tens of billions of dollars a year. Even the gloomiest of New Zealand\u2019s business commentators would not believe that a $4 million impost would ruin that exporting success. I remind the member that the May figures just out showed a very substantial trade surplus.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000099\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002236175298b8054ad389b84bfefa561705\u0022\u003EParole Board\u2014Review\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000100\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E4. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e1f45b42aee94d9095deaeab5fc41875\u0022\u003ESTEPHEN FRANKS (ACT)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Justice: Will he ensure that the announced review of the Parole Board considers whether punishment should be part of the Parole Board\u2019s consideration when deciding on parole, and did he expect that punishment would be taken into account when he promoted the Parole Act 2002?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022 data-id=\u00222e05c7fad3654129959880e8ba9f43e7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000101\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222e05c7fad3654129959880e8ba9f43e7\u0022\u003EHon PHIL GOFF (Minister of Justice):\u003C/span\u003E No. The amount of punishment a crime warrants is determined by the sentencing judge. It is reflected in the overall sentence length and the minimum non-parole period a judge may impose under section 86 of the Sentencing Act, if he or she believes the statutory minimum will represent insufficient punishment. It is not the job of the Parole Board to re-sentence offenders.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224835f1db8e4b4344b7d8629384b5fac9\u0022\u003EStephen Franks\u003C/span\u003E: Now that the chairman of the Parole Board has confirmed that punishment is no part of the Parole Board\u2019s role, will the Minister support my Supplementary Order Paper to ensure that parole decisions do not turn the Sentencing Act criteria into an elaborate charade?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000103\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d8c35858875e4b3c90d4bd680bc164a4\u0022\u003EHon PHIL GOFF\u003C/span\u003E: No, for the reasons I gave in replying to the member\u2019s primary question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000104\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224e34b93ebd46457892f38d0d8178693f\u0022\u003ELianne Dalziel\u003C/span\u003E: What guidance is given to the sentencing judge in respect of how long the sentence should be and whether a longer period beyond the statutory minimum should be set before parole can be considered?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000105\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ac23f36f11034e5abdde3ababd6e93b7\u0022\u003EHon PHIL GOFF\u003C/span\u003E: Section 7 of the Sentencing Act sets out guidance as to the things a judge must consider in determining the severity of a sentence and punishment. They include denouncing the conduct, deterring the offender, protecting the community, and providing for the interests of the victim. Section 86 allows the court to order that up to two-thirds of the sentence must be served as a minimum to achieve greater punishment, greater denunciation, and greater deterrence.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000106\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022461658ba1e2047f68465f67772ecd950\u0022\u003ELianne Dalziel\u003C/span\u003E: What legislative provision is there to ensure that early consideration for parole is not given in the case of the worst offences, such as murder, especially those where there are aggravating factors?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000107\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b671d2518efe4e7d81c3c20fb0285f50\u0022\u003EHon PHIL GOFF\u003C/span\u003E: The Sentencing Act provides that those guilty of murder will not be considered for parole before a standard 10-year period, but where there are aggravating factors the minimum period must begin at 17 years. Just a few years ago the standard non-parole period for all murders was 7 years, which contrasts with the non-parole periods now being given of up to 28 and 30 years.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000108\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d8169e96d626454782325893da91d035\u0022\u003EStephen Franks\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Minister think the chairman of the Parole Board is right to say that the board does not, and should not, give any weight to victims\u2019 views on whether a court-ordered sentence should be cut short; if not, will he urgently change the law to allow the board to have regard to the thing that most concerns victims\u2014that is, that a fair punishment is served?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000109\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a342acc1f75442528f1c5f1203737b20\u0022\u003EHon PHIL GOFF\u003C/span\u003E: Of course, the member has not characterised accurately what the judge said yesterday. I can table in the House what the judge said yesterday, for members\u2019 benefit and in order to avoid going through all the detail, but he did say, for example, that in some instances a considerable amount of weight is given to the victim\u2019s statement to the Parole Board\u2014for example, when indicating there is no contrition on the part of the offender, which would automatically make that offender an undue risk.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000110\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002263a6fc8a5c2f4bc1bafcae8b2e054b9c\u0022\u003EHon Tony Ryall\u003C/span\u003E: Why did this Minister change the law so that a rapist sentenced to 9 years in jail can apply for parole at only one-third of the sentence?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000111\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d29d1682871d4d989c39eba4a601642b\u0022\u003EHon PHIL GOFF\u003C/span\u003E: I changed the law first of all because under the member\u2019s previous law any rapist was automatically released at two-thirds of the sentence, regardless of risk. Yes, that was the case\u2014regardless of risk. Under the current law, the judge can determine that the minimum period before parole can even be considered for anybody committing that offence be two-thirds of the sentence.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000112\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d1b16c33cd1740e38332a7cc561ba8f5\u0022\u003EDail Jones\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Minister recall that New Zealand First opposed this Minister\u2019s change to the Parole Act and the Sentencing Act in 2002, on the grounds that this Minister\u2019s law is soft on law and order and allows people to get out of jail a lot earlier than New Zealand First would require, which would be at a time much closer to the end of their sentence?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000113\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002237c0ed20f27845aaa03d2afa71195509\u0022\u003EHon PHIL GOFF\u003C/span\u003E: What I do recall is that inmates now can be kept in prison to the very last day of their sentence. That was never the case. I do recall that New Zealand First did not oppose automatic release at two-thirds of a sentence. That has been changed. If the law is so damn soft, why is it that prison figures are to rise by 20 percent by 2010, when the crime rate is down by 13.8 percent? Those are independent police figures. There is a 13.8 percent reduction in the crime rate since 1997.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000114\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225a203e1dd00e44fdbb7b21200506abc2\u0022\u003ESimon Power\u003C/span\u003E: Crime is going up.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000115\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fe229e520f4048f5a8ae16b24c22c5a9\u0022\u003EHon PHIL GOFF\u003C/span\u003E: Members may bay,  but they cannot deny the facts put out by the police.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000116\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002287ab39b4c6d14b7c97e7f59e892f317c\u0022\u003EDrugs\u2014Mental Illness\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000117\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022\u003E5. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002288cb0d2db5304f269537292d2129460b\u0022\u003EJUDY TURNER (United Future)\u003C/span\u003E to the Associate Minister of Health: Does he stand by his statement that \u201CWe need to face the fact that drug taking is widely accepted as a trigger for suicide by some people with mental illness.\u201D; if not, why not?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228415e962-886d-47b9-9356-3fdce746891f\u0022 data-id=\u002287d390c820f34dc3b168342d1984c235\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000118\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228415e962-886d-47b9-9356-3fdce746891f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002287d390c820f34dc3b168342d1984c235\u0022\u003EHon JIM ANDERTON (Associate Minister of Health):\u003C/span\u003E Yes, I do. There is a wide base of evidence that supports it, both nationally and internationally.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000119\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c511923104824cc9bc5b0f45d853df79\u0022\u003EJudy Turner\u003C/span\u003E: Has the Minister seen the reports showing that all three suicide cases before the Coroner\u2019s Court in Tauranga last month tested positive for cannabis, and that the coroner believes that virtually all of the 13 suicides dealt with so far this year in the Tauranga region had some connection with cannabis use; if so, is he concerned that the Government\u2019s soft harm minimisation approach is simply not enough to prevent further deaths?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000120\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228415e962-886d-47b9-9356-3fdce746891f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002278ab2f6c1b7d44669e32c94355e12319\u0022\u003EHon JIM ANDERTON\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, I have seen those reports and they are concerning. I have always advocated a precautionary approach with regard to policy initiatives around all drug use, including alcohol and tobacco, and I would like to see all parties in Parliament embrace this approach. Evidence shows that alcohol and other drug use, including cannabis, appears to increase the risk of suicide among some people, in two ways: first, the short-term effects of intoxication increase the likelihood of impulsive behaviour, including suicide; secondly, through the indirect effects of longer-term use and dependency, resulting in increased stress, triggering or exacerbating existing mental disorders.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000121\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022749a724d-1ef9-49cb-9ba2-2610403653ea\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a028850c28a94ac1868abb5c41405af7\u0022\u003EDianne Yates\u003C/span\u003E: Given the Minister\u2019s statement, what are the Government and the Minister doing to combat the present situation?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000122\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228415e962-886d-47b9-9356-3fdce746891f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e79b942099694cc883ee12eecf72dad5\u0022\u003EHon JIM ANDERTON\u003C/span\u003E: As part of this coalition Government, as leader of the Progressive Party I recently secured just over $20 million for initiatives aimed at preventing drug abuse and suicide.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000123\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228469c5f6fb234df795992b208e92eaf9\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: What did it cost for the pamphlets?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000124\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228415e962-886d-47b9-9356-3fdce746891f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ab5de0e3644240f2a12d335427f9d5e3\u0022\u003EHon JIM ANDERTON\u003C/span\u003E: Suicide and drug abuse cost the taxpayer a lot more than $20 million. One of these initiatives is aimed at depression, the mental illness most associated with suicide, with an eight times higher rate than for those in the general population not suffering from depression. Depression is the largest single risk factor for suicide. Another initiative is the establishment of a residential treatment centre in the central region, for youth with alcohol and drug abuse problems, similar to the one in Christchurch that I achieved funding for last year.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000125\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285712e72-b25f-4850-b4d9-90035064fde3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002223714ea374c24531b634e13d8b8769f8\u0022\u003ENandor Tanczos\u003C/span\u003E: Has the Minister seen the research on suicide recently published in the medical journal The Lancet by Ronald Maris, which states: \u201CAlcoholism seems an important risk factor for suicide\u201D, but notes that evidence on other substances is inconclusive, and does he therefore think that those who want to maintain the criminalisation of personal use of cannabis, while supporting the aggressive promotion of alcohol on television, for example, are hypocrites?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000126\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228415e962-886d-47b9-9356-3fdce746891f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226699b5645dd54ac68ab6c655386556b3\u0022\u003EHon JIM ANDERTON\u003C/span\u003E: The abuse of all drugs, including alcohol, is a serious factor in mental health and suicide issues. I am happy to look at the article the member has indicated, but I am relying on three New Zealand studies, two by Dr Annette Beautrais and one by Professor David Fergusson, and three international studies\u2014one United States, one Australian, and one UK\u2014 that all point to suicide being exacerbated by the use of drugs and alcohol.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000127\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c5d9f81e-8fbc-419b-8f03-d0c6abebb8d2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002240268e3b7a1348b8acf366ce7a4ed457\u0022\u003EHon Matt Robson\u003C/span\u003E: What is the evidence on which the Minister has based his statement?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000128\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228415e962-886d-47b9-9356-3fdce746891f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223348363ac088436d8c6be1a822e34da6\u0022\u003EHon JIM ANDERTON\u003C/span\u003E: I indicated to the House that there are six significant studies\u2014three New Zealand and three international\u2014and there are many more, and I am happy to table those studies, subsequently, so that other members may access them if they wish to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000129\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229f7a3f86f5da403ebb0a7ba8d1af8a19\u0022\u003EMarc Alexander\u003C/span\u003E: Is the Minister concerned that efforts to provide credible messages about drug-related harm, and the link between cannabis use and heightened suicide risk, are being undermined by irresponsible statements made by groups such as NORML New Zealand, the ideological cousins of the Green Party, that \u201CPeople who attempt or commit suicide have a high rate of using cannabis, but that does not mean cannabis has caused their distressed state, rather cannabis may be a therapeutic tool that offers some escape.\u201D; if not, why not?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000130\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228415e962-886d-47b9-9356-3fdce746891f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222c3c5179cf644336a226215713eb7e9a\u0022\u003EHon JIM ANDERTON\u003C/span\u003E: I have no ministerial responsibility for statements like that, and I agree that they are concerning. The Government has taken a precautionary approach to the link between drug and alcohol abuse, and suicide, and I recommend that precautionary approach to all members of the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000131\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226434305ccc704f39b9823cdf960d64c4\u0022\u003EJudy Turner\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Minister agree that people who have never tried drugs are nevertheless capable of explaining to young people the potential danger of drug use, or does he agree with the comment that current drug users have more credibility when promoting the dangers of taking drugs because: \u201CSaying that drug users can\u2019t provide education to others about how to use drugs safely and responsibly is like saying only an atheist can give spiritual advice.\u201D, or asking: \u201CCan only a celibate teach sex education?\u201D, as claimed by Green MP Nandor Tanczos?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000132\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227fac76ced8794598a862f3dc4df5e777\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: That was too long a question. The Minister can comment briefly on the first part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000133\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228415e962-886d-47b9-9356-3fdce746891f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022290d52ea511249208d652395ab7b3056\u0022\u003EHon JIM ANDERTON\u003C/span\u003E: I have never advocated that if one has not experienced some serious physical or mental disorder, one is not capable of commenting on the serious nature of those disorders, so I could not subscribe to the proposition that because one has not experienced something, one is not able to comment on it with any authority.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000134\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285712e72-b25f-4850-b4d9-90035064fde3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e7fb6d945f5e4a75addb616813c15538\u0022\u003ENandor Tanczos\u003C/span\u003E: Is the Minister aware of the study by the Canterbury Suicide Project, which found that when factors such as socio-economic status, abuse, behavioural problems, and mental health problems were taken into account, there was barely any association between cannabis and suicide, and does he accept there is a difference between correlation and causality?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000135\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228415e962-886d-47b9-9356-3fdce746891f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221cf598f88f944f6594565b8ffaccf3c2\u0022\u003EHon JIM ANDERTON\u003C/span\u003E: There are a number of associations with social and economic deprivation, as well as drug and alcohol abuse, in terms of suicide. But I tell the member again that a precautionary approach seems the most responsible approach to take. If we take a precautionary response to issues like genetic engineering, for example, I would have thought a precautionary approach to drug and alcohol abuse, and suicide, would have been equally valid.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000136\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d2b1cd4bc1744006a404b6b06191bf9a\u0022\u003EMarc Alexander\u003C/span\u003E: Is the Minister concerned that credible messages about drug-related harm, such as the link between cannabis use and suicide risk, are being undermined by statements made by groups such as NORML New Zealand, such as: \u201CThe mental health of all cannabis users is threatened more by the current law than by the use of cannabis itself. The criminal law generates paranoia, suspicion, alienation, and anxiety.\u201D, and would he endorse this kind of comment as a suitable premise for the drug education of our young people\u2014a position equally espoused by the Greens?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000137\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228415e962-886d-47b9-9356-3fdce746891f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b361f70339754a499eb578ecfcff2f91\u0022\u003EHon JIM ANDERTON\u003C/span\u003E: I have already commented on similar comments that the member has read out to the House. Again, I am not responsible for them. I think that most common-sense New Zealanders would size up those comments and compare them against their experience of this matter, and they would know on which side of the fence they fell on that one.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000138\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285712e72-b25f-4850-b4d9-90035064fde3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b7d9e7a755bd45b0b339fd4e1c86249c\u0022\u003ENandor Tanczos\u003C/span\u003E: I seek leave to table some excerpts on a study on suicide by Ronald Maris, published in The Lancet in 2002.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000139\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285712e72-b25f-4850-b4d9-90035064fde3\u0022\u003EDocument, by leave, laid on the Table of the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000140\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228415e962-886d-47b9-9356-3fdce746891f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022004e4d4ce617408d8eb25d2d7c77e277\u0022\u003EHon JIM ANDERTON\u003C/span\u003E: I seek leave to table the documentation around six primary sources of evidence for suicides in New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228415e962-886d-47b9-9356-3fdce746891f\u0022\u003EDocuments, by leave, laid on the Table of the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000142\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a3e632c112814275b3457d42ff23ccc2\u0022\u003EPrisoner\u0027s Release, Nelson\u2014Eligibility\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000143\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E6. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022788972262ec94d41aa812712b887625e\u0022\u003ERON MARK (NZ First)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Corrections: Was Arthur Alexander Gray\u2019s original sentence of imprisonment taken into account before he was released under probation supervision in Nelson last year and subsequently attempted to kill two backpackers?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022 data-id=\u00220b8f37f36b184494963588474798b573\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000144\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220b8f37f36b184494963588474798b573\u0022\u003EHon MARGARET WILSON (Acting Minister of Corrections):\u003C/span\u003E I am advised that Arthur Alexander Gray was released from prison at his statutory release date. There was no discretion about his release. He was not released to the backpackers hostel in Nelson. Gray made contact with the Nelson probation office after moving from Auckland and finding his own accommodation. He had told the backpackers hostel owner about his background. The probation officer met with the owners, and also informed the police of Gray\u2019s whereabouts. Alternative accommodation was being sought when the subsequent offending occurred. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000145\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022740f9ad7ec6d4abd809e998a6f1ecb08\u0022\u003ERon Mark\u003C/span\u003E: Is the Minister of Corrections aware that Arthur Gray, who was jailed for aggravated robbery and who killed an inmate whilst in P\u0101remoremo prison, had been paroled only 11 days prior to his vicious attack on Tobias Sieber; if he is, what confidence does he have in, firstly, the Parole Board to protect the public from vicious criminals and, secondly, the rehabilitation programmes that we are paying hundreds of millions of dollars for and that, clearly, do not work?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000146\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c576be505f544d9e896a067d43bdc45d\u0022\u003EHon MARGARET WILSON\u003C/span\u003E: I repeat that the Parole Board had no discretion as to whether to release Mr Gray. To keep him longer would have been to retain him beyond the period of his sentence.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000147\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226f6e1ae1-8aa5-4f71-8e73-30bb378026c4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d5b98c669e50441a9611639ff4419568\u0022\u003EGeorgina Beyer\u003C/span\u003E: What is the Government doing to ensure that offenders who are released from prison are adequately resettled back into the community so as to reduce their chances of reoffending?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000148\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d6dd407457324c3a808523d8ac309417\u0022\u003EHon MARGARET WILSON\u003C/span\u003E: My colleague the Minister of Corrections has recently announced in this year\u2019s Budget additional funding for reintegration. An extra $1.25 million has now been made available for offender reintegration, and this will rise to $1.4 million in July 2005. This funding is to pilot new resettlement initiatives aimed at ensuring that inmates are given the best chance of rehabilitation upon release by being assisted with obtaining such things as stable accommodation and employment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000149\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b170b8c4eacd4c7aae23ba703ddf09a3\u0022\u003EHon Tony Ryall\u003C/span\u003E: Why does she believe that Arthur Alexander Gray, convicted of attempted murder and sentenced to 9 years in jail, should be entitled to apply for parole after only 3 years?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000150\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002236992732cfc947b3859c559d4d7259ec\u0022\u003EHon MARGARET WILSON\u003C/span\u003E: May I repeat that in fact the Parole Board had no discretion. Mr Gray had completed his sentence and therefore the law required him to be released.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000151\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d4d0cd05b045433caac2a470498bdc0a\u0022\u003EHon Tony Ryall\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I think the Minister was confused. I was referring to his current sentence. He is now in jail for 9 years, but, under the Government\u2019s law, is entitled to apply for parole after only 3 years, and that is what I was asking the Minister about.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000152\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224abffe815f04427fb81c6c009c426b90\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The member has made his point. The Minister might like to answer that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000153\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228e133cf6e9a8426aaa9203c44d630aec\u0022\u003EHon MARGARET WILSON\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, Mr Speaker. I apologise for misunderstanding the member\u2019s question. There is, of course, no obligation for parole to be given after he has served that period, and in these circumstances of course the Parole Board will take into account that Gray\u2019s sentences does reflect that he is a risk to the community.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000154\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220f24a5e540034e93ba71cfcee895d610\u0022\u003ERon Mark\u003C/span\u003E: Why will this Government not accept and implement the very popular and sensible New Zealand First policies that include\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000155\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222b90b623d84f49c2a81753233840f284\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Will the member please come to the question. That is a little bit of extra fact that he does not need to add to render the question intelligible. Would he now ask the question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000156\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002229583483136a4b8a934994132b31fe87\u0022\u003ERon Mark\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014\u201Cthree strikes and you\u2019re out\u201D, and a requirement for violent and dangerous offenders to demonstrate their rehabilitation before they are even considered for parole; or do we all simply have to live in hope that the Government gets things right?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000157\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a3aedf722f824ac9b9fe2640d4452307\u0022\u003EHon MARGARET WILSON\u003C/span\u003E: I think the Minister of Justice in the House today has very ably outlined the policies that the Government is pursuing. I would make just one other comment, and that is that anyone who has studied the \u201Cthree strikes and you\u2019re out\u201D policy that is in effect in California should think again.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000158\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dc689963fddf40e788c22b7d31c09618\u0022\u003EMarc Alexander\u003C/span\u003E: Will the Minister, in respect of the original question, give the House an assurance that the Department of Corrections will not allow any more paroled criminals to be placed in backpackers hostels amongst unsuspecting travellers, as was revealed by the Minister of Corrections and by the Department of Corrections Chief Executive, Mark Byers, at last week\u2019s Law and Order Committee; if not, why not?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000159\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002235516e9bc8ab45b586f256ae789c2929\u0022\u003EHon MARGARET WILSON\u003C/span\u003E: As indicated, it is desirable that those released on parole find appropriate accommodation. I would point out, of course, that 0.25 percent of people have been placed or have placed themselves in backpackers hostels\u2014that is, three out of a muster of 1,200 have had that accommodation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000160\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022148c1d5c765a4c67bde16a39e39a5618\u0022\u003ELake Rotoiti\u2014Water Quality\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000161\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003E7. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f2b56ad0f13f4454ac60c8f098b2c772\u0022\u003ESTEVE CHADWICK (Labour\u2014Rotorua)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister for the Environment: What action has the Government taken to help fix the problem with Lake Rotoiti water quality?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221583b5cb-f4e0-4981-97ba-193c338ff404\u0022 data-id=\u0022770b26991d234e4d8bb942a5329b3883\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000162\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221583b5cb-f4e0-4981-97ba-193c338ff404\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022770b26991d234e4d8bb942a5329b3883\u0022\u003EHon MARIAN HOBBS (Minister for the Environment):\u003C/span\u003E The Minister of Health and I announced central government funding of $7.2 million towards improving Lake Rotoiti water quality. We are spending $4 million on urgent remedial engineering works, and a further $3.2 million for reticulated sewerage to avoid leaching from septic tanks into the lake. The local and regional councils are sharing the total costs. These short-term measures should result in a marked and quick improvement in the lake\u2019s water quality.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000163\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022336740a55660410ea3356b841f023a20\u0022\u003ESteve Chadwick\u003C/span\u003E: What factors led the Government to approve this funding?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000164\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221583b5cb-f4e0-4981-97ba-193c338ff404\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002264db886a0e184b8ea4c6d9c7d7d0479c\u0022\u003EHon MARIAN HOBBS\u003C/span\u003E: The recent decline in Lake Rotoiti poses a threat to people\u2019s health and New Zealand\u2019s image as a tourist destination. These economic and health effects justify this funding in advance of the Government\u2019s water action programme, which will identify waters of national importance and manage the effects of land use on water quality. The final factor was the strong advocacy from my colleagues Mita Ririnui, on behalf of Te \u0100rawa, and Steve Chadwick, on behalf of the Rotorua electorate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000165\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209278070-a54a-41e9-8a27-45166301277e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224ed962b7b6b143858333fd7c48730a6b\u0022\u003EJeanette Fitzsimons\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Minister acknowledge that prevention of water pollution is always easier than restitution of water quality; if so, what steps is she taking to limit intensification of dairying in sensitive catchments?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000166\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221583b5cb-f4e0-4981-97ba-193c338ff404\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002292899b17871a477fa245930456eecfa0\u0022\u003EHon MARIAN HOBBS\u003C/span\u003E: I could not agree more, and that is the agreement we have reached with Fonterra to manage water runoff from land into catchment areas such as Lake Taupo, Waikato River, and lakes Rotorua and Rotoiti.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000167\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00222f853d2176f942c88b6978fb78dd147c\u0022\u003EChristchurch Polytechnic Institute of Technology\u2014Investigations\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000168\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E8. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a4ee994064cd46e2a4a4fa46ec775af1\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH (National\u2014Clutha-Southland)\u003C/span\u003E to the Associate Minister of Education (Tertiary Education): Has he had any advice from Ministry of Education officials about their role in the alleged conflict of interest situation at Christchurch Polytechnic Institute of Technology, currently being investigated by the Office of the Auditor-General; if so, what was that advice?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022 data-id=\u0022c2db6f5ed8754e0ab02bd33cbc0490e9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c2db6f5ed8754e0ab02bd33cbc0490e9\u0022\u003EHon MARGARET WILSON (Acting Associate Minister of Education (Tertiary Education)):\u003C/span\u003E I have been advised by the Ministry of Education of three interactions between the Tertiary Advisory Monitoring Unit and Christchurch Polytechnic Institute of Technology on this matter. Firstly, the unit was first informed of the business arrangements between the polytech and Brylton Software during a routine visit to the polytech on 27 November 2003. Secondly, within days of the conflict of interest allegations being made public on 5 and 6 May, the unit contacted management staff at the polytech to advise that they would need to ensure that their processes and procedures had been appropriate and sufficient. Thirdly, the unit spoke to the acting chief executive of the polytech in the week of 24 May. She again confirmed that any potential conflicts of interest had been managed in the appropriate manner.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000170\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002289320e48b3cc4a1589c34d48c6ce084b\u0022\u003EHon Bill English\u003C/span\u003E: Why did ministry officials accept assurances from Christchurch Polytechnic regarding the conflict of interest when Vicki Buck, the director of development at the polytech, introduced her own private company to the polytech, sat on a joint venture overseeing the contract between the polytech and her private company\u2014a $15 million contract\u2014and personally promoted the contracted courses in public; why did officials accept assurances in the light of that information?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000171\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022721e8a1b8384442da560344896adbc68\u0022\u003EHon MARGARET WILSON\u003C/span\u003E: Managing conflicts of interest is the primary obligation of the polytech, not the Tertiary Advisory Monitoring Unit. Also, the facts that the member mentioned in his question are, as I understand it, to be established, and are subject to an Auditor-General\u2019s report.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000172\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221a59d3ae-788b-4b19-b7dd-7d0e29a626fc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022756eccdc7b5e466ca1eda83d08fb60d1\u0022\u003EHon Brian Donnelly\u003C/span\u003E: What instructions has the Associate Minister given to the chief executive officer of the Ministry of Education about how such alleged conflicts of interest of staff members in State education institutions should be handled in the future, or is the Associate Minister happy with how this case has been handled?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000173\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b42ab073de034a5cb54f16799a26c4e6\u0022\u003EHon MARGARET WILSON\u003C/span\u003E: The Tertiary Advisory Monitoring Unit does not have any specific audit functions. However, as I understand it, the chief executive did tell the select committee\u2014and I would endorse this\u2014that if the Auditor-General\u2019s report does suggest or require that changes be made to the current practices, then of course we will comply with those.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000174\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d5bb803b60594b619058c0c9e3c537d4\u0022\u003ELynne Pillay\u003C/span\u003E: What are the role and function of the Tertiary Advisory Monitoring Unit?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000175\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002275060cf5661a4884b86545d9b679b9c9\u0022\u003EHon MARGARET WILSON\u003C/span\u003E: The Tertiary Advisory Monitoring Unit is responsible for managing the Government\u2019s ownership interest in public tertiary education institutions. It monitors the viability of those institutions by providing early warning of potential risks, and it intervenes in the event of poor financial management. It does not, however, have audit functions or audit powers. I am happy to table a description of the Tertiary Advisory Monitoring Unit\u2019s roles and functions at the end of the question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000176\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fa78a31a16b544869e87e37ef85c1bf7\u0022\u003EHon Bill English\u003C/span\u003E: What kind of ethical vacuum do the Minister\u2019s officials operate in, when they come across an arrangement whereby a senior public employee stands to gain personally millions of dollars from a contract she is overseeing with her own private company, but those civil servants walk away with bland assurances; and if they were not meant to investigate it, who was?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000177\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220c9f9b002f2a41b7872e9fbe9331133b\u0022\u003EHon MARGARET WILSON\u003C/span\u003E: Again, the member refers to facts that are yet to be established. They will be established in the Auditor-General\u2019s report. In fact, the Auditor-General\u2019s report is the appropriate place for this matter to be decided.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000178\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f81de01c6b8f4ef398bf997f42e317e1\u0022\u003EHon Bill English\u003C/span\u003E: Why is the Minister now saying it is the Auditor-General\u2019s job to sort this out, when the Government never sought the Auditor-General\u2019s participation, and, in fact, he is involved because I complained and the Christchurch Polytechnic council agreed; in the light of that, which public agency is responsible for the ethics of private contracting in educational institutions?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000179\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022806772799365491db075e8b54f9cfdb7\u0022\u003EHon MARGARET WILSON\u003C/span\u003E: As I said, the primary obligation for managing conflicts of interest is on the council. My understanding is that it did, in fact, call in the Office of the Controller and Auditor-General before Mr English made his complaint, and the two inquiries then became one. I think it is advisable that we wait for its report, because then all the facts can be put on the table.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000180\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002294402e6ef64c4b8f9fc31a613ca786b0\u0022\u003EPolice\u2014Staffing\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000181\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E9. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bab2a3fd6629453386cb1072a8e4bf7c\u0022\u003ERON MARK (NZ First)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Police: Is he confident that police staffing numbers are adequate; if so, why?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u0022c5c83a7fa489418f86738c7219a78716\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000182\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c5c83a7fa489418f86738c7219a78716\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Acting Minister of Police)\u003C/span\u003E: Generally, yes, because there are record numbers of police officers, crime rates continue to fall, and New Zealand has a crime-resolution rate that is amongst the best in the world. Part of the improvement in resolution rates is due to using non-sworn, specialist forensic evidence - gathering teams, such as those traditionally used in serious crimes, including murder, for a much wider range of crime. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000183\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022209cf425613d49b092145b8bc4e85cdf\u0022\u003ERon Mark\u003C/span\u003E: If the Minister is accepting that the police are so over-worked and under-staffed that they need to hire civilians to do police work\u2014civilians who dress like police and drive police cars but who are not police\u2014why does he not simply recruit more police? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000184\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c84627a36ca8423894aaa9f8426af4be\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: I think the first and shorter answer is that there are more police being recruited. The second answer is that any sane person would not send two sworn officers to a crime scene, when they could be out arresting criminals and when there could be someone who is a trained forensic expert picking up the material that is more likely to result in convictions. It would take a nutter to promote something else. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000185\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223a0e52c8-5bb1-4325-9870-21f4e3eb3702\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ccaeeede53ec4949afd70a94c3b694e8\u0022\u003EMartin Gallagher\u003C/span\u003E: Further to the Minister\u2019s answers to both the primary and supplementary questions, what recent scientific advances are police using to solve more crime?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000186\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a2f31297154c41879e2eaa9d20d25aee\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: Police use of new technology is making life harder for criminals, although some people appear to want to be able to protect them. For example, over 9,000 samples have been added to the DNA database in the 12 months to March this year. Police now identify people from crime scenes where DNA is collected, in nearly 50 percent of cases. There have also been 280,000 palm prints added to the police computer-matching system, with the projection that that will result in the resolution of from 7,000 to 10,000 cases. There are some people who are Neanderthals and who do not believe in that approach, but this Government is tough on criminals\u2014unlike members opposite. [Interruption]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000187\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225eae5fbc8c9a4f2e9e22be52426d6915\u0022\u003ERon Mark\u003C/span\u003E: Even you, Mr Speaker, laughed at that answer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000188\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eb19c74d534044029c7a93c56c0eafcb\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I laughed at the fact that there was laughter on all sides. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000189\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022549ad5b88c6841c8af7bcfc826b9303b\u0022\u003ERon Mark\u003C/span\u003E: Why does the Minister not accept that given the escalation in violent crime, methamphetamine production, immigrant crime, and the number of dishonesty offences and emergency calls to communication centres, rather than increasing the use of civilian staff he should just accept that the police are grossly under-staffed, and commit to doubling the size of the police force\u2014as New Zealand First would?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000190\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223f1cd8e40b0948259b2f0e80e154fbd1\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Between 1999 and 2003 on a population basis, overall, the number of dishonesty offences fell by 9.2 percent, of reported burglaries by 20.9 percent, of car conversions by 14.2 percent, of fraud cases by 13.2 percent, of receiving cases by 9.6 percent, and of sexual assaults by 14.5 percent. There are some people who would have police officers put their size 12 shoes all over crime scenes, but some of us want the evidence collected. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000191\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bb9c0a158e764ebd9ba68d2b83d972e4\u0022\u003EPeter Brown\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000192\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eb92218ca0254ac0beaec9ce9bfa8cab\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I ask Mr Brown whether this a supplementary question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222096ca6cd68b426ba3baeb9d39210bf8\u0022\u003EPeter Brown\u003C/span\u003E: No, it is not a supplementary question. I simply ask the Minister: what happened to violent crime\u2014because he left that one out.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000194\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cf32e5dbbc4543f6827fcd53aa83700f\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No. That was a supplementary question, and of course it has to be counted as one by the member\u2019s side, because it is about an extra area. I will allow the member that supplementary question. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000195\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002286e1a85be4644a819afb2a0de296d2c1\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: The figure I have on assaults shows a falling of 3.1 percent. People will also be interested that given the very good work that police are doing, out and about on the roads, in April and May we had the lowest road toll for decades\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000196\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002224dc0b487ee247b1a1d7799b47c9e108\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: Violent crime, he said.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000197\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c14c6440c6e24b47a39be06511a52cfa\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: Well, it might be that Opposition members do not like the police stopping members of the Mongrel Mob and Black Power in their cars. Opposition members do not like that approach. They say that they want to set up\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000198\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229351b505d21f4e6398cc8f49f0e289c1\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Order!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000199\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221bd94eb10a63451b9203441612134253\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014the traffic cop service again\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000200\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022764eca7e247a4453bb6692806eba3a71\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Order!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000201\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227d0a1be511c84579bec9598e23da3de6\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014but they are soft on crims\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000202\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e670d4f23ac24dff8449903f9c4f3b79\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: When I tell the Minister to sit down, he sits down. He had his say and he went overboard. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000203\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ec35d59e90324e61b17f9aa5d9de3897\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. My colleague Peter Brown distinctly asked for the figures on violent crime. He got one snippet of that, but a whole range of other violent crimes were left out. The Minister has provisioned himself with every fact in respect of his own answer that makes the Government look good. How about the facts that make the Government look as it really is\u2014quite bad?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000204\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225ead3c7dd3904d4f9ad7ea01e85389f5\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Let me say that the member asked a question and the Minister addressed it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000205\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222de46519da694b198541cdafcdbb3171\u0022\u003ERon Mark\u003C/span\u003E: In light of the Minister\u2019s comments, I seek leave to table pages 18 and 19 of the Police statement of intent 2004-05, with the two graphs showing that since Labour came to Government, crime in all categories has gone up.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000206\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a7bbbbf938e348d2baba40cefd8a033d\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Leave has been sought to table that. Is there any objection? There is. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000207\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229598c18847b4488c9017727dcf5d15c0\u0022\u003ERon Mark\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Whilst you were putting the leave, the Minister of Finance and Deputy Prime Minister stated to the House that that statement of intent was fiction. If that is fiction, then the Government has clearly misled the House. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000208\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222617cd0a219542c583b2422d4d52b53c\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I heard what was said. The word \u201Cconviction\u201D, not \u201Cfiction\u201D, was used.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000209\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227df38cab898d4196b039b0381197acc8\u0022\u003EHon Dr Michael Cullen\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Mark was just questioning your statement in that respect. He was mouthing at you, I think, \u201Cincredible\u201D\u2014I think that that was the word he was using. He is in no position to question your statement in that regard, which I can confirm in every respect. It never occurs to people to work it out that convictions can go up when crimes are going down, if we are catching more crims and prosecuting them successfully. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000210\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002282156c8bd95442a487f9e2a4740ad014\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I do not need any assistance. I heard the interjection which strictly speaking, during a point of order was out of order. I heard the interjection; I put what the member asked. There was objection to it being tabled, but the interjection certainly was not what the member said it was.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000211\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00229905f9ad1a7c48d2b4c539cf1992b233\u0022\u003ETainui\u2014West Coast Harbours and Waikato River\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000212\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E10. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b5bd2095108440c8975becb7565d8dfe\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader\u2014National)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister in charge of Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations: Can she rule out ownership of the Waikato River and west coast harbours being transferred to Tainui as part of a settlement of its historical claims; if not, how does she reconcile that with the Government\u2019s assurances to other New Zealanders that the foreshore and seabed will be placed in Crown ownership?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022 data-id=\u002247ff74416eea4625b75955b155df01e9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000213\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002247ff74416eea4625b75955b155df01e9\u0022\u003EHon MARGARET WILSON (Minister in charge of Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations):\u003C/span\u003E The foreshore and seabed will be placed in Crown ownership through the bill that is currently before the Fisheries and Other Sea-related Legislation Committee. The settlement of historical claims is a matter of negotiation between Tainui and the Crown, and those negotiations will not be conducted in this House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000214\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225543dda67bc544c0866433836fdcc625\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: Is it true that Government Ministers and officials have had recent meetings with Tainui representatives and have assured them that the Foreshore and Seabed Bill will not be allowed to affect their historical treaty claims to the Waikato riverbed and west coast harbours, and does that mean that parts of the foreshore and seabed could potentially fall into private M\u0101ori ownership, even though the Government claims the Foreshore and Seabed Bill vests the foreshore and seabed in the Crown?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000215\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022de6ea63d375c47a0bfd6c815fcf6d55e\u0022\u003EHon MARGARET WILSON\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, there is no contradiction between the bill and also the pursuance of the settlement of historical grievances. In addressing the other part of the member\u2019s question, I think it may be useful to refer him to the document Healing the Past, Building a Future, which sets out the Crown\u2019s position and process on those matters, and with the Speaker\u2019s indulgence I would just like to read a very short passage in order to get that accurately. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000216\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002262b91ed0a0f347109ff0ffd9b69788ab\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The member has asked for leave to be given to read a short passage. Is there any objection? There is objection.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000217\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022938a7533f99243beaede15fe7916f1bb\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: I wonder whether the Minister can confirm that the background to this problem lies with the settlement between the then National Government and Tainui in May 1995, for which that Government gave Doug Graham a knighthood for doing it and Bill Birch a knighthood for paying for it?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000218\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227cb643c738004c259c83a70170742501\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The first part of the question is in order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000219\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222e5606dfe04c45b6bf47bcc43dd6b5e7\u0022\u003EHon MARGARET WILSON\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, it is undoubtedly true that the previous Government settled the easy bits and left the difficult bits for this Government. That is what National normally does.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000220\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002273f60731-048d-4a21-81c5-52d588de2325\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226295a030524741dc923c989f2bc646b7\u0022\u003EMita Ririnui\u003C/span\u003E: What progress has been made in the negotiations with Tainui to settle its historical claims?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000221\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227f3e6153e7044fe9ba93bb236bb70ce3\u0022\u003EHon MARGARET WILSON\u003C/span\u003E: There are ongoing discussions between Crown officials and representatives of the Tainui iwi, focusing on issues around mandating and the Crown\u2019s preference to deal with comprehensive claims from large natural groups. To date, no mandating document has been received by the Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000222\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285712e72-b25f-4850-b4d9-90035064fde3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220d5ee08f282445019037ad02603b7a70\u0022\u003ENandor Tanczos\u003C/span\u003E: Can the Minister tell the House when the policy decision was taken to transfer fee simple title over water bodies to tangata whenua, such as  the return of \u014Ckahu Bay to Ng\u0101ti Wh\u0101tua and of Lake Ellesmere to K\u0101i Tahu as part of their negotiated treaty settlements; and has that policy now changed?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000223\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002222f99094c1724a989239347578b6acf0\u0022\u003EHon MARGARET WILSON\u003C/span\u003E: It is true that the previous Government, in settling the Ng\u0101i Tahu claim, had no difficulty at all in transferring ownership of those matters; nor did it in the matter of Lake Taup\u014D. In terms of the policy changing, no, there is no change in policy. We negotiate with the claimants, and on the basis of those negotiations come to a fair settlement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000224\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226f0c55a83be74ae0a57f1a24f2862c79\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: How can any New Zealander have confidence that should the Foreshore and Seabed Bill pass, substantial parts of the New Zealand coastline will remain in Crown ownership, when today she has told the House she is in negotiations to deliver some of the seabed and foreshore of this country into private M\u0101ori ownership?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000225\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225d150dcca56b41be8ecebdeef36591bf\u0022\u003EHon MARGARET WILSON\u003C/span\u003E: I did not say that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000226\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224d978afc9f044f9aa0ce41681db22a54\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. We should be able to get from Ministers good information that leads to other questions. In that answer, the Minister said that negotiations between the Crown and Tainui are continuing over that matter. The question came from Mita Ririnui. The Minister had previously said she would not reveal the content of the negotiations or have matters negotiated in the House. I simply asked whether that was effectively what was happening, and the Minister gave a very bland answer like that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000227\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002240f141c6ca134c6eb4f34a0729864b5d\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I do not need any assistance. The Minister denied the member\u2019s premise, and that is an answer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000228\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022c4d021e9ea854d6fb9f12bd3595edf9b\u0022\u003EState Housing\u2014Elderly\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000229\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022263be082-dd01-4ef1-9c19-d546d0174793\u0022\u003E11. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e34c8d543efe4edbaaa13a6992cebd20\u0022\u003EHon MARK GOSCHE (Labour\u2014Maungakiekie)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Housing: What reports has he received on security and affordability of housing for elderly New Zealanders living in State houses?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022 data-id=\u002291cbfed0f4cd4e26abc1e766451c8e4d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000230\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002291cbfed0f4cd4e26abc1e766451c8e4d\u0022\u003EHon RICK BARKER (Acting Minister of Housing)\u003C/span\u003E: I have received reports focusing on the fact that 300 Housing New Zealand tenants have been in a particular house for 50 years or more, and stating quite categorically that that is \u201Cunacceptable\u201D. What the report did not say was that these people are generally in their 80s\u2014honest, decent New Zealanders in their twilight years\u2014who are proud to call a State house their home. If the policy were implemented, it would see these people dumped on the street, as they simply could not afford a new house. I am shocked that our senior citizens are being attacked in this way by the Hon David Carter on behalf of the National Party.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000231\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022263be082-dd01-4ef1-9c19-d546d0174793\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c372336e18ff42a8864fb8421e39bb2a\u0022\u003EHon Mark Gosche\u003C/span\u003E: What other reports has the Minister received on housing security for vulnerable New Zealanders?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000232\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002295be9de161ee42ebb488ee4cb891b9d3\u0022\u003EHon RICK BARKER\u003C/span\u003E: I have received further reports that State house tenants with substantial assets or income should be told to move. I was particularly interested in those reports for three reasons. Firstly, 90 percent of all State house tenants are on income-related rents, as their income is low. The remaining 10 percent pay market rents. Secondly, higher-income earners were the very people who were encouraged into State houses by the previous National Government\u2019s policy. Thirdly, this proposal appears to be yet another policy flip-flop for Don Brash, whose party encourages those people into State houses now, and wants them out later.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000233\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fcd6e51506ea4a93a5d06c5032e703db\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The last part of the Minister\u2019s answer, he has no responsibility for.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000234\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4b09a29-dfd3-42c0-8585-11463bd6077b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022068701c3cf944ef195f285982d4ed82a\u0022\u003EHon David Carter\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Minister think it is desirable to trap people in welfare dependency by abolishing the previous Government\u2019s home-buy scheme, thereby denying a State house tenant in Manurewa currently earning over $80,000 a year the opportunity of purchasing that State house and making it his own?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000235\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229de98ec39ac64983a847905123be621a\u0022\u003EHon RICK BARKER\u003C/span\u003E: This party does encourage people into buying houses, and this is why we have a relationship with Kiwibank. But what this Government will not do is have the mass sell-off of State houses undertaken by the National Party\u201413,000 State houses sold off, and that party opposite cries crocodile tears about the people who cannot get a State house. There are fewer of them because of the 13,000 State houses sold off by the National Party.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000236\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f8b92f47-d078-4e6a-b4c6-136913bda55d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f96167fded764a549ab346f43cb4a351\u0022\u003ESue Bradford\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Minister accept that State housing overall, including State housing for the elderly, is in decline as a proportion of the overall rental market, and does he realise that the decline in social housing, combined with increases in the accommodation supplement, is simply pushing up rents around the country?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000237\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227bd5adc7c088493590d6b25f138b2107\u0022\u003EHon RICK BARKER\u003C/span\u003E: I accept that there is a decline in the number of State houses as a proportion of the total amount of houses. I do accept that homeownership is a declining option for many people. What this Government is intent on doing is increasing the stock of houses as fast as it can, so that those people who cannot afford a rental house can be taken care of by the State system. I have to say that it will take a long time to claw back the 13,000 houses sold by the National Party.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000238\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022971c86effc4a4febbab2a4e46265e8df\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: I seek leave to table the quite excellent press release from National\u2019s housing spokesperson, setting out National\u2019s disappointment that so many people are in State houses for so long, in contradiction to the claims made by the Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000239\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022922ab2bb01f346a7a4d02181c96bc488\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought to table that press release. Is there any objection? There is objection.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000240\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022263be082-dd01-4ef1-9c19-d546d0174793\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f871a60ac2ed4359bac88d555f938be5\u0022\u003EHon Mark Gosche\u003C/span\u003E: What are implications for elderly State house tenants of the policy suggestion that it is \u201Cunacceptable\u201D for them to remain in their homes unless they buy them?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000241\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227e7fa34162fe446baed4b8c45f0e7323\u0022\u003EHon RICK BARKER\u003C/span\u003E: Clearly, the implication of such a policy suggestion is that elderly State house tenants will be forced from their homes, as they are unlikely to have the cash to buy them. Even though this Government has reversed the pension cuts the previous National Government made, the relatively modest level of income for those on the basic pension means that they will be unable to purchase their houses. State house tenants are on clear notice that in the unlikely event that those making these unacceptable suggestions\u2014the National Party\u2014were to be elected into Government, their homes would be gone by lunchtime.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000242\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b4da34782ca24259aa37ea36b611d846\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: That was going too far.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000243\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022c9481e3f365c4edd971561d266ff2046\u0022\u003EAquaculture\u2014Moratorium\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000244\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003E12. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221c2a524375394cfaac9b4b3592f27ff0\u0022\u003EPHIL HEATLEY (National\u2014Whangarei)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Fisheries: Can he confirm existing marine-farming consent applications, halted for over 2\u00BD years by the aquaculture moratorium, may now be thwarted in favour of the allocation to iwi of 20 percent of marine-farming space; if so, does he regard the Government\u2019s proposal as fair to everyone?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022330c030b-99be-4461-8aaa-9a10ee5bd889\u0022 data-id=\u0022ae64317d0a084fa087517769b7036e17\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000245\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022330c030b-99be-4461-8aaa-9a10ee5bd889\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ae64317d0a084fa087517769b7036e17\u0022\u003EHon DAVID BENSON-POPE (Minister of Fisheries):\u003C/span\u003E In answer to the first question, no, there was never any certainty that applications put on hold would either succeed or be incorporated into future aquaculture management areas. In answer to the second question, yes, the proposal is fair to everyone. In the words of the Dominion Post of 24 June, \u201CThe proposed solution is \u2026 a fair compromise. The 20 per cent figure is a proxy for the \u2018spatial\u2019 component of marine farming in line with the 20 per cent of quota given to Maori in National\u2019s September 1992 fisheries settlement.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000246\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022635834c26b404697aab0a64629da6d9a\u0022\u003EPhil Heatley\u003C/span\u003E: Will those marine farmers who have put their business plans on hold for, now, 2\u00BD years because of the moratorium, and who now lose out in favour of the iwi quota of 20 percent, receive any form of compensation from the Government; if not, why not?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000247\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022330c030b-99be-4461-8aaa-9a10ee5bd889\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c7e8ef723db54718966450f2857916a1\u0022\u003EHon DAVID BENSON-POPE\u003C/span\u003E: The Government will be taking no steps to interfere in people\u2019s private commercial decisions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000248\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c5b3ede3-ae58-4862-b45d-b4c8f3280960\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002206cff39a67084081b9b035fa980aa914\u0022\u003EMahara Okeroa\u003C/span\u003E: Has the Minister received any reports of the industry\u2019s response to the Government\u2019s marine-farming proposals?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000249\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022330c030b-99be-4461-8aaa-9a10ee5bd889\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d8a259fa7b04439ca83ed40491b72b3f\u0022\u003EHon DAVID BENSON-POPE\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, the industry has responded very positively. For example, in Saturday\u2019s Marlborough Express the general manager of the Port Mussel Company, Terry Schwass, was quoted as saying: \u201CThe Government has picked the best options of the alternatives available, and if it means we can move forward as an industry then it is a good start.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000250\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b036ef128a9042e78c29cf67c9f83b3c\u0022\u003EGerrard Eckhoff\u003C/span\u003E: How will the decision as to which iwi, wh\u0101nau, or hap\u016B receive the 20 percent allocation be made, and how long does he envisage that will take?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000251\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022330c030b-99be-4461-8aaa-9a10ee5bd889\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002270d5a8dafd55422fbdeafd1f8f29320f\u0022\u003EHon DAVID BENSON-POPE\u003C/span\u003E: As Mr Eckhoff will be aware if he has read the background material, that decision is yet to be made, but the allocation proposal, if Cabinet makes a final decision to proceed in this direction, will be made by Te Ohu Kai Moana, with the final approval of that process to be given by the Minister of Fisheries and the Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000252\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002275cd7f1e6faf4ae58043926ca0865b67\u0022\u003EPhil Heatley\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Minister not consider a 2\u00BD year moratorium to be interfering in commercial decisions, and does the Minister concede that robbing Peter to pay Paul is inherently unfair to all currently involved in the aquaculture industry, including iwi who themselves have had applications held up by the moratorium, and iwi who are currently involved in the industry on their own merit and independent of a Government handout?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000253\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022330c030b-99be-4461-8aaa-9a10ee5bd889\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b5bf85ac4ec04da09b02590782f862b0\u0022\u003EHon DAVID BENSON-POPE\u003C/span\u003E: No, I consider the Government\u2019s approach a sensible way, in the first place, to avoid poor use of our valuable environmental space\u2014in this case, marine space\u2014and, secondly, no one is being robbed. This is a sensible compromise to complete the business that that member\u2019s Government left unfinished in 1992.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000254\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002232a4c0774d834f0483fa7f815764f5e1\u0022\u003ERelationships (Statutory References) Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000255\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002251255aa0e47a4f5fa1a226ee486f432c\u0022\u003EFirst Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000256\u0022\u003EDebate resumed from 24 June.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022 data-id=\u00225dc656edd00148b19dc94e40273c3891\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000257\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225dc656edd00148b19dc94e40273c3891\u0022\u003ELIANNE DALZIEL (Labour\u2014Christchurch East):\u003C/span\u003E In support of the Relationships (Statutory References) Bill, I point out that the legislation meets obligations agreed to by this Parliament just over a decade ago. In 1993 this Parliament debated the Human Rights Bill, which introduced significant changes to our human rights framework. I was extremely proud to be a member of this House on the day that bill was passed. I am the first to acknowledge it was a National Government Minister\u2019s name that appeared on the bill that made it unlawful to discriminate on the grounds of marital status, and another National Government Minister\u2019s name that appeared on the Supplementary Order Paper that extended the grounds of unlawful discrimination to include sexual orientation. I take my hat off to both those members and other members of the National Government of the day. The human rights legislation did a lot more than that, of course, but it is very relevant to the bill that is before us today. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000258\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003EMy pride in being an MP that day came, in part, from the fact that MPs from different sides of the political spectrum joined across that spectrum in order to do the right thing. Now, by enabling a free vote on the Relationships (Statutory References) Bill, individual MPs across the political spectrum can again provide real meaning to the decision that took effect 10 years ago, this year. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000259\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003EThe Human Rights Act contained a sunset clause. A period of 5 years was allowed to the Government of the day to assess the variety of statutes that contained discriminatory provisions, and to make a decision about each\u2014namely, to repeal the provision, to amend the provision, or, indeed, to continue the discrimination, if there was good cause to do so. If I were to express disappointment in the former National Government it would be that it failed to meet the time frame set by the legislation, which is why two separate amending bills had to be introduced\u2014one in 1998 and the other in 2001. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000260\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003EThe Relationships (Statutory References) Bill generally provides that the law will be neutral in respect of relationships. As I said before, the prohibited grounds of discrimination on the basis of marital status and sexual orientation were decided 10 years ago. We are not revisiting that issue today. We are introducing a bill that will take us through the process of determining how to address our obligations, which we have already entered into as a Parliament. This bill promotes all three options. It contains repeal, it contains amendment, and, by way of omission, it allows for the retention of discriminatory pieces of legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000261\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003EThere are other issues that have not been dealt with in this bill, because they are being dealt with in the context of specific law reform measures. An example is the spousal immunity provision contained in the Evidence Act. That measure will be addressed in the reform of evidence law, which the Government will be introducing later this year. For those members who were at my wedding, they will know how distressed I am at knowing that that provision in the Evidence Act may be disappearing from our books. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000262\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003EThe Relationships (Statutory References) \tBill contains both minor and significant changes. I guess the most significant ones relate to the next-of-kin examples we hear about in the media, where the next of kin has been denied the ability to be part of the most crucial aspect of his or her partner\u0027s life\u2014in fact, the ending of someone\u0027s life\u2014at the time of death. For example, the Burial and Cremation Act provides only for a husband or wife to be buried with each other. There is no provision for somebody in a de facto relationship, same-sex relationship, or otherwise, to be buried with his or her partner. \u201CLifelong\u201D does not matter how long a couple has been together; it does not count. This Relationships (Statutory References) Bill says that lifelong does count, it does matter, so the bill resolves that very serious anomaly in the law. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000263\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003EAnother really significant change in the bill relates to benefit rules, which, at the moment, recognise opposite-sex de facto relationships but not same-sex de facto relationships. I believe that while the State does not provide a mechanism for the legal recognition of same-sex relationships, then discrimination is justified. How could we say that a lesbian couple or a gay couple were not entitled to treat themselves under the law as separate and individual, when the law does not recognise their relationship, or give them a mechanism for recognising their relationship in any legal sense? So the provision of this civil union legislation resolves that issue. It does not matter whether individuals take up the option of civil union. The fact that the State has provided recognition for same-sex relationships, addresses that matter. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000264\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003EThe laws to be amended by this bill largely proceed the obligation to make the law neutral on the question of marital status and sexual orientation. I do pay tribute to those who were in Parliament in 1993 and who voted to enable the law to be changed in order that this human rights measure could be put in place. It is time to face up to our responsibility to meet the obligations that were passed by this Parliament just over a decade ago.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022 data-id=\u0022fb6f21a4fcaf4d9cbdab11e12e73f758\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000265\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022fb6f21a4fcaf4d9cbdab11e12e73f758\u0022\u003ELARRY BALDOCK (United Future):\u003C/span\u003E I appreciate this opportunity to explain my personal concerns regarding this bill, which United Future is treating as a conscience vote. The Prime Minister was quoted in the 11 February issue of Express magazine as saying: \u201CThe omnibus bill will take out any discrimination, so the Marriage Act will not have any practical effect. In essence, we are carrying on the work started in the Property Relations Bill.\u201D The omnibus bill she was referring to is now called the Relationships (Statutory References) Bill, and she is right\u2014this bill will make the Marriage Act have no practical effect.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000266\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003EMy first question in relation to this legislation is where the Government\u2019s mandate is to make marriage have no practical effect. Did the Labour Party campaign in 2002 with a promise that if it were elected, it would remove any distinction in law for marriage, so that it would have no practical effect? Was that one of its credit-card promises? No. Was that in its printed manifesto that I have here? No. All that Labour can claim is that it was on its website under \u201CRainbow Policy\u201D. How will a dear, sweet old lady know about this sinister plot if she has to get a computer and learn about websites to find out what the Government\u2019s plans are? Even on that website, there is no mention of making marriage having no practical effect. Something with no practical effect has become useless in anyone\u2019s interpretation, and I for one will not support this legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000267\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003EIt is clear that a Government does have a responsibility to provide laws to enable the just and equitable outworking of many relationships in society. These vary from the relationship of marriage to employer versus employee, client versus customer, teacher versus student, male versus female, child versus parent, M\u0101ori versus P\u0101keh\u0101, new immigrant versus established Kiwi, young versus old, able versus disabled, and a host of other relationships that we tend to take for granted. Many of those relationships require different treatment by law within the context of an equality of human rights. This bill seeks to treat marriage, de facto, and same-sex relationships as equivalent for the purposes of pensions, social security, taxation, next of kin, and other entitlements and responsibilities, supposedly on the basis that we are removing discrimination on the basis of marriage. Yet in the Prime Minister\u2019s own words we are in fact making marriage have no practical effect.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000268\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003EThe main problem this bill is supposed to address has to do with the need for people in relationships other than marriage to be able to make decisions on behalf of their partner in situations we refer to as next-of-kin issues\u2014that is, the right to give approval to cremate a deceased person\u2019s body, the right to visit a partner in hospital, etc. There clearly are some issues that cannot be adequately covered by the enduring power of attorney legislation currently provided in law. We should address those concerns, but we do not need two bills to address those issues. This response is like using a sledgehammer to crack a peanut.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000269\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003ELet me first talk about de facto heterosexual couples. They are people who, for whatever reason, have chosen not to marry, despite the fact they could legally recognise their relationship without any religious connotations at all. A civil celebrant could conduct a completely non-religious ceremony, and then all the rights of next of kin would be theirs. The solution to any legal difficulties is entirely in their hands\u2014that is, get married or live with the consequences of a relationship that is de facto. The Webster dictionary definition of de facto is it means \u201Cwithout legal recognition.\u201D That is the choice people make if they do not want to marry. And people should be free to make their own choices with minimal Government interference. This bill is not about choice; it is about removing choice. I have not had one single email from a de facto couple urging me to support this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000270\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003EThe Government should be looking for all means possible to support and improve marriage relationships, and to encourage more people to commit to marriage, for the benefit of society\u2014not elevating de facto relationships to the same status. Do the female members of this Government not know that all sociological research indicates that women in de facto relationships are many, many more times at risk from violence than those in marriages? Their children are worse off by far statistically, and in danger of abuse. Of course there are de facto relationships that are exceptions, and not every marriage is a good one, but it is still absolutely true that married couples are healthier, live longer, are richer and happier, and have better sex lives than de facto couples, by any means or measure by which sociological researchers look at it. The children of married couples do better, as well. Why give support to legislation that would make marriage have no practical effect, and treat de facto relationships as equal to those of married couples, who have had the courage to front up before their families and friends to state and pledge their commitment to one another in a lifelong covenant of marriage?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000271\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003EWhenever Parliament has sought to address problems in marriage by altering the law, society has had to cope with many unintended consequences\u2014no-fault divorce, the domestic purposes benefit, the Property (Relationships) Act, and now this. Again, I say that if de facto couples want the rights of married couples, then let them marry. It is that simple.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000272\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003EHowever, when it comes to people in same-sex relationships the solution is not so simple, because we know that they cannot marry. I have always said that I am concerned about their right to fair and just treatment by the law. It would have been a simple matter for the Government to make it possible for these couples to assign next-of-kin rights to each other, under an extension of the enduring power of attorney provisions or some other, similar legal action. I would not have opposed that, and I do not believe that many who oppose civil unions would have any problem with it, at all.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000273\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003EHowever, these next-of-kin dilemmas may arise not just for gay and lesbian partners but also for other single adults living together in relationships of care and support that are not sexual relationships in any form at all. Focusing the debate around sexual relationships and preferences, in my opinion, is far too narrow. As we suffer increasingly from family breakdown across society, and as more and more never married, separated, or divorced adults grow older, they often form relationships for companionship and support. These adults may share the same house, but not necessarily the same bed, and their needs in law deserve consideration by Parliament, as well. Some may want the opportunity of transferring next-of-kin status to someone they trust, rather than having to rely on their closest relative, whom they may not know well at all. But to offer them a civil union as an option, or recognition as a de facto couple, is not likely to be an offer they would consider. This bill ignores their needs, even though these issues are just as relevant to them as they are to gays and lesbians.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000274\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003EThese problems of inequality in law could be resolved by Parliament without civil unions and without this massive bill\u2014this sledgehammer to crack a peanut of a problem. But it is clear from statements made by the Prime Minister and Tim Barnett that the real intent is to make civil unions equal with marriage, and ultimately render marriage as a relic of the past with no practical effect. New Zealanders are tolerant, and the majority are prepared to tolerate same-sex relationships and to give people in them the rights and respect every human being deserves, but no Government can force me or the majority of New Zealanders to give our approval to those relationships. To do so would be to deny our rights of freedom of thought, and speech, and conscience. While many gays and lesbians cannot wait to run down the aisle to formalise their relationship, I suggest that this desire is born out of not so much a legal need but, rather, the desire to gain approval from society.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000275\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003EUnder the disguise of addressing simple next-of-kin legal issues, the Government is imposing on Parliament not one but two bills whose real intent is to legislate for the morality of same-sex relationships. People say that a Government cannot legislate morality; I say that a Government does it every time it passes a law, and on this occasion it is clearly attempting to change society\u2019s morality by law. Without learning the lessons from history, we are now intent on moving towards a society that will no longer make any distinction between marriage and de facto relationships of people of the same or opposite sex. In the midst of appalling social statistics that portray New Zealand as one of the worst countries in the OECD on a whole range of issues, the best that our leadership offers is to make laws to approve of the lowest common moral denominator, treating all relationships as equal with an anything-goes philosophy. That is not leadership.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000276\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003EOur children and young people deserve better. In my opinion, discrimination in favour of marriage is justifiable. In fact, it is essential in the interests of the public good and the health of our communities as a whole. When nearly 50 percent of our children are growing up in fatherless homes, when the State\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000277\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224f9b823e4e7a4626b771b88ddfa63f3c\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I am sorry to interrupt the honourable member, but his time has expired.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000278\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e219d6c5f2e645f2bbd6e77976dc2c4c\u0022\u003ELARRY BALDOCK\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I have actually had my stopwatch running during my speech because I was concerned about the amount of time. The 8-minute bell actually rang after 7 minutes, and I ask that you look into the timekeeping during that speech.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000279\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222faeb262c0ee4d878779d63313706289\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: If the member thinks that, I will give him another 20 seconds to finish off. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000280\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d26878d34ef4472197806d9e8b856e8b\u0022\u003ELARRY BALDOCK\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much; I have one more paragraph. When nearly 50 percent of our children are growing up in fatherless homes, when the State is supporting 100,000 single-parent families, and when we spend an estimated $6.5 billion on the cost of family breakdown, this bill does nothing to address the real issues confronting us as a nation, but is a very dangerous social experiment for the benefit of a small minority at the expense of our future as a society, and I shall vote against it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226f6e1ae1-8aa5-4f71-8e73-30bb378026c4\u0022 data-id=\u0022fd14486c8f8845daa1b7b05b16101d10\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000281\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226f6e1ae1-8aa5-4f71-8e73-30bb378026c4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022fd14486c8f8845daa1b7b05b16101d10\u0022\u003EGEORGINA BEYER (Labour\u2014Wairarapa):\u003C/span\u003E I rise to make a brief contribution to the first reading of the Relationships (Statutory References) Bill. May I remark on the previous speaker\u2019s speech. I have a great deal of respect for the views that are shared by Larry Baldock, and I pay due heed to what he has to say. He thinks about matters from his perspective sensibly and clearly, and articulates them well. However, I do disagree with many of the points that he made. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000282\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226f6e1ae1-8aa5-4f71-8e73-30bb378026c4\u0022\u003EIn the first reading of the Civil Union Bill I mentioned the perpetuation of discrimination and prejudice that occurs, particularly in relation to the particular matters dealt with in the Civil Union Bill and the Relationships (Statutory References) Bill. We cannot continue that discrimination. Albeit that some may consider that those who will benefit the most are in the minority, that is no excuse to deny rights when they are sought. I am also quite often amused at the hysterical argument that is put out about the undermining of marriage, due to both the bills that I have referred to in this speech. I do not think the situation is as dire as some people would make out. Quite simply, I do not think this bill or the Civil Union Bill affect technically the powers of the Marriage Act. That Act, of course, currently holds the power of excluding people such as same-sex and de facto couples from being involved in marriage. The choice that I hear being talked about is, for some, no choice. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000283\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226f6e1ae1-8aa5-4f71-8e73-30bb378026c4\u0022\u003EThis bill will support the Civil Union Bill in rectifying the discriminations that occur under the Marriage Act towards de facto couples and same-sex couples. I certainly hope the House will support this bill being scrutinised by a select committee. That referral will appropriately be done at the end of this first reading, I hope.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022 data-id=\u002288aaac7a1ad34cb3bd03f6651e8d37aa\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000284\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002288aaac7a1ad34cb3bd03f6651e8d37aa\u0022\u003EBRIAN CONNELL (National\u2014Rakaia):\u003C/span\u003E Mr Speaker, I do not have my stopwatch running, so I ask you to feel free to ring the bell when you decide it is appropriate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000285\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221a59d3ae-788b-4b19-b7dd-7d0e29a626fc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225f4ca9f3f7d942a4b6b05f3f16f5f10a\u0022\u003EHon Brian Donnelly\u003C/span\u003E: Take your time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000286\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a634d2c48ec94e1aa5b8b9323b397252\u0022\u003EBRIAN CONNELL\u003C/span\u003E: Five minutes will do fine. Of all the moral issues that this Parliament will involve itself in, I do not think that many will generate more controversy and bitterness than those concerned with homosexual marriage, or, as the Government would have us believe, with the Civil Union Bill. I understand that this is a debate on the Relationships (Statutory References) Bill, but I cannot talk about that bill without at least referring to the Civil Union Bill, because one is dependent on the other. I accept that the discussion around de facto relationships will generate less controversy, but I put it to the House that this debate will continue to rage, because any attack on the institution of marriage\u2014a marriage between a man and a woman, and, by definition, children\u2014will, for those who believe that minority groups are trying to re-engineer society in their own image, simply not be tolerated. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000287\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022\u003EI am surprised\u2014nay, concerned\u2014that until recently the churches have been spectacularly silent on this issue. I would not have thought they would be silent, because the institution of marriage is core to their business. Notwithstanding that observation, Cardinal Williams has now had the courage to speak out. What he has received for having had the courage to put a carefully considered position is criticism from the Prime Minister, who said that his contribution was sad. This came from the Prime Minister who called for tolerance in the debate. I will not use the word \u201Chypocritical\u201D, because I know it is not parliamentary, but I would ask listeners to consider the veracity of the Prime Minister\u2019s position. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000288\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022\u003EAfter voicing strong views on the Civil Union Bill, I have been vilified by some sectors of society as being homophobic. I say to those people that that is simply not the case at all. I have no antipathy whatsoever towards homosexuals, of either sex. Throughout a long business career I have known a good number of homosexuals, and a good number I call friends. In the main, I find these people to be deeply sensitive. So, I pose the question: why am I opposed to this bill? It is simply an old-fashioned concept I hold: I believe it is morally wrong. There is nothing new about erotic attractions between members of the same sex. It has been happening for centuries. Although it may be tolerated, maybe even accepted by some, there has never been any suggestion over the centuries that it would be given the same parity as marriage within the State. That is why I believe that this bill and the Civil Union Bill have to be strongly opposed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000289\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022\u003EI believe that the talk about de facto relationships is simply a smokescreen. The gay movement is seeking acceptance that its lifestyle is a satisfactory alternative to traditional heterosexual marriage. It is, in my view, the subject of a highly organised campaign, with its protagonists deeply embedded in the Labour Party caucus. They do not seek understanding or fairness; they seek converts. It is the hard sell of the homosexual lifestyle. I will not buy it, and I do not believe that mainstream New Zealand will buy it, either. We were asked for tolerance regarding the Prostitution Reform Bill. Those of us who had the courage to rise and argue that it was evil legislation were told that we were intolerant, and that if we legalised prostitution, prostitution would be taken off the streets. One has only to go down the main streets of any city in this country to see prostitutes as young as 11 and 12 years of age plying their trade, and that is a disgrace. I take no comfort whatsoever from those who say to us that we need to be more tolerant in our views on this issue. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000290\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022\u003ELet me turn specifically to some of the issues that have been raised in this bill. I have heard all sorts of self-indulgent drivel about marriage and its religious associations. I know of many\u2014and there are probably many thousands of such Kiwis\u2014who have been married in non-religious ceremonies, and I have never heard any of them raise any concerns about their human rights having been breached. Another excuse that is often put forward by the gay movement is that their people\u2019s rights are being impinged on in respect of property. I say to the House that in this country people can name their dog as the main beneficiary in their will. My advice to these parties is that they should go to their lawyer and sort it out, just like the rest of us have to do. They should not ask the country to legislate to use\u2014as Mr Baldock said\u2014a sledgehammer to smash a legal nut. It is simply not necessary. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000291\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022\u003EDifferent-sex individuals living together have the same property rights under existing law. I accept that there are some situations where they will not have all their rights recognised, but I say to them, and particularly to those in de facto relationships, that if they want what marriage can offer, they should simply make the commitment and get married. That, in my view, is what marriage is all about\u2014love and commitment. I will not tolerate those who want to argue that putting in place all sorts of alternatives to marriage is not an attack on the institution of marriage itself. It is, and, as I said, I will not stand for it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000292\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022\u003EThe reason I am strongly opposed to what has been suggested under this legislation is that it is just a continuation of the slippery slope of casualising relationships. That trend has been in vogue in New Zealand for nigh-on 30 years, and the consequences for some of our kids in this country have been disastrous. We see the damage everywhere we look. Every day we see dysfunctional families, high crime rates, welfare dependency, women with four, five, or six kids, fathers who do not know how many kids they have, and all sorts of terrible abuse. I will not say that marriage is a perfect solution. I am not arguing that at all. I am saying it is a standard-bearer that says that at least this is a stake in the ground\u2014that these are the minimum standards that society stands for and stands up for. Anything that erodes those standards just does not make sense. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000293\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022\u003EWhy would we want to legislate to accelerate the trend of a breakdown in relationships? I do not believe, when we think this through, that this is really what society wants. Certainly, where there are some anomalies that cannot be sorted out through attorney or client relationships, then maybe we should look at changing those things, but we should not change the standards that underpin a civilised society. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000294\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022\u003EI call on members of the House to reflect on some of these views and comments, and to have the courage to stand up and articulate those views. I am not suggesting that people who oppose this legislation do not have the high moral ground; they do. But I want them to have the courage of their convictions to stand up and make a stand. If anyone feels very strongly that those who argue against this legislation are right, then they should stand up as well, because we cannot do it by ourselves.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226de7f1d9-7be9-468a-b27c-06000416b96a\u0022 data-id=\u00221da3bc40606341b7b050f2b0b74f94bc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000295\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226de7f1d9-7be9-468a-b27c-06000416b96a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221da3bc40606341b7b050f2b0b74f94bc\u0022\u003EHon JOHN TAMIHERE (Minister of Youth Affairs):\u003C/span\u003E I stand to commend the bill to the House on its first reading so that it may be referred to a select committee, for no other reason than that rates of social security payments are sometimes higher and the ability to engage in beneficial tax arrangements is sometimes greater for non-married couples. There are over 300,000 Kiwis in de facto relationships. The Human Rights Amendment Act 2001 requires Government activities to comply with the anti-discrimination standards set out in section 19 of that legislation. This bill has nothing to do with the range of matters raised by the member who has just resumed his seat. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000296\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226de7f1d9-7be9-468a-b27c-06000416b96a\u0022\u003EI commend the bill to the Justice and Electoral Committee, where we can have a meaningful and fruitful conversation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002281c4656adc8041d6b3a15f63598ef3d9\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA personal vote was called for on the question, That the Relationships (Statutory References) Bill be now read a first time. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 77\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\n        \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\n          \u003Ctable\u003E\n            \u003Ctr\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EAnderton (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EDuynhoven\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003ELaban (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003ESimich\u003C/td\u003E\n            \u003C/tr\u003E\n            \u003Ctr\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EBarker\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EDyson\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003ELocke (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003ESmith L\u003C/td\u003E\n            \u003C/tr\u003E\n            \u003Ctr\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EBarnett (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EEwen-Street (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EMackey J\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003ESowry (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n            \u003C/tr\u003E\n            \u003Ctr\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EBenson-Pope\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EFairbrother (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EMackey M (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003ESutton (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n            \u003C/tr\u003E\n            \u003Ctr\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EBeyer (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EFitzsimons  (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EMaharey (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003ESwain (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n            \u003C/tr\u003E\n            \u003Ctr\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EBradford\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EGallagher\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EMahuta (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003ETamihere (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n            \u003C/tr\u003E\n            \u003Ctr\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EBrash (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EGoff (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EMallard (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003ETanczos\u003C/td\u003E\n            \u003C/tr\u003E\n            \u003Ctr\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EBurton (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EGosche\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EMapp (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003ETe Heuheu\u003C/td\u003E\n            \u003C/tr\u003E\n            \u003Ctr\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003ECarter C\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EHartley\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EMark\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003ETizard (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n            \u003C/tr\u003E\n            \u003Ctr\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EChadwick (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EHawkins (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EMcCully (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003ETurei (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n            \u003C/tr\u003E\n            \u003Ctr\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EChoudhary (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EHereora (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EOkeroa\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003ETurner (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n            \u003C/tr\u003E\n            \u003Ctr\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EClark (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EHide\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EParker (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EWard (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n            \u003C/tr\u003E\n            \u003Ctr\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003ECopeland\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EHobbs (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EPeck (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EWilliamson\u003C/td\u003E\n            \u003C/tr\u003E\n            \u003Ctr\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003ECullen\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EHodgson (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EPillay\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EWilson (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n            \u003C/tr\u003E\n            \u003Ctr\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003ECunliffe (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EHoromia\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003ERich\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EWong\u003C/td\u003E\n            \u003C/tr\u003E\n            \u003Ctr\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EDalziel (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EHughes\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003ERirinui (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EYates (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n            \u003C/tr\u003E\n            \u003Ctr\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EDonald\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EHunt (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003ERobertson (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003E\u003C/td\u003E\n            \u003C/tr\u003E\n            \u003Ctr\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EDonnelly\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EKedgley (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003ERobson (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003E\u003C/td\u003E\n            \u003C/tr\u003E\n            \u003Ctr\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EDuncan\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EKey (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003ESamuels (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003ETeller:\u003C/td\u003E\n            \u003C/tr\u003E\n            \u003Ctr\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EDunne\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EKing (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EShirley\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EPettis\u003C/td\u003E\n            \u003C/tr\u003E\n          \u003C/table\u003E\n        \u003C/div\u003E\n      \u003C/div\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 42\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\n        \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\n          \u003Ctable\u003E\n            \u003Ctr\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EAdams \u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003ECollins (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EMcNair\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003ERyall\u003C/td\u003E\n            \u003C/tr\u003E\n            \u003Ctr\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EAlexander\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003ECosgrove (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003ENewman\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EScott (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n            \u003C/tr\u003E\n            \u003Ctr\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EArdern (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EEckhoff\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EO\u0027Connor\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003ESmith M (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n            \u003C/tr\u003E\n            \u003Ctr\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EAwatere Huata\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EEnglish\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EOgilvy\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003ESmith N \u003C/td\u003E\n            \u003C/tr\u003E\n            \u003Ctr\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EBaldock \u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EField (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EParaone\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EStewart\u003C/td\u003E\n            \u003C/tr\u003E\n            \u003Ctr\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EBrown \u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EFranks\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EPerry (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003ETisch\u003C/td\u003E\n            \u003C/tr\u003E\n            \u003Ctr\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EBrownlee (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EGoudie\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EPeters J\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EWoolerton (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n            \u003C/tr\u003E\n            \u003Ctr\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003ECarter D (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EGudgeon (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EPeters W\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EWorth  (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n            \u003C/tr\u003E\n            \u003Ctr\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003ECarter J\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EHeatley\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EPower\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003E\u003C/td\u003E\n            \u003C/tr\u003E\n            \u003Ctr\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003ECatchpole\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EHutchison (P)\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EPrebble\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003ETeller:\u003C/td\u003E\n            \u003C/tr\u003E\n            \u003Ctr\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003ECoddington\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EJones\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003ERoy\u003C/td\u003E\n              \u003Ctd\u003EConnell \u003C/td\u003E\n            \u003C/tr\u003E\n          \u003C/table\u003E\n        \u003C/div\u003E\n      \u003C/div\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill read a first time, and referred to the Justice and Electoral Committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000297\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00223fbf262914ce472b83307f34dd2fbeb0\u0022\u003ECustoms and Excise Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000298\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00223fbf262914ce472b83307f34dd2fbeb0\u0022\u003EImmigration Amendment Bill (No 3)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000299\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002239889e2319954b1189b7e3f79fdad30e\u0022\u003EThird Readings\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000300\u0022\u003EDebate resumed from 22 June.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022 data-id=\u00229ada3ea7ced340118de4a1be84a7a0e6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229ada3ea7ced340118de4a1be84a7a0e6\u0022\u003EDAIL JONES (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E This legislation before the House was originally the Border Security Bill. The Government has now split that bill into the Customs and Excise Amendment Bill\u2014relating to the customs and excise part\u2014and the Immigration Amendment Bill (No 3)\u2014relating to the small part involving immigration. It is my understanding that the changes were made because of problems the Government was having with the Greens in terms of their supporting the legislation, and finally the Government had to split the bill in that manner. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000302\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EThe main purpose of this legislation is set out in the Customs and Excise Amendment Bill, which New Zealand First opposes. We do support the Immigration Amendment Bill (No 3), which includes a number of machinery matters to ensure that immigration is well administered in this country. It is ironic that the Customs and Excise Amendment Bill will pick up about $20 million from the exporters of this country, or thereabouts. [Interruption] How much, then, I ask the Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000303\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022695f9c3fe3674be6a2371c3f82d5004b\u0022\u003EHon Dr Michael Cullen\u003C/span\u003E: $4 million. The rest is on imports and re-exports.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000304\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002203dc55799df341539692f44566f42224\u0022\u003EDAIL JONES\u003C/span\u003E: Well, it will pick up about $20 million from the exporters of this country and the importers of this country. All right? Allow me to finish my sentence. I was saying that it is ironic, because these two bills will cost the taxpayer about $20 million. One could almost say that the Civil Union Bill, and all the time it will take to go through Parliament, and the Relationships (Statutory References) Bill, which is going through Parliament, will be paid for by the importers and exporters of this country, who are being levied $20 million for the purposes, allegedly, of good import and export control. But is it not ironic that on this very day the provisions in these two bills\u2014affecting about 0.3 percent of the population\u2014will be paid for, effectively on a contra basis, by the money that is collected in taxes from importers and exporters?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000305\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EThe Customs and Excise Amendment Bill is just another impost on the hard workers of this country, whom the Labour Party does not like. If Labour members see a worker they believe it is their duty to tax that person. A worker is just another excuse for this Labour Party to tax. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000306\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EVarious people are involved in imports and exports, and we have just seen that industry hit a record month in overseas trade figures. That was mainly because agricultural commodity prices, which were depressed 16 months ago, have increased to record levels. Does the Minister of Finance deny that? The main reason they have done so well this month is that agricultural commodity prices have risen from their low of 16 months ago and are now at high levels, once more. That is why we are doing so well in this country at the moment. It is because of importers and exporters\u2014the people working out there\u2014who have brought New Zealand\u2019s terms of trade back to a position better than it has ever been. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000307\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EWhat credit do they get from this minority Labour Government? It taxes them even more. The Government sees them as a group that ought to be taxed more. That is all this minority Labour Government can think about, instead of introducing, say, export incentives and export credits to try to help people\u2014which can all be done regardless of what is said at various international levels. Instead of doing things to encourage exporters, to give them the benefit of what they want to do\u2014as New Zealand First would do, specifically, through our export trade incentives\u2014this minority Labour Government, in this legislation, is taxing exporters and importers once again. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000308\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EOne of the first pieces of legislation I was involved with when I came back to Parliament in this session, and which was passed in September or October 2002, was a bill in which the Labour Government introduced a tax of $20 million on importers in respect of new computer machinery.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000309\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002290ca0236c6b64ea2b43ea1b7e31455df\u0022\u003EHon Rick Barker\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s wrong.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000310\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022111f79ba510c4d25a1c6e717377fc29b\u0022\u003EDAIL JONES\u003C/span\u003E: Is the member saying that that customs and excise legislation was not introduced by the Labour Party and by Jim Anderton in 2002? Rick Barker says that of course I am wrong. He said I was wrong when I said, for example, that people had to pay fees to use the Employment Court. Rick Barker said: \u201CNo, no, no, there are no fees in the Employment Court.\u201D Well, I had to remind him that there are fees in respect of the Employment Court, and I remind him, once again, that customs and excise legislation was passed towards the end of 2002 and it introduced more taxes on importers. Less than 2 years have gone by, and this minority Labour Government is again putting an impost on importers and also on exporters. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000311\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EThe border control of our country\u2014of any country\u2014must be the primary responsibility of the Government, with taxation and payment for it collected in the ordinary course of events. That is one of the primary jobs of a Government\u2014to ensure the borders of a country are well patrolled and taken care of. It is historical. It goes back donkey\u2019s years\u2014to the 1500s, the year 1,000, and right back to BC times. Governments have always had to make sure that their borders are patrolled, and that they collect taxes from people coming in and going out. But they did not add an extra impost on the people who had to export things and import things. That is what this Labour Government does. It puts special charges on people who are working their guts out for the benefit of this country, and the only response they get from this Labour Government is that, as usual, they will be taxed more.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022 data-id=\u00223bbd39463cb0462581c57b69202319cd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000312\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223bbd39463cb0462581c57b69202319cd\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Deputy Prime Minister):\u003C/span\u003E I am delighted to rise and support the passing of these two bills. I will pick up on a couple of points the previous speaker made. He said absolutely rightly that border security has been a function of the Government for a long time, and he said that people used to collect taxes on the way in and way out. He might care to think about that a bit further because these days we do not collect many taxes on the way in. The average weighted tariff is two-thirds of 1 percent in New Zealand. That is why we now have to actually charge for some of those services. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000313\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EIn terms of border security, the biggest increase in charges on exports is because of demands made by the United States for increased security, and that is not a charge that will fall to the New Zealand Government. We might as well argue that we should pay for all the freight costs for exporters\u2014who argue that they have to pay for the costs being imposed by the United States\u2019 security requirements. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000314\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EWhat is the cost of this bill? The total cost on the export sector is $8 million a year. The Government is paying $4 million. The remaining $4 million represents .0000001 percent, roughly, of the total value of our exports. The Opposition, just like every Opposition party, says that every bit of money can be found from somewhere, just like that. New Zealand First argued for a billion dollars extra on police this afternoon. Just like that! A million here, a hundred million there, a billion there\u2014what does it matter? That is the Opposition\u2019s response and that is why they are over there and we are over here, and we will stay here. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002206080055edc842fa9752f745a0b1da70\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the Customs and Excise Amendment Bill be now read a third time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 62\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 57\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill read a third time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00222446ace0a2b540209672fae18bbb6946\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the Immigration Amendment Bill (No 3) be now read a third time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 110\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Progressive 2; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 9\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party 9.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill read a third time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000315\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022179f4530cd13469e80c1d3d3fa993ae0\u0022\u003EVoting\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000316\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002205010fe3abb941cdb4d3184f6ebf014d\u0022\u003ECorrection\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022 data-id=\u00224640543c97794941adf2731f685750ee\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000317\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224640543c97794941adf2731f685750ee\u0022\u003EDARREN HUGHES (Junior Whip\u2014Labour):\u003C/span\u003E On the question before the House previously on the Relationships (Statutory References) Bill, Mr Peck\u2019s proxy vote was inadvertently omitted from being recorded with the Ayes. I would seek leave for Mr Peck\u2019s vote to be recorded as being in favour of the first reading.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000318\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002215f15a6f118849cf9a8405729a2e0954\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is not. It will be so. The new result is Ayes 77, Noes 42.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000319\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00227c8053edb6874756a7f0b488c86cd761\u0022\u003EUrgency\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000321\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002273b8b382fe494b4292fb88cbcf6da352\u0022\u003EUrgency\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022 data-id=\u00227727e7e1f24849c1a4f775a2817a3a22\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000320\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227727e7e1f24849c1a4f775a2817a3a22\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That urgency be accorded the passing through their remaining stages of the Local Government (Auckland) Amendment Bill, the Meat Board Restructuring Bill, the Visiting Forces Bill, the Local Government Law Reform Bill (No 3), and the Parole (Extended Supervision) and Sentencing Amendment Bill, and of any bills into which those bills may be divided; the first readings of the Electoral Matters Bill, the Criminal Procedure Bill, and the Animal Products (Dairy Products and Other Matters) Bill; the passing through their remaining stages of the Mercenary Activities (Prohibition) Bill, the Secondhand Dealers and Pawnbrokers Bill, and any bills into which those bills may be divided; and the first reading of the Land Transport Amendment Bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000322\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EThe motion is moved, first of all, to complete all stages of the Local Government (Auckland) Amendment Bill, the Meat Board Restructuring Bill, and the Visiting Forces Bill, which all have commencement dates of 1 July 2004. In relation to the other matters, the motion is moved to ensure they are dealt with before the House rises for the 3-week July adjournment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022159add9b328e404fb9c8161497d06c07\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That urgency be accorded.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 61\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 58\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022388d07af200448c9822c0c7f8bfcd98f\u0022\u003ELocal Government (Auckland) Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000324\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022727f06f7b9614f01adf7851e744bef68\u0022\u003ESecond Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022 data-id=\u0022ac3992bf20a04a8ebe2150dd441155f4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000325\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ac3992bf20a04a8ebe2150dd441155f4\u0022\u003EHon RICK BARKER (Minister for Courts)\u003C/span\u003E, on behalf of the Minister of Local Government: I move, That the Local Government (Auckland) Amendment Bill be now read a second time. This bill was referred to the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee. The committee examined the bill thoroughly and has referred it back with majority amendments, which have been shown. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000326\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe bill aims to promote increased integration of decision-making processes for integrated Auckland regional transport. It establishes two new council-controlled organisations: the Auckland Regional Transport Authority and Auckland Regional Holdings. The authority will be responsible for the integrated planning, funding, and development of Auckland\u2019s land transport. The holdings company will own and manage the transport assets and other assets for the Auckland region. Overall, the responsibility for the Auckland regional land transport strategy remains with the Auckland Regional Council. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000327\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThis is a bill that seeks to make some dramatic improvements to Auckland\u2019s infrastructure, and it deals with a past lack of investment. Indeed, the Government is now providing an additional $1.62 billion to be spent on Auckland transport over the next 10 years. The bill deals with the necessary changes in the governance structures for Auckland transport and in the way in which transport decision-making is incorporated into wider issues, such as land use. The Investing for Growth package and the transport sector review address these funding and governance issues at the national level. Together, these proposals consolidate transport governance in the Auckland region and provide a firm foundation for integrated, safe, responsive, and sustainable decision-making. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000328\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EUnder the bill, the Auckland Regional Council will have overarching responsibility for the Auckland regional land transport system. The council will continue to be directly responsible for the regional land transport strategy but will undertake its operations through a new, arm\u2019s-length, council-controlled organisation: the Auckland Regional Transport Authority. Because of the importance of the authority, governance arrangements must be clearly transparent. The board of directors will govern the authority as a council-controlled organisation. The authority will be required to agree to a statement of intent with the council. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000329\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe select committee has added provisions to the bill so that both the council and the authority will be required to provide the reasoning that underlies any proposed change to the authority\u2019s statement of intent. The authority will be responsible for planning, funding, and developing the Auckland regional land transport system, including setting land transport priorities in the region. Consequently, the bill precludes the council from including a list of activities, or their prioritisation, in the regional land transport strategy. The authority will assume responsibility for public transport from the council. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000330\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EAuckland\u2019s bids for Transfund funding will be made by the authority through its land transport programme. The authority will also set out a common view on the relative priority of projects across the Auckland network. This will mean that the nine separate land transport programmes for Auckland will be consolidated into just two for the authority and Transit New Zealand. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000331\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe bill will also reduce the number of transport funding decision-makers by disestablishing Infrastructure Auckland and transferring its responsibilities to the Auckland Regional Council. The new council-controlled organisation, Auckland Regional Holdings, is to take over Infrastructure Auckland\u2019s $1.3 billion asset-management role. Infrastructure Auckland\u2019s liabilities for stormwater grants go to the Auckland Regional Council and for transport grants to the Auckland Regional Transport Authority, which is to take over the job of deciding how the funds from those assets are spent. Good governance will again be critical. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000332\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe select committee has made some amendments to further improve the transparency and effectiveness of the governance of Auckland Regional Holdings. Although the council will appoint directors to Auckland Regional Holdings and set the ground rules by which the board may operate, it will be able to appoint a maximum of only two council representatives to the board of Auckland Regional Holdings. This provides an appropriate balance between the council\u2019s ability to govern Auckland Regional Holdings and the need to minimise the potential for any future conflict of interest between the directors. As well as having a statement of intent, Auckland Regional Holdings will be also required to agree to a long-term funding plan with the Auckland Regional Council. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000333\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe committee has recommended that the bill specify the detail that must be included in Auckland Regional Holdings\u2019 long-term funding plan. This would not include how those funds are used, which is a matter for the Auckland Regional Council. Both the council and Auckland Regional Holdings will be required to provide their reasons for any significant proposed changes either to Auckland Regional Holdings\u2019 statement of intent or to the long-term funding plan. The committee has also included new transitional provisions to ensure that Auckland Regional Holdings must prepare its first long-term funding plan as soon as possible, but that, in the meantime, the council can access Auckland Regional Holdings\u2019 funds. This will ensure that the funding for any existing Infrastructure Auckland grants will not be disrupted in the transition. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000334\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe committee has strengthened the safeguards around public ownership of the 80 percent of Ports of Auckland shares currently held by Infrastructure Auckland by maintaining the current restrictions under the Local Government Act 1974. The bill also provides for better alignment between land transport and land-use decision-making by requiring changes to the Auckland Regional Council\u2019s regional policy statement and regional plans, and to territorial authorities\u2019 district plans. The bill provides that local authorities will have to prepare and publicly notify changes to their planning documents in order to achieve this alignment. The committee has recommended that the local authorities have an additional month\u2014until 31 March 2005\u2014to do this, in light of the local body elections in October and the holiday period over December and January. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000335\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThese changes must give effect to the growth concept in the Auckland regional growth strategy. They must also contribute to a range of objectives that the committee has detailed under the new schedule 4A. These objectives include, firstly, increased certainty in the assessment of resource consents, designations, and plan changes related to the transport and urban form, and, secondly, facilitating a multimodal transport network and integrated management. The bill provides a streamlined process by which submissions on these planned changes are to be heard by a single, joint panel\u2014I am sure that the member Maurice Williamson would support this\u2014and also removes the need for a multiple, parallel process. It is also proposed by way of Supplementary Order Paper that the bill facilitate the integration of the Auckland Regional Transport Network Ltd within the new governance arrangements and that the matters that can be included in the regional land transport strategy be further clarified. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000336\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe enactment of this legislation provides a firm basis for improvements in Auckland transport, and, as someone who lives outside of Auckland, I can say that I wholeheartedly endorse this bill and recommend it to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022 data-id=\u002219a8d0448f334b88913d59911fca02b7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000337\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002219a8d0448f334b88913d59911fca02b7\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON (National\u2014Pakuranga):\u003C/span\u003E For the benefit of the people who were listening to that debate, they need to know that the previous speaker was the member for Tukituki, the Hon Rick Barker, who showed about as much interest in solving Auckland\u2019s problems as\u2014I will not even begin to go there. The reading of his speech was appalling, the context was hopeless, and there was no passion. I do not think there is a member\u2014[Interruption] Now Labour members are showing some passion, now we are getting them rarked up. How come the Minister did not show that when he was reading the bill? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000338\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EI think that anybody who has either lived in or visited Auckland is in no doubt that the one issue that now consumes Aucklanders\u2019 minds is solving the transport dilemma. Auckland has perpetual gridlock. It used to occur only at peak times at very specific points in the corridor, but as traffic volumes have grown year on year, it now happens anywhere, anytime. We need only for a tin of paint to fall off the back of a utility or for someone to have a little bit of a nose-to-tail ding and the gridlock works its way right through the network. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000339\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003ESo I was really pleased when the Government announced in December a package to solve the problems in Auckland. One thing the Government announced that I thought really read well was that Auckland needed one agency to deal with its transport matters. I think most members from Auckland would agree that that is the general public\u2019s view. There is a plethora of agencies at present that deal with Auckland transport. Let us go through them. There are seven territorial authorities, such as Pukekohe\u2014or Franklin, as it is called at the bottom\u2014through to Manukau City, which is New Zealand\u2019s most progressive city according to Sir Barry Curtis. We have Waitakere, we have Auckland City, we have North Shore, and we have Rodney\u2014there is just a plethora of these city councils that are all currently responsible for roading. One would expect that to change, and that they would now be gone under this new bill, because we do not want seven of them. No, they are not. No, there will still be seven councils responsible for local roading in Auckland. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000340\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EThere is a heap more agencies. Let us go through them. There is Transfund and Transit, the two major Government agencies that are, respectively, the funding arm and the provider of State highways in New Zealand. Surely they would go under this bill. There would not be a need for Transit in Auckland anymore if one body was running Auckland transport. Oh no, when we look at this bill and check it again, sorry, but there is still a Transit. The same old boundary problems have applied year after year, whereby one local council wants this, and another one wants that, and Transit, which runs in the middle, wants a third option. The bill will not solve any of those things. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000341\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EBut there are lots more. I said something to my wife the other night about ARTNL. She asked: \u201CWho\u2019s ARTNL?\u201D. I said that ARTNL was the Auckland Regional Transport Network Ltd, and did she not know that. No, she had never heard of it. I bet that if we went out there and did a survey of people about the Auckland Regional Transport Network Ltd, they would not have a clue what it is. It is the organisation that provides things like railways stations, some of the rolling stock, and the\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000342\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223f538a91c4fd4fbfa928efef8d381c5e\u0022\u003EJohn Key\u003C/span\u003E: Shopping malls.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000343\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022caa9df3cc3d04310a3a43e6f65bfa5a1\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON\u003C/span\u003E: The shopping malls at Britomart Place\u2014that was a good one from Mr Key. But will Auckland Regional Transport Network Ltd go under this bill? No, it will not go. We will still have Auckland Regional Transport Network Ltd. I am getting really confused. The Government said that only one body would be responsible for Auckland\u2019s roads. Here is a great one. TrackCo will be the owner of all the railway lines in Auckland. Surely it would be integrated into the Auckland Regional Transport Authority so that the authority could make decisions about transport networks. No. Again, TrackCo will still exist. I am getting really perplexed. Connex runs the trains. Will Connex go? How about\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000344\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002205e2d6dff8f04c84bf02c4839f51948e\u0022\u003EJohn Key\u003C/span\u003E: They\u2019re French.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000345\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022617daa1029724a3d8ee27a14446e7729\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON\u003C/span\u003E: They are French, they might go. Let us take the ferries. We have Fullers Auckland, Subritzky on the Hauraki Gulf, and I think there is Pacific Ferries. I think there are three ferry operators. Will they all be amalgamated, with the Auckland Regional Transport Authority running the ferries? No. What about all the different bus companies\u2014Stagecoach, and, out my way, Howick and Eastern Buses? No, they will still be running buses, and so on. What about public transport funding mechanisms\u2014will they change? No. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000346\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EThis bill is the biggest con the world has ever seen. The Government came out with an announcement\u2014and I have its words, if members want me to read them out. The Prime Minister was one of the announcers: \u201CWhat Auckland needs is one agency to fix its transport.\u201D National agrees. We wholeheartedly agree with that statement made by the Prime Minister. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000347\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EThis bill does nothing of the sort. There is more. There is the Auckland Regional Council. To be fair, one body that will go is Infrastructure Auckland. That is one. But it will be replaced by Auckland Regional Holdings, which is the same sort of organisation\u2014it owns assets on behalf of the public to fund transport and stormwater drains. How can we make any great change by replacing one body called Infrastructure Auckland, which owns the Ports of Auckland shares and the America\u2019s Cup village? How can that fix Auckland\u2019s problems? The bill states that it will go, but instead of being gone, the bill just replaces that organisation with another one. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000348\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EI can refer members of this House and the public to no better diagrams than the spaghetti diagrams that the Automobile Association has drawn. Those diagrams make the Cook Islands\u2019 wiring diagrams for tax evasion look simple. There are just lines, responsibilities, squares, and boxes all over the page. The Government\u2014the Prime Minister, Michael Cullen, Paul Swain, Chris Carter, and Judith Tizard\u2014came out in December with its announcement, saying that it was hopeless; that it could not fix Auckland\u2019s problems with a governance system in which there were a multitude of organisations. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000349\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EWhich ones have gone? Let us go through them again. Have any of the seven territorial local authorities gone? No, they will all still be responsible for local roading, and so on. Will the regional council be gone? No, it will still be there. Has Auckland Regional Transport Network Ltd gone? No, it will still be there. Is Transit gone? No, it will still be there. Is Transfund gone? No, it is there. Is TrackCo gone? No, it will still be there, and it will not be part of the Auckland Regional Transport Authority. TrackCo is not part of the Auckland Regional Transport Authority, and Transit is not part of it. So the biggest funders of some of the major suppliers of infrastructure and transport solutions in Auckland are not included. How mad is that? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000350\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EThe Government said that it would bring in one body to solve Auckland\u2019s transport problems. National would have been fully supportive of a Government move to do that, because I do not think anyone in this House would deny that it is a serious problem. The serious problem lies around this multiplicity of various bodies, all with their own little hobby horse. For goodness\u0027 sake! Thank God these organisations do not run railway lines, or we would have had seven different gauges of roads in Auckland, with every one of the local authorities wanting to have their own little bit. And now we have fights about whether North Shore will get its busway, because Auckland City does not want that, and so on. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000351\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EWhat the goal should have been, and what this grubby little bill should have done, was to bring all the bodies into one, and to drop Transit and TrackCo in there. But I do not seem to be able to get through to the Government that we have this artificial delineation of some roads. In my electorate of Pakuranga, we have a thing called the Pakuranga Highway. It is six lanes wide\u2014three lanes either way. It carries more traffic than any other road, barring motorways, in a day. I think the number of 64,000 cars was the last car count I saw for that highway. It is massive. Is that a State highway\u2014that massive, big, wide, huge arterial road? No, it is not. Pakuranga Highway is a local road, funded and run by Manukau City. Yet I can take members of this House out into the boondocks of the back of Taihape, and they will find a State highway run by Transit. So \u201CState highway\u201D does not mean main road or artery, and when we get to those main arteries in Auckland\u2014and the Pakuranga Highway has to be an absolutely central part of that road network; but it is not a Transit road\u2014Transit will be included in some roads, but it is not included in that body. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000352\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003ENow, one would have to be some sort of mad scientist to sit down with a clean white sheet of paper and say, as I am sure the Government was told by its advisers, that Auckland\u2019s one problem is that it has far, far too many bodies making decisions\u2014far too many. That is Auckland\u2019s one problem, and what we need to tell Madam Prime Minister and Ministers is that the best thing they could do is bring a bill to this House that brought all those bodies into one. We could then have centralised decisions that prioritised what was needed first, and which of the roads would happen. That is what would really have been quite a sensible move. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000353\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EI was talking to the New South Wales Minister for Transport, in Sydney, and when I told him how many bodies were responsible for the funding of roads here\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000354\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022abc081ec45364a0c8fbe4668c8585e72\u0022\u003EClayton Cosgrove\u003C/span\u003E: Name him.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000355\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d188b1611c2f45a98212b495f75d64a9\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON\u003C/span\u003E: Carl Scully is his name, if the member wants to know. He is a good guy. I have been to a number of ministerial conferences with him. When I told him of the number of bodies that will be responsible for funding transport here in Auckland, he just laughed. He said that I could not be serious, and that we would make no progress whatsoever. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000356\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EIn conclusion, I want to say that the National Opposition will most vehemently be opposing this bill. Sometimes we just oppose some legislation. [Interruption] Well, there is Judith Tizard saying that we are opposed to solving Auckland\u2019s problems. This bill does nothing to solve Auckland\u2019s problems. It just adds one more body called the Auckland Regional Transport Authority to the huge list of other bodies there, and gives a few more jobs for the boys. The National Party is totally opposed to the bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022 data-id=\u0022d840f6344695445995ba66e6e6712bf1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000357\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d840f6344695445995ba66e6e6712bf1\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Minister for Racing):\u003C/span\u003E It is a great honour to speak on this bill. I come from a region that is not known for its passionate support for Auckland, but our people do appreciate the need to sort out Auckland\u2019s problems. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000358\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003EWe have just heard a speech from a member who, I think, was the Minister of Transport at some stage. In fact, I think he was Minister of Transport almost throughout the 9 years of the National Government. He is also, I believe, an Auckland MP. I would think that that member, for all his preaching now, would have been able to do something about a major infrastructural problem this country has faced for many years. Now he has the cheek to stand up in this House and criticise a Government that has put money into transport and commitment into solving this problem in Auckland. He has the cheek and audacity to challenge this Government. Well, I am proud of my Auckland colleagues, because, time and time again, they have got up in caucus and said that they needed to sort that problem out and that they needed some more resources. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000359\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cae556e6c8b64574923e70da7ffc3fee\u0022\u003EHon Maurice Williamson\u003C/span\u003E: This bill doesn\u2019t do it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000360\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222a10e5dc706b401a863bf65bbb231f52\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Williamson, who was Minister of Transport for\u2014how many years?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000361\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cfeed6a7383a4c8e860efbafb3431f70\u0022\u003EGovernment Member\u003C/span\u003E: Nine.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000362\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225ba85ed61d7f4c708045f23cebbfd55d\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR\u003C/span\u003E: \u20149 years\u2014could not do anything to solve that problem. He walked away from Auckland. He was the person who proposed a solution that would commercialise the roads. Does the member know what? Has he been reading the papers lately? He commercialised the rail\u2014he and his mate John Key. They flicked it off to their mates, and what sort of job did they do of managing key infrastructure in this country? What happened to New Zealand Rail? Do members know the only good thing about the National Government? It was so incompetent that it could not even get through its commercialisation of the roads. Thank God it did not, because we would have seen the same disaster with Auckland roads, and roads around the rest of the country, as we have seen with rail. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000363\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003EI am proud of Judith Tizard and all the other Auckland MPs who have fought hard to get resources for Auckland roads. Those of us who come from other areas of the country know that if we travel to Auckland, get caught up in a traffic jam and have to go round those dinky little back streets on our way from the airport to the central business district, what sort of chaos and bizarre situation created the mess that we now have to sort out. This Government is prepared to sort it out. We are putting in an extra $2.97 billion into roading, and we are prepared to spend another $1.6 billion in Auckland. We will be spending, on average, about a third of the country\u2019s roading money in Auckland, where about a third of the population resides. My constituents in West Coast \u2013 Tasman are prepared to accept that, because after 9 years of National Government\u2014under Maurice Williamson, who has the cheek to stand up in this House and criticise\u2014we have ended up with total chaos. Mr Williamson should get up and support this Government for this bill and for putting in place a very good infrastructure that will sort out, finally and for once and for all, the infrastructural issues around Auckland transport. I am proud to support this bill, as is this Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022 data-id=\u0022cc3b466fc81b43cb92e409d755ef81e0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000364\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022cc3b466fc81b43cb92e409d755ef81e0\u0022\u003EJIM PETERS (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E I listened with interest to the Hon Maurice Williamson, and thought about the 1990s and what sort of overall framework and vision the National Government had for transport. My first thought was Tranz Rail. My next thought was Fay Richwhite\u2014advisers to Tranz Rail in March, would-be owners in May, and eventual owners by sleight of hand. I thought of the numerous papers, and checked them at the weekend to make quite sure I did not have it wrong. But in 1999 that former Minister of Transport had not solved one issue in Auckland. The white papers, the green papers, and all the thinking that came through in 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, and 1999, showed that the issue was left unsolved. So I find it rather rich for someone to stand here and claim that that National Party had an answer for Auckland. The real issue is that it had no answer. In 1999 in the last desperate days before the election, that was even more evident than it is today. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000365\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003ETherefore, with that in mind, New Zealand First came to the issue\u2014first of all, because the deputy leader of New Zealand First, Mr Peter Brown, is the transport adviser to our party; and, secondly, because we have worked, and are working still, on a major transport initiative for our policy for the next election, whenever that may be. We are looking at a policy, new directions, which will set a different pathway from what New Zealand has had in the past. In that policy is ample provision for Auckland. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000366\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003EWhen this bill first came to the House we in New Zealand First felt that it was not the answer. On our party\u2019s part, we agreed that it should go on to the select committee, but in the course of the committee\u2019s deliberations I felt on behalf of New Zealand First that this legislation was but a partial answer to what is a very major problem. I want to look at those issues that developed around the bill with regard to the select committee submissions. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000367\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003EThe first was the one touched upon by the Hon Maurice Williamson. Was there to be the integration of a local authority land transport system for Auckland, or was there to be a policy of national networks, with one major entity, rather than the one proposed? There was some support for the grand idea of one entity, incorporating rail, water transport, and all the various modes. But I believe that, quite sensibly, the Government of the day has rejected that and instead is taking the approach that first one must walk before one can run. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000368\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003E Also in that regard, we felt that if that was to be so, in some ways\u2014and I said so, and was pleased to see that it was partially acknowledged, and the changes are in the proposed Supplementary Order Paper\u2014there ought to be a real clarity and consistency in order to make this thing work, and it is our belief in New Zealand First that this can work. It can work if there is goodwill, and if there is a real attitude and a will to make it work. It will not be so successful if we begin with the assumption, which has been made by the National Party, that this will not work, and that the answer is not a diminishing of the number of authorities involved in transport, which it is, but instead looking for a more radical answer, which I really suspect disregards the whole nature of local government in the Auckland region. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000369\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003ETo come back to the bill therefore, we believe that the bill does set out sound objectives with regard to the integration of the Auckland regional land transport system. The management of funding is a major issue for transport. The care of assets, and the issues with regard to water quality are all covered in the bill. We believe that the Auckland Regional Transport Authority will do the task in the way that it has now redesigned and reset. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000370\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003EOne of the issues that came up and was advanced to members of Parliament who met with the Auckland Regional Council was the fact that for some reason, there was not sufficient recognition given to the nature of the work of the Auckland Regional Transport Committee; and particularly, there did not seem to be quite the appropriate acknowledgment of the importance of a regional land transport strategy. I am pleased to say that the Government has acknowledged there needed to be some changes in the bill as it comes to the Committee stage, which should ensure there will be greater clarity and objectivity with regard to the way Auckland transport matters are viewed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000371\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003EI want to say our party supports the role of the Auckland Regional Council. We support the whole nature of the Auckland local bodies. In saying that, we acknowledge there are issues. Those issues will be resolved, district by district, and region by region, in October. We support a democratic response by Auckland ratepayers; that is, the election of their duly elected councils. We therefore support the whole structure\u2014as advanced here\u2014of a regional land transport committee being set up to cover the territorial and other groups as modified by the bill of 2003, and that that body ought to have a role in setting the broad framework, not the fine detail. This bill, envisaging a detailed, objective implementation role for the Auckland Regional Transport Authority, is a sound approach. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000372\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003ESo at this point, we give our support to the bill. We will make some submissions on the floor in Committee, but the bill seems to us at this stage, with all that is known, to be a reasonably honest attempt to try to make a breakthrough in what has been a historically obscure and obstinate problem for people who live in Auckland. To come back to the Hon Maurice Williamson, that problem is not one just for 2004. There has been a problem in Auckland from 1987, and it was there through all those years. The problem has been there ever since, and it ill behoves any responsible member who represents an Auckland electorate to come to this House and not give this a reasonable understanding, and recognise a reasonable attempt by the Government to try to meet the demands. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000373\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003EThis is not an answer for 2005 or 2008; it is a gradual development in trying to overcome the inertia, lack of funding, lack of will, and lack of Government direction, especially over the last two or three decades. No bill, no matter how great it is in substance, will be able to do that without care and great deliberation. New Zealand First supports this bill to the House in Committee, and we will make further comment there. We believe it is a reasonable attempt at this stage to try to do what has not been done in Auckland before. With that will come problems, as one can envisage, but the bill is at this point one that New Zealand First can support.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022fcd222c3-03a3-4568-a8aa-b6e8c6ef37c5\u0022 data-id=\u0022a5f3c89399854417be575dc37fe79a7b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000374\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fcd222c3-03a3-4568-a8aa-b6e8c6ef37c5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a5f3c89399854417be575dc37fe79a7b\u0022\u003EMIKE WARD (Green):\u003C/span\u003E The Local Government (Auckland) Amendment Bill recognises that Auckland is a special case with special transport needs and circumstances that are different from other parts of New Zealand. While overall responsibility for land transport will continue to reside with the Auckland Regional Council through its regional land transport committee, a new council-controlled organisation, the Auckland Regional Transport Authority, will be established to undertake the integrated planning, funding, and development of Auckland\u2019s land transport. The bill will also require Auckland local authorities to change their planning policy documents, and make the land-use provisions consistent with the Auckland regional growth strategy and the Auckland regional land transport strategy. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000375\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fcd222c3-03a3-4568-a8aa-b6e8c6ef37c5\u0022\u003EThe bill has the support of all Auckland local authorities and the overwhelming support of the majority of submitters. The Auckland Regional Transport Authority must plan, fund, and develop Auckland\u2019s transport system in a way that contributes to an integrated, safe, responsive, and sustainable land transport system for the Auckland region, and a system that is consistent with the New Zealand land transport strategy and the Land Transport Management Act. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000376\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fcd222c3-03a3-4568-a8aa-b6e8c6ef37c5\u0022\u003EAuckland, with a million people and 700,000 cars, and growing, has to transform itself from an overwhelmingly motorcar-dependent city, with all the congestion, safety, health, environmental, and economic downsides that such an approach imposes, to an integrated system that leaves Auckland with a much wider range of choices about how to move products and people, including by car and truck where that is appropriate, but on roads that have the space to accommodate them and without the delays, air pollution, inconvenience, or enormous cost on personal, regional, or national budgets. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000377\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fcd222c3-03a3-4568-a8aa-b6e8c6ef37c5\u0022\u003EWe are concerned that while New Zealand has a great deal of expertise and experience in the business of designing and building roads, our expertise in other areas is much more limited. We need look no further than Wellington to see how well public transport can work, and how it can be made attractive and effective. However, when it comes to car pooling, or pedestrian and cycling strategies, our efforts have been piecemeal. None the less, one can travel to Nelson to visit the Broadgreen Intermediate School and check out its cycle stands\u2014they are full. Along the back of Broadgreen Intermediate, there is a cycleway. Put in place good cycling facilities, and people will make those choices. Auckland could do it just as well. Of course, cycling and walking are not just good ways of moving; they are also healthier ways of moving, and they take the heat off the motorways. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000378\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fcd222c3-03a3-4568-a8aa-b6e8c6ef37c5\u0022\u003EWhile we may have little expertise at persuading people to use their feet and their cycles, or to use buses and trains, we have even less when it comes to any of the elements that demand management or land-use mechanisms for changing transport behaviour. While the capital costs of demand management are much less expensive than the motorway model, they none the less require expertise and a substantial shift in mindset. The Auckland growth strategy is an attempt to plan a more coherent future for Auckland\u2014one where people are better able to live, work, play, shop, and go to school, first and foremost without the need to spend too many hours every week sitting in their motorcars moving very slowly, and many more hours working to earn the money to pay for the experience, but, more important, simply to be able to live in their own communities without moving at all. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000379\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fcd222c3-03a3-4568-a8aa-b6e8c6ef37c5\u0022\u003EThe Land Transport Management Bill charges the Auckland Regional Land Transport committee and the Auckland Regional Transport Authority with providing sustainable, healthy, integrated options. Providing Auckland\u2019s local body leaders can see beyond the motorcar and motorway model long enough to make their resource management documents consistent with the Auckland regional growth strategy, that most beautiful city could go from being a seriously dysfunctional urban sprawl to an intelligently connected series of attractive and unique communities, but it will require vision, imagination, and flair that has not been seen there since the days of Mayor Robbie. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000380\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fcd222c3-03a3-4568-a8aa-b6e8c6ef37c5\u0022\u003EThe bill provides a framework. I mentioned earlier the lack of expertise. I know that the Ministry of Transport is aware that it does not currently have the expertise. It is a gap that will need to be filled urgently if Auckland and the rest of New Zealand are to measure up to the new responsibilities. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000381\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fcd222c3-03a3-4568-a8aa-b6e8c6ef37c5\u0022\u003E During the hearings, and since, I have suggested a need for the equivalence of Transit but with expertise in the alternatives to roading. We now know that Transfund is obliged to fund a wider range of transport alternatives. It is going to do that only if the Auckland Regional Land Transport Committee and the Auckland Regional Transport Authority have a similar level of expertise as that provided by Transit New Zealand. How else are they going to come up with the other strategies? The alternatives to roads may be cheaper, and they are certainly healthier, but they are not free and they will require the Auckland local authorities to talk to their communities and work out ways to make the alternatives more attractive. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000382\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fcd222c3-03a3-4568-a8aa-b6e8c6ef37c5\u0022\u003ERecently, Auckland City contemplated turning itself into a motorcar racetrack. Had I been an Aucklander, I might have been a tad upset. My reaction, however, was tempered by the thought that if Auckland City was capable of reducing its demand on roads, or tempering its motorcar fetish for even long enough for something as frivolous as a motorcar race, how could it possibly claim that it might be too difficult to effect a similar shift in behaviour, if it meant a healthier, cleaner, less congested city? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000383\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fcd222c3-03a3-4568-a8aa-b6e8c6ef37c5\u0022\u003EThis bill and the Land Transport Management Act that underpins it are bold moves to create a more sustainable New Zealand. Most of the things we do are highly unsustainable\u2014they use up more energy than we can continue to provide, and they use up future generations\u2019 share of the planet\u2019s resources. They also pollute and undermine the capacity of the planet to sustain, and undermine our capacity to enjoy life. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000384\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fcd222c3-03a3-4568-a8aa-b6e8c6ef37c5\u0022\u003ESustainability has never mattered as much as it matters now. With oil running out and prices becoming higher, it is inevitable that it will become even more expensive as a way of getting around. Barely a day goes by without attention being drawn to the reality of global warming and climate change. While New Zealand with a population of 4 million, and Auckland with a population of just 1 million, may have little to contribute on a planet with 6 billion people, that does not excuse us from our responsibilities to play our part on this overcrowded and overheated planet, which is crying out for examples of an intelligent approach to transport. Auckland could just provide such an example. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000385\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fcd222c3-03a3-4568-a8aa-b6e8c6ef37c5\u0022\u003EBut even if global warming turns out to be a myth\u2014and I do not believe for one minute that it will\u2014Aucklanders actually deserve real choice. This bill at least provides an enhanced likelihood of that choice. It is not just a choice of another road, or 10,000 models of motorcar, but an opportunity to live in self-reliant communities that minimise the need to travel\u2014a choice between fast, regular, and frequent bus services, and comprehensive rail services. The motorcar option has served nobody particularly well, but it has served the transport-disadvantaged particularly badly. Those who travel outside the daylight hours, those who are too old, or too young, or too poor, or those who simply prefer not to drive, or those who would like to cycle or walk, have particularly limited choices. So the Greens are pleased to support this legislation and look forward to an Auckland that is a more pleasant place to visit and a more pleasant place to travel around. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022 data-id=\u002236e854c8770b44c5b6218a2e3f2a1eda\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000386\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002236e854c8770b44c5b6218a2e3f2a1eda\u0022\u003EDEBORAH CODDINGTON (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E That last speech was like listening to a Hans Andersen fairytale. We can imagine how Auckland would be if we all moved around it by lying on our backs on bicycles, pedalling with our feet in the air. Would it not be a glorious city then! In that situation it really would deserve the name \u201CDorkland\u201D. That is the patronising sort of drivel we have come to expect from the Greens, who expect everybody to be herded into public transport. They forget that most people in Auckland who are trying to move around are just mothers picking up their children from different schools, going to the supermarket, or dropping children off at soccer. They cannot use a bus or a train. The Greens would say that we should walk everywhere. I have actually heard one of the co-leaders of the Greens say that we should not be allowed to drive to the corner dairy\u2014we should be forced to walk. Well, that is the whole point of the Greens\u2019 philosophy: not to care about individuals, but just to save the planet. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000387\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003ECourier drivers have to make a living by getting around Auckland. The physical nature of Auckland means it is impossible for public transport ever to be a serious alternative to the car. Aucklanders do not have a motorcar fetish. Aucklanders hate being stuck in gridlock. They loathe the fact that they cannot get to where they need to be on time, or else have a clear run and are half an hour early. One cannot plan anything in Auckland any more. That is a disgrace and a disaster, but this bill will do nothing to fix it. This Government had the ability to fix that problem, with the Land Transport Management Bill. I agree with the Greens that just building more roads will not solve the transport problem. If we build more roads then, yes, people will pour on to them. We will never solve the transport problems in Auckland unless we have pricing mechanisms. As soon as people have to pay to go on a congested road they think twice, or three times, about using it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000388\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003EThis bill has gone through without enough thought as to what it will mean. It will set up two new organisations to plan, fund, and control transport in Auckland\u2014to make decisions. Decision after decision will be made, but nothing will be done until this Government does something serious to address the Resource Management Act, because while resource consents are needed for every little kilometre of road, for every culvert, and for every little stretch of roading that is improved or built we will never get anywhere. If this Government was really serious about addressing the Resource Management Act, instead of setting up a cosmetic, damage-control type of review led by David Benson-Pope, it would stop the iniquitous funding that goes on, shown by this Government employing in the offices of one of its senior Ministers Gary Taylor, who is known to be anti the Resource Management Act. Gary Taylor is the head of the Environmental Defence Society, and he actually hires himself out as a consultant to people who are objecting to resource consents. That person was hired to work in the office of the Minister who is Convenor, Ministerial Group on Climate Control, and was paid by the taxpayer to be an adviser. At the same time he was lobbying for funding from the Government for grants from the Department of Conservation and the Ministry for the Environment to set up a website\u2014$50,000 for a website to advise people on how to use the Resource Management Act to object to resource consents. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000389\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003EHow on earth can New Zealand take seriously this Government\u2019s proposal to look at the Resource Management Act and what it is doing to block development, when on the one hand it sets up a review committee and on the other hand it is happy to fund lobby groups and lobbyists to actively campaign to oppose developments? The Government also gives money to the Forest and Bird Protection Society. It funds the society\u2019s legal costs when it opposes resource consents under the Resource Management Act. It funds a whole host of lobby groups that set themselves up to object to developments. Many of those developments are new roads or are connected with transport infrastructure. That is the crux of the problem, and that is why we are opposed to this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000390\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003EMany of the things in this legislation are anti-Auckland. It is patronising towards Aucklanders. I do not usually agree with Brian Rudman, who writes for the New Zealand Herald. He is usually on the opposite end of the political spectrum from me, but I totally agree with his column on 5 April this year, when he said that Aucklanders should decide how to spend their assets, not this Government here in Wellington, and not people who do not even go near Auckland. The assets that will be taken out of Infrastructure Auckland belong to Aucklanders. Those assets were paid for by and belong to Aucklanders, but Aucklanders have not been allowed to decide what happens to them since the previous National Government was in power and Jenny Shipley decided that Aucklanders would not be able to decide that. This Government had the chance to turn that around. Instead of Government members criticising National, why did they not take the opportunity to do something and let Aucklanders decide what happens to those assets? Not only will Aucklanders be unable to decide what happens to those assets, but 15 percent of the assets will be given to the Auckland Regional Council to do what it likes with. We know what that means; it means propping up the bottom line. It means propping up the Auckland Regional Council\u2019s shortfall, if it comes to that. That money, and more, should be spent totally on solving Auckland\u2019s transport problems. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000391\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003EThere is no reason why more money from the consolidated account cannot go to pay for fixing Auckland\u2019s transport problems. It is all very well for the rest of the country to sneer at Auckland and say that it should solve its own transport problems. It has actually got to the stage where Aucklanders are prepared to pay for their own transport solutions, because they are so desperate. However, Auckland\u2019s transport problems cost the New Zealand economy an estimated $2 billion a year.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000392\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b1b5881-3b86-4894-ac77-72905f786141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f9c6d9b97b13447bbc5ba7c23b684697\u0022\u003EHon Judith Tizard\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, made up!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000393\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227bddc92beeeb40cb9991b4f8540a91f9\u0022\u003EDEBORAH CODDINGTON\u003C/span\u003E: That is how much the Minister with responsibility for Auckland Issues cares about Auckland. That Minister asked the New Zealand Herald why the eastern motorway should proceed, just so the people in Pakuranga can have an extra half-hour in bed. That is what she said to the New Zealand Herald. She now denies that, and says she has been misquoted. [Interruption] \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000394\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022952aed009ebe4ebf94b03f87a6389f5b\u0022\u003EHon Maurice Williamson\u003C/span\u003E: She just said: \u201CI don\u2019t deny it.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000395\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ac6954100a5b4d2da90749e1810e14af\u0022\u003EDEBORAH CODDINGTON\u003C/span\u003E: She accepts that she said it?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000396\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222a7345f2daa74297b6ee496874cf8f2d\u0022\u003EHon Maurice Williamson\u003C/span\u003E: Yes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000397\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022459e9fbdb30e40508f7b52cebda89950\u0022\u003EDEBORAH CODDINGTON\u003C/span\u003E: That is good. She has changed her tune, then.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000398\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b1b5881-3b86-4894-ac77-72905f786141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227cf532841c024ccab0ded51cb7e1992d\u0022\u003EHon Judith Tizard\u003C/span\u003E: What happens to the three queues of cars when they hit the queues\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000399\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220d80ab361e25470ea8fe8df1ca521cca\u0022\u003EDEBORAH CODDINGTON\u003C/span\u003E: The Minister should get some pricing mechanisms introduced for the road problems. She should look at some of the private-public partnerships that were originally in the Land Transport Management Bill. All the submitters who came before the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee in support of that proposal put forward very clear and good reasons to go for public-private partnerships and congestion tolling. But no, this Government had to do a deal with the Greens. So Auckland does not have those mechanisms, and money paid by the poor old motorist is being siphoned off and put into cycle lanes and walkways, so that, as the spokesperson on transport from the Greens says, we can save the planet and do not run out of oil. People have been saying for the last 50 years that we will run out of oil, but motoring just gets cheaper and cheaper. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000400\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003EThe ACT party is opposed to this bill, which will not do anything to solve Auckland\u2019s transport problems. When the National-ACT Government is in office, then members will see what really can be done to solve those problems.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224e6caa14-14ae-43f5-b9da-fe479511fe74\u0022 data-id=\u00229a4cc8f464944ddc8fc6fcc9cb82d840\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000401\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224e6caa14-14ae-43f5-b9da-fe479511fe74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229a4cc8f464944ddc8fc6fcc9cb82d840\u0022\u003EPAUL ADAMS (United Future):\u003C/span\u003E I rise on behalf of United Future to say that we are very pleased to support this legislation. Auckland is a unique place. It is a large, expansive area, and of course has the challenges of being an urban area comprised of many cities. One of the challenges in terms of roading issues in Auckland is that various local bodies have been doing the very best for their areas, but very few have been standing back and looking at the overall picture of what needs to be built, and what is needed in order to control the area as a whole, to keep transport and people moving through it. I agree with the Greens that we need to look at rail, bicycles, buses, and all those things. However, I challenge members who rubbish the motorcar and ask what good it has done for anybody to speak to trades people like mechanics, panel beaters, car dealers, and everyone else who is employed in the motor industry. As it turns out, the motor industry is one of the largest employers on the globe, and I think that those members would be seriously challenged on the good that the motorcar has done for it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000402\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224e6caa14-14ae-43f5-b9da-fe479511fe74\u0022\u003EAny structure that is set up\u2014and we are supportive of these structures\u2014is only as good as the people within it. My hope is that the people who set up these structures will be forward thinkers, and that they will stand back and look at the overall picture, and begin to strategise on what will be good for Auckland and our nation over the next 20, 30, 40, or 50 years. For example, I have always failed to understand why it is that when land is bought to build a motorway, the left and right lanes are built from the centre point of that land, instead of those lanes going out as far to the left and as far to the right as is possible on that land, and why the surplus space is not left in the middle for future development. Whether that land is used for future lanes, or for rail, cycleways, or whatever other purpose, why are the two lanes each way plonked in the centre, and why is the surplus land on the right and left sides sold off back into private ownership, perhaps enabling people to build houses on it? We then find 20 years later that that land has to be purchased back again, and that makes no sense to me, at all. I hope that forward-thinking people will begin to think about traffic flows and about the importance of clearly numbering the exits on every off-ramp around Auckland City. Traffic does slow because motorists do not know whether they are at the right exit. If Auckland had a simple numbering system, like that of many of the large cities in the world, showing No. 7, No. 8, or No. 9 off-ramp for a motorist to exit from, it would make a large difference. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000403\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224e6caa14-14ae-43f5-b9da-fe479511fe74\u0022\u003EI believe that Auckland City has had forward thinkers prior to now. Sir Dove-Meyer Robinson, a former Mayor of Auckland, planned a rapid rail system that was years before its time and had everything laid out, yet the Government of the day abolished that plan. I am sure that Aucklanders regret that. I hope that when the Government begins to review the overall strategy for Auckland, it will look at things that make a lot of sense, such as retaining Whenuapai airport and other structures that will be needed for our great city in the days that lie ahead. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000404\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224e6caa14-14ae-43f5-b9da-fe479511fe74\u0022\u003EPreviously, each council has promoted its own pet project. Thankfully, through the passing of this legislation, we will see that fade away as the councils now work together, collectively look at the overall good of Auckland City, and begin to lay out the roading, rail, and bus structures that Auckland needs. As I heard one previous speaker say, I would like to see any Auckland MP who does not support this legislation stand before the citizens of Auckland, hold up his or her head, and say that he or she does not support this legislation, which will make the way forward to progress solutions to the challenges that Auckland has had for many reasons and for many years. Personally, as an Aucklander I am thankful to see that roads are under way now. I am glad that this type of legislation is going through the House, and will make a pathway for those who are appointed to various authorities and give them the power to make the correct decisions. Once again, we always have to deal with people. I really hope that the ones who come here are forward thinkers, who do not just look at the issue today but also consider and think through the issues of tomorrow. Auckland is an expanding city, and there is no doubt about that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000405\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224e6caa14-14ae-43f5-b9da-fe479511fe74\u0022\u003EWhen my friend from the Green Party said that we were running out of room on the planet, I wondered whether he lived on the same planet as I do. If he thinks that New Zealand is overpopulated with 4 million people, he had better travel to other cities of the world. I will stand corrected on the space allocated here, but I have read that we currently have enough space on our planet that, if every person was allocated his or her portion of land, he or she would be living on a 10-acre block. Yes, we do have many challenges on the planet. Often people say millions of people are starving. We have enough food; it is just that it is not distributed correctly. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000406\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224e6caa14-14ae-43f5-b9da-fe479511fe74\u0022\u003ETo come back to the Auckland roading issue, we have a fantastic city. Auckland is a buzzing, humming city that will hum even better once we hear the sound of the thundering V8s running around the streets of Auckland, as they used to run around the streets of Wellington. I would welcome that. We need wisdom in our choice of a circuit. Maybe the planners will see the wisdom of putting a central Auckland motor racing circuit right in the city, and I would support that. Or perhaps we could put it out at Whenuapai. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000407\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224e6caa14-14ae-43f5-b9da-fe479511fe74\u0022\u003EUnited Future supports this legislation. We believe that it makes a way forward. It will enable planners and strategists to think together. I hope that they think not just 2 or 3 years out, but 10, 20, and 30 years out into the future, and that Auckland will continue to expand and become the great city it expects to be.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223b1b5881-3b86-4894-ac77-72905f786141\u0022 data-id=\u00221e82c283c5a941ae9007cc89c8ff2912\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000408\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b1b5881-3b86-4894-ac77-72905f786141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221e82c283c5a941ae9007cc89c8ff2912\u0022\u003EHon JUDITH TIZARD (Minister with responsibility for Auckland Issues):\u003C/span\u003E  I want to thank United Future, New Zealand First, the Greens, and the Progressive Party, which support this Local Government (Auckland) Amendment Bill. What on earth do National Party members think they are doing? They have said that they will not support this legislation. According to Don Brash petrol taxes are unnecessary but also essential, rates funding for roads is awful but necessary, road tolls will help to pay for new roads but will not raise any money, and public transport is good but there is no reason to fund it. The complete two-facedness of National Party members on all that will land them in incredible trouble. It reminds me of a former Minister of Local Government, Warren Cooper. When he started the mauling of Auckland\u2019s regional local government arrangements in 1992, he said to me: \u201CWhat you\u2019ve got to understand, girlie, is that if Auckland ever gets its act together it will be a serious threat to central government.\u201D So what are National Party members doing? They are continuing to say that no one should raise any extra money, and no one should actually have the power to do anything in Auckland. But they will go on moaning about the fact that Auckland is not working, and that a dollar wasted in Auckland is 66c that is not available to the rest of the country. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000409\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b1b5881-3b86-4894-ac77-72905f786141\u0022\u003EAccording to Deborah Coddington we are wasting $2 billion; she has doubled Maurice Williamson\u2019s apocryphal number. We now have $2 billion being wasted in Auckland, but at the same time ACT will not support this bill. ACT members tell us there is no reason why more money from the consolidated account cannot go into Auckland. Presumably, they want to take money from the consolidated account that they are also giving away in taxation cuts, spending on defence, and all the other Mickey Mouse Budget arrangements they are trying to pull out of a top hat\u2014rabbits or anything else they can find to try to confuse New Zealanders with. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000410\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b1b5881-3b86-4894-ac77-72905f786141\u0022\u003EI am delighted to support this bill. I want to thank the officials from the Ministry of Transport, the local government section of the Department of Internal Affairs, the Ministry for the Environment, Treasury, and from Auckland local government\u2014the territorial local authorities as well as the regional council\u2014who have worked so hard to bring the best partnership and the best solutions for Auckland\u2019s transport needs together. It is the first time ever in history we have seen central government and local government work in partnership to solve a problem\u2014not by grandstanding, not by saying that it can be solved overnight, and not by putting out outrageous proposals with outrageous costs associated to them, but by a clear strategy and vision, with funding and practical rearrangements of organisations so that we can implement it. In fact, the goodwill that we have seen in terms of Auckland\u2019s transport needs over the last 5 years should be commended as a first in history. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000411\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b1b5881-3b86-4894-ac77-72905f786141\u0022\u003EIn 1992 Warren Cooper in the then National Government introduced the Auckland Regional Services Trust, which expropriated Auckland\u2019s regional assets. Auckland was the only region in New Zealand that had its assets stolen from public use and put into the Auckland Regional Services Trust. Why was that? It was because that National Government said that all our regional assets should be flogged off. Warren Cooper said they would be sold for so little that whatever was left could go to the arts, because they did not matter either. What did we have? We had about $1 billion worth of assets and revenue. In 1998 the National Government suddenly decided that that should not go to the arts. We had Maurice Williamson leaping about like a whirling dervish\u2014but without the spiritual interest of a dervish\u2014and he said he would give all that money away to Auckland. He was still going to flog off the port company, but he was going to give about $1,000 to $1,500 to every Aucklander. His own colleagues said: \u201CFor God\u2019s sake, Maurice, don\u2019t be so bloody stupid. Pull your head in, and get on.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000412\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fbabd482218244dea8301f46c4c1ef9c\u0022\u003EHon Maurice Williamson\u003C/span\u003E: Only Christine Fletcher and John Banks!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000413\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b1b5881-3b86-4894-ac77-72905f786141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022208c598da5ff400f9bfe60a06e2ea51f\u0022\u003EHon JUDITH TIZARD\u003C/span\u003E: I notice that all the rest of his colleagues voted for that. So the National Government set up Auckland Infrastructure, which was another attempt to put in a barrier to Auckland solving its own problems. At the same time Maurice Williamson, as the then Minister of Transport, was to put in better transport and better roads. What did we get? We got neither. Maurice Williamson spent the whole of the time of the Ministry of Transport and a big chunk of the time of the Ministry of Commerce and of Treasury, but he did not build one centimetre of road in Auckland. Nor did he put one seat on one bus in Auckland. He did nothing for Auckland in respect of better transport and roads. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000414\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b1b5881-3b86-4894-ac77-72905f786141\u0022\u003EWhat has this Government done? We have worked constructively with Auckland with regard to the present chaotic system that it has. In the last 5 years we have built the Puhinui interchange on State Highway 20. We have seen the Grafton project finished. We have started the huge project in the central business district to put in the links that are necessary so that we can actually get from the harbour bridge to the western motorway, which the National Government did not bother to do. We have put the work in on State Highway 18.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000415\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d0293cca208e4382bbaeef170eaf0241\u0022\u003EHon Maurice Williamson\u003C/span\u003E: What about the Albany to Puhoi realignment (ALPURT)?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000416\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b1b5881-3b86-4894-ac77-72905f786141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022653c88b5504f4cbc8baa4a767fb4df32\u0022\u003EHon JUDITH TIZARD\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, certainly the National Government built the ALPURT one, but what did it have left in 1999 to do after that? It had absolutely nothing left! Did it put the North Shore busway in? Did it heck! Who kept public transport funding capped?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000417\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d51b887d6d3b41bd963abd6444647b36\u0022\u003EHon Maurice Williamson\u003C/span\u003E: Me!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000418\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b1b5881-3b86-4894-ac77-72905f786141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cfc958b87a574bf8a54c803883278faa\u0022\u003EHon JUDITH TIZARD\u003C/span\u003E: Maurice Williams proudly says: \u201CMe!\u201D. We have seen a trebling of the public money going into buses, and a huge increase\u2014over 30 percent\u2014in public transport use across Auckland. We have seen walking school buses and the start of the refurbishment of the rail network in Auckland, with the start of the double-tracking of the western corridor and the upgrading of the stations. That has all led to the investment in growth that this legislation will put into place. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000419\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b1b5881-3b86-4894-ac77-72905f786141\u0022\u003EIt is absolutely wonderful to see everybody working together in Auckland. This bill links up the organisations that have planned the solutions. Transit and Transit have put their 10-year capital indicative plans out there. We have the growth strategy, the regional land transport strategy, and the partnerships. Now we will have the organisations with the power to make the links, and we have put the funding in place. I am delighted to support this excellent legislation, which for the first time will establish one agency with the clear responsibility, the power, and the funding to carry out the projects that Auckland needs. It is about time that Auckland received its fair share of the funding,  and got the Government\u2019s foot off its neck\u2014which was put there for the whole of the 9 years of the last National Government\u2014so that we can get on and solve our problems, get Auckland moving, and make sure that Auckland\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000420\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022617aec8fbde04cfbac2c71ac0ef9eb28\u0022\u003EOpposition Members\u003C/span\u003E: Five long years!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000421\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b1b5881-3b86-4894-ac77-72905f786141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002201302ecd8e3947deb83564bf3d5bdfb1\u0022\u003EHon JUDITH TIZARD\u003C/span\u003E: Are the Opposition members not tragic? One project in 9 years, and they are chorusing: \u201CFive long years!\u201D. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000422\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b1b5881-3b86-4894-ac77-72905f786141\u0022\u003EI am delighted to say that this bill has overwhelming support, not only from all the agencies that work with Auckland but also from Auckland itself. It is about time! We will do the job. We have started it already, and this legislation will continue it through. I congratulate the Minister of Local Government, who introduced this legislation. I can see why the National and ACT members are so upset, because not only would they not fund this work but they would not do it, and Auckland has got that message. I endorse this bill and commend it to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022 data-id=\u0022b6324a39076c4100a9c2a91de4113bb6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000423\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b6324a39076c4100a9c2a91de4113bb6\u0022\u003EJOHN KEY (National\u2014Helensville):\u003C/span\u003E That was a party political broadcast brought to us by the Labour Party, similar to the propaganda campaign it had for the Budget. Hopefully, that speech did not cost $21 million like the Budget propaganda did. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000424\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003EI have no doubt that in years to come that people who follow politics and are moderately interested in Auckland transport issues will look up that speech made by the Minister with responsibility for Auckland Issues. They will spend a long time looking for it, and I will give the House the reasons why that is the case. They will need to find it in the fiction section of the library, because this Government loves the spin. It loves to tell everybody that it has Auckland under control, that it is fixing the problem, and that it cares. This is a Government that cares so much that it was prepared to pass the Land Transport Management Bill, which was a complete sop to the Greens. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000425\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003EWhen the Minister brought the legislation into the House, privately he was going up and down the country in buses, cars, trains, taxis, planes, in any form of transport he could find, begging people\u2014he was not asking them, he was down on one knee begging them\u2014to put in strong submissions and oppose his own legislation. That is how much the Labour Party cares about fixing transport. That is how much it cares about finding a solution. It had the audacity to bring into this House legislation that it knew was doomed to fail, knew would never work, and knew would never find the solutions. The reason the Government did that\u2014and did it for one reason alone\u2014was to keep the Greens happy. Heather Simpson had an agreement with the Greens, and the Labour Government needed them, or thought that one day it might need them. That is why it happened. It was not because the Government cared about the people of Auckland, or cared about getting a solution. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000426\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003EI look across at the other parties in the House that are supporting this legislation. I say to them to go back and look at the Land Transport Management Bill. It was such a disgrace that afterwards the Government had to set up the joint official group. This bill is the result of the joint official group. Even that move completely failed to find a solution. Even that was a complete cop-out. It will not work. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000427\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003ENational will get some billboards, and during the election campaign it will put them up on the side of motorways all around Auckland. I make this promise: my constituents will be able to get out of the north-western motorway. These are the same constituents that Chris Carter has in his neighbouring electorate of Te Atatu. They will be able to get out and look at the billboards. They will be able to read the fine print. They will be able to see any kind of message that might be there. They will be able to get back in their cars, because their cars will not be moving on the north-western motorway\u2014just like the cars do not move on any night. They will not be moving, because this bill is all about a cop-out. It is all about failing to find solutions. It is all about party-political politics. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000428\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003ENo one in Auckland is rejoicing. The reason why Newstalk ZB is so popular in Auckland is that people get to listen to the entire Larry Williams show. Even if they leave work to go home at 4 o\u2019clock, they get to listen to it all way through to 7 p.m. I am regularly on Newstalk ZB with Larry Williams. What a wonderful talkshow host he is. Whenever I am on that show I get thousands of emails, because everybody in Auckland hears it. Nobody is at home playing with the kids, or getting to do other things, because the Government cannot fix the problem. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000429\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003ENo one said that the problem in Auckland was easy to fix. It is a difficult issue. Auckland has a difficult topography. It is a very widely spread out city. It has low density rates. It has an incredible number of issues to cope with. It has seven territorial local authorities and the Auckland Regional Council. This bill is not the solution. It does not go even halfway near the solution. This bill goes nowhere towards finding a solution to Auckland\u2019s problems. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000430\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003EI challenge those parties in the House who have come to the Chamber, like lapdogs for the Labour Government, to try to say they support this bill. They are terrified to read the legislation and work out that it will not work. They do not have the guts and the temerity in their own Parliament\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000431\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228d35cf2ac7a84cb8a92dfad4664f9c31\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: The member will be seated, please. To imply that a member lacks courage is a personal reflection, and it is out of order. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000432\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220880c8cee4a24eacb4f06c6bd2f07fe2\u0022\u003EJOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: I did not refer to a member; I referred to a political party. Those political parties lack the temerity to come to the House and argue why this legislation is wrong. They have not even read it to work out that it will not work. This bill is a complete failure. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000433\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003ELet us look at the things that are not in the legislation that might go some way towards solving the problem. Is the Resource Management Act tackled in this legislation? It must be, because that would be the reason that Transfund last year could not spend $250 million, despite the fact that fixing Auckland\u2019s motorway network will cost $10 billion. Transfund could not even spend the money it had last year, because the Resource Management Act prevented it from doing so.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000434\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229fc1c2fbf7eb481aa2f92167b541c94a\u0022\u003EHon Maurice Williamson\u003C/span\u003E: You\u2019re kidding.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000435\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ef175aa31edc4ffea2ad5cb35a0e2403\u0022\u003EJOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: I am not kidding. There is no Resource Management Act amendment clause in this Auckland bill. There is nothing in there, because it is not going to happen. There is a $5 billion shortfall in funding for Auckland\u2019s projects, and that excludes the Auckland motorway network.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000436\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022312f552773734eb28e0aa783fd362177\u0022\u003EHon Chris Carter\u003C/span\u003E: Ha, ha!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000437\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220f64e1569c8848b28032549f9f6e28e7\u0022\u003EJOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: The Minister laughs. I thought the Minister had a calculator in his office. He could add it up, or do elementary arithmetic. But if he wants me to come around to his office, any day he likes, I will add up, in front of him, the amounts that will add up to the $10 billion to fix Auckland\u2019s motorway network. That excludes the eastern corridor and the alternative harbour crossing. It is $10 billion. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000438\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003EThere is no solution to the problem in this legislation. What we have done is rewarded failure. We have gone to the Auckland Regional Council and said: \u201CYou haven\u2019t done a tremendously good job in your planning. You haven\u2019t done a tremendously good job of finding a solution to Auckland\u2019s problems. We do not want a commercial entity that could have independent directors;  that could find the problem, put all the people inside the tent and actually get a solution that Aucklanders can be proud of. No, we want to play party politics. We want the Auckland Regional Council, with all the members on its regional committee. We do not want the real people in the tent.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000439\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003EThis is no different from the Land Transport Management Bill. This is all about propaganda and spin. We are back to the same old problem we had with the Land Transport Management Bill when the Minister was here. It is all about trying to tell people we are fixing the problems, but the real solutions are not coming today. They are not coming tomorrow. They are not coming in 6 months or in 2 years. They are not ever coming as a result of this bill, because this bill fails to address the real issues in Auckland, which relate to whether we can get in more private sector capital by having public-private partnerships. Can we do that? There is no response to that question. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000440\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003EThese are not radical, right-wing ideas. These are things introduced in the United Kingdom by a left-wing Government. These are things introduced in every state of Australia by Labour Governments.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000441\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c259bc87e7f64cdb83aae92293ca68fa\u0022\u003EHon Maurice Williamson\u003C/span\u003E: Every one of them is Labour.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022877a33fb3a154a269a85fa7b5d3a8f2c\u0022\u003EJOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: Every one of them is Labour. Public-private partnerships have been introduced all around the world. We cannot do that. There is no provision for that in this legislation. We do not see independence in this bill, and a real framework and a real willingness to make the problem go forward. We see party-political politics in here. This bill is a tremendous failure. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000443\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003EI want to finish on one other point. I ask anyone who might even question my last statement\u2014and I strongly urge the United Future party and New Zealand First that it is never too late to change their view\u2014to read the bill, have a look at Auckland Regional Holdings and ask themselves one question: \u201CIf this is not about a slush fund and not about politics, why do 85 percent of the funds of Infrastructure Auckland have a definite direction\u2014a definite earmarking to them\u2014that they will go to either transport or stormwater? What happened to that other 15 percent? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000444\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003EThe answer is that even Auckland Regional Holdings and the Auckland Regional Council will not tell us. No one will tell us, because it is the political slush fund. [Interruption] It is 15 percent of billions of dollars, and that is the very reason why Infrastructure Auckland did a good job when it was previously set up. It was prepared to stand up to the likes of Judith Tizard, who wanted to go there and use political influence. That is why it is doomed to failure. Auckland has been badly served indeed by this propaganda. Every party in this Parliament should be campaigning strongly against the bill. National will not support it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221772e9f5-5379-4bfe-9d9b-eaffb4c61b02\u0022 data-id=\u0022292fb8952b6f44b2b8cda4973433155e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000445\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221772e9f5-5379-4bfe-9d9b-eaffb4c61b02\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022292fb8952b6f44b2b8cda4973433155e\u0022\u003EHon HARRY DUYNHOVEN (Associate Minister of Transport):\u003C/span\u003E It is a pleasure to stand in support of this bill. Having been asked only a few minutes ago to give a short speech on it, I am very happy to do so. It is also a pleasure to follow Mr Key, an Auckland member. He mentioned the UK experience\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000446\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223609e91eca4e4ca6a5ee0f6a91626943\u0022\u003EJohn Key\u003C/span\u003E: A positive experience.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000447\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221772e9f5-5379-4bfe-9d9b-eaffb4c61b02\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022752e561f676943339ea87641a7cb408d\u0022\u003EHon HARRY DUYNHOVEN\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014he calls it a positive experience\u2014in terms of the construction of new roads, new motorways, etc. I want to give Mr Key a little of my experience of the UK. I well recall the ring roads around London, the congestion that occurred there in the 1980s, and the huge construction efforts undertaken by the roading authorities in the UK at the time, which resulted in a motorway called the M25.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000448\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224f9f038d47e945b195ea0d14b2396f51\u0022\u003EJohn Key\u003C/span\u003E: I know it well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000449\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221772e9f5-5379-4bfe-9d9b-eaffb4c61b02\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002252cb04f595884798af43d3e4f14b9121\u0022\u003EHon HARRY DUYNHOVEN\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Key would know, therefore, that the M25 was dubbed, almost as soon as it was completed, the largest car-park in the world. I had the experience, when this brand new motorway was less than a few months old, of sitting in a coach for several hours as the traffic inched gradually along.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000450\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221772e9f5-5379-4bfe-9d9b-eaffb4c61b02\u0022\u003E The point I am making is that Auckland\u2019s problems will not be solved by a very simple recipe of building more and more motorways. I am not, for a moment, saying there is no need for more roads. Clearly, the Government has recognised that, but it has a balanced mixture of policy that sees roads, public transport by way of buses, a rail system, integrated ticketing, cycling, walking, and walking school buses\u2014all those things\u2014as part of a greater whole. But, at the same time, we are making the investments that are needed in an area of the country that, for many years, has been neglected in terms of the amount of infrastructure being built.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000451\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221772e9f5-5379-4bfe-9d9b-eaffb4c61b02\u0022\u003EI think it is absolutely instructive to look at some of the comments of the National Party members. Just to give members one very short example before I sit down, I refer to Mr Brash\u2019s comments. He said we should remove petrol tax, and reduce rates, levies, etc., but acknowledged that we need to build a roading network within 10 years. If one actually looks at the detail of the comments made, one sees it is quite clear that one cannot remove taxes and spend more money at the same time. It is simply not possible, yet that is what National members are asking us to believe.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022 data-id=\u002285a9d27bdf904fcc86e64ba745d31ec0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000452\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002285a9d27bdf904fcc86e64ba745d31ec0\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH (National\u2014Nelson):\u003C/span\u003E If this bill is the answer, it must have been one dumb question. The idea that we will fix the ginormous transport problems in Auckland by creating two new bureaucracies could only have come out of a left-wing Labour caucus. I was amazed to hear the contribution from the Associate Minister of Transport Harry Duynhoven. He says that the answer, as much as I could make it out, to Auckland transport issues is walking buses\u2014walking buses for kiddies. Well, my daughter, Hazel, is proud to be part of a walking bus, but I have to tell the Associate Minister of Transport that if his answer to Auckland\u2019s serious traffic woes is walking buses, it is no wonder we have a flaky bill like the one before the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000453\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EIt further amazes me as National\u2019s local government spokesperson. I have talked to a great number of the citizens and councils of Auckland, and if there is any local authority\u2014I would go so far as to say anywhere in New Zealand\u2014in which there is a lack of public confidence, it is the Auckland Regional Council. Everybody I speak to says it is a bureaucratic monster out of control that delivers little. Yet the Government\u2014Judith Tizard and Chris Carter\u2014believe that our worst public authority is the answer to New Zealand\u2019s biggest problem. That is absolutely extraordinary. I am not surprised that those Auckland members of the Labour caucus are not down here defending this bill; they know it is a failure, and they know it will not address the very serious transport issues that are costing Auckland and New Zealand a billion dollars a year.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000454\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EBut I want to go further down this track of extra bureaucracies not being the answer. If there is any aspect of Auckland\u2019s transport issues on which the editorials, the councils, and the important commercial transport organisations agree, it is that there already are too many organisations trying to deal with Auckland\u2019s transport woes; that there already is a lack of accountability, and no one organisation is prepared to put up its hand and say it is responsible for the mess that is Auckland\u2019s transport woes. So I ask Mr Carter again: how can creating two new bureaucracies possibly make a positive difference to those transport concerns?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000455\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EIt is interesting to note that despite all the increased taxes that this Government has imposed\u2014not just on the road users in Auckland but on the road users in New Plymouth, in Nelson, and throughout the country\u2014and despite this Government telling New Zealanders that that extra money would be spent on Auckland roads, it has been quite comprehensively proved by my colleague Maurice Williamson that this Government is spending less on Auckland roads than was spent in the last year of the National Government. That is a fact, it is an embarrassing fact, and it is time that both the Minister of Transport and the Minister of Local Government fronted up to the people of New Zealand as to why they are taking more money off the road user and spending less on roads.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000456\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022be8a694902324effac2174da178323af\u0022\u003EHon Maurice Williamson\u003C/span\u003E: There was a 32 percent increase in revenue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000457\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fe61abfc4bc143fd87db82e9ac36065e\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: My colleague points out that 32 percent more money was taken off road users and less money is being spent. That is why we say Auckland\u2019s transport problems have got worse every year under this Labour Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000458\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b1b5881-3b86-4894-ac77-72905f786141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c24f7bfa6a7e46cab4d1924253f0fd5d\u0022\u003EHon Judith Tizard\u003C/span\u003E: Because you did nothing for years.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000459\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002230dc6f8e361d4492b2a48d4a9a6e8b66\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I will tell that Minister what we did do.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000460\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b1b5881-3b86-4894-ac77-72905f786141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221799131a94ec4ea5aba6cc4c81c79c85\u0022\u003EHon Judith Tizard\u003C/span\u003E: What?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000461\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227f699ef1c8ab47e9a09c5dede6f8567c\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: We introduced a Resource Management Amendment Bill, and that member is part of the Government that rejected that bill. It is interesting that Judith Tizard, the failed Minister with responsibility for Auckland Issues, is getting a bit tetchy. It is not surprising she is getting a bit tetchy; if I had her track record I would probably resign. She is getting tetchy because this Government has done a U-turn on the Resource Management Act. If we go back to 1999, we find that National introduced quite a comprehensive bill to make some key changes to that Act, and this Minister and this Government pooh-poohed it. They said that, no, the Resource Management Act was beautifully written and beautifully crafted, and did not need to change, despite the fact that key Auckland transport projects had been tied up by the Resource Management Act for 7 years. It seems it is acceptable to Government Ministers, including Judith Tizard, that it takes 7 years to get a consent to build a new road. Well, members on this side say that is not acceptable, and that is why Don Brash, in his leading speech on Auckland transport issues, pointed out\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000462\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b1b5881-3b86-4894-ac77-72905f786141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221eff8493e7e04b018ec874ea23b713ce\u0022\u003EHon Judith Tizard\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s all laughable!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000463\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222ee651e59ccc4925b8652d187fe1872d\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: Judith Tizard obviously has not read the New Zealand Herald. I read a stunning editorial in the New Zealand Herald that stated there was more sense in Don Brash\u2019s speech on roads than it had heard on that issue for years from Judith Tizard or the four Ministers of Transport. We on this side of the House are proud of that speech, and proud of the fact that that speech recognises that we will not make substantive progress on Auckland\u2019s transport issues without substantial amendment of the Resource Management Act. That is something this Government does not recognise, it is something this Government has continually kicked for touch, and it is something that National and Labour view very differently.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000464\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EThe further issue is public-private partnerships. We on this side of the House have held the view that they offer real potential to solve Auckland\u2019s transport woes. Where in this bill do we find any mention of the potential for public-private partnerships to do the job?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000465\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b1b5881-3b86-4894-ac77-72905f786141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022615636311bb04cdb8b7aa22ceb785d81\u0022\u003EHon Judith Tizard\u003C/span\u003E: They were in the last bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000466\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eaef1d44f0934fe98e47baeb0e8f5308\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: I ask the Minister how many public-private partnerships there have been. It is 5 years since that member picked up her ministerial warrant. How many public-private partnerships do we have? Could the National transport spokesperson fill me in?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000467\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002276d837fd902647efbd6ed15be5cbf2aa\u0022\u003EHon Maurice Williamson\u003C/span\u003E: Um, um, it\u2019s zero!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228ac539730d0647568c8739b77780b453\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: It is zero. [Interruption] The Minister admits that, despite her carrying a ministerial warrant for 5 years, we do not have a single public-private partnership in respect of dealing with Auckland\u2019s transport concerns. I tell the Minister that, by any sense, that is failure, and she will be held accountable at the polls next year for that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000469\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b1b5881-3b86-4894-ac77-72905f786141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c1416da2a2ca431c9524aa636727976f\u0022\u003EHon Judith Tizard\u003C/span\u003E: No wonder you lost the Wearable Arts!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000470\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225207cce4d6014292a6cd5d4b2b070701\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: Is it not interesting: the Minister now wants to talk about the Wearable Arts Awards. I would be happy to talk about those, and about how that Minister has produced a result that is a tragedy for Nelson, but this debate is actually about a transport bill. I think the people of Auckland are actually more concerned about the billion dollars a year that transport issues cost them than they are about the tragedy of Nelson losing the Wearable Arts Awards.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000471\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EI want to come back to this bill and to point out that it is an appalling indictment on the Government\u2019s management of transport. Here we have a huge issue of great economic and strategic importance for not just Auckland but our country, and on all the key issues\u2014organisation, the agencies involved in managing this problem; legislation, notably the Resource Management Act; the billion-dollar price tag on completing the Auckland motorway network; and the issue of public-private partnerships\u2014this bill takes us nowhere. It is a failure. It is an indictment on the Minster of Local Government, the Minster of Transport, and the sometime Minister with responsibility for Auckland Issues. It is a bill that will actually make things worse not better. It is a bill that will sentence thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of New Zealanders to ongoing traffic jams.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000472\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EI say to members opposite, particularly the Auckland members, that the voters of the city of Auckland will not tolerate the ongoing obfuscation and failure in respect of transport issues. Those members have failed. They ought to resign and let somebody else come up with a far better approach to solving Auckland\u2019s transport woes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00220ccfa6f8cdab4ed48ccaf2559ec82721\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendments recommended by the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee by majority be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 70\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 49\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EQuestion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002290ce36dd5f98416bbc17f8cddb28623b\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the Local Government (Auckland) Amendment Bill be now read a second time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 83\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 36\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill read a second time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000473\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002288cfb668481a4dc1a1652f2fd562b610\u0022\u003EInstruction to Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022 data-id=\u0022be4694e861ed44a4946f4e28e802e2f1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000474\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022be4694e861ed44a4946f4e28e802e2f1\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS CARTER (Minister of Local Government):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That it be an instruction to the Committee of the whole House on the Local Government (Auckland) Amendment Bill that it take the bill part by part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022cf87aa2dae1649de9047a155f11cf383\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the motion be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 83\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 36\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000475\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022669ef09aba9e4254bc7f98c917d98913\u0022\u003EIn Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000476\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022f2bdd947f28747728ce2549c89bad273\u0022\u003EPart 1  Preliminary provisions\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022 data-id=\u002268aa978f33cc4109ba27cac9491718b6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000477\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002268aa978f33cc4109ba27cac9491718b6\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON (National\u2014Pakuranga):\u003C/span\u003E I am delighted to be able to get into what I think will be the long, long process of the Committee stage of the Local Government (Auckland) Amendment Bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000478\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221772e9f5-5379-4bfe-9d9b-eaffb4c61b02\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002222239d31e7034fc292bbb16d8b9efcd3\u0022\u003EHon Harry Duynhoven\u003C/span\u003E: What were we doing 10 years ago? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000479\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220cb8340d39a1421c8faaf817e120ad97\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON\u003C/span\u003E: Harry Duynhoven thinks that is funny, but I am delighted to say that\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000480\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b1b5881-3b86-4894-ac77-72905f786141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227937264b0d9046b78473f87f73b44441\u0022\u003EHon Judith Tizard\u003C/span\u003E: We got a lot of support, Maurice.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000481\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224252aae7af754c3c9e2624a3e88baba7\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON\u003C/span\u003E: Actually, I do not need much support, because we know exactly what we believe on this bill and why we believe that it is wrong.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000482\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003ENow that the Minister of Local Government, Chris Carter, is in the chair there are a couple of things I want to start off with. There is so much material that I want to ask about, but I guess the first question is this: why did there seem to be such a split within Cabinet when it came time for the announcement of this stuff in December? Dr Michael Cullen, the Minister of Finance, and Paul Swain, the then Minister of Transport, issued very positive press statements that mentioned roads, and that said we needed better roading, more roads, in Auckland. I actually thought their press statements looked quite good. Then I read stuff from the Hon Judith Tizard, from the Prime Minister, Helen Clark, and from the Hon Chris Carter, the Minister of Local Government, who is in the chair, and in many cases\u2014I am not sure about Chris Carter\u2019s statement but I think his was one; I am happy to bring them down to the House afterwards\u2014they never mentioned roads.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000483\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EJudith Tizard certainly did not mention roads in her whole press statement. It talked about Auckland\u2019s needs for the future, about integrated transport, walking buses, cycleways, and walkways. It talked about the lot, and I thought this is wonderful\u2014where is the mention of roads? Roads, as I think everyone in this Chamber will agree, will be central to solving Auckland\u2019s problems. Yes, there needs to be more done in the area of public transport\u2014I accept that. Yes, there needs to be more done to encourage people to use alternative transport or to change lifestyles. But all those solutions are of the magnitude of about 1 percent. The number of people currently using rail in Auckland make 3 million trips a year. That is 0.3 percent of the passenger trips being made in Auckland. So even if rail patronage were to double, by some miraculous change, over the next few years, it still would be an absolutely minute part of the solution.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000484\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EI think the Minister in the chair has a responsibility to tell us about this. I might have done him a disservice\u2014I will go back and check his press statement from 13 December\u2014but I know that several Ministers, in their announcements, never used the words \u201Croads\u201D or \u201Croading\u201D. In that great, wonderful announcement about the world-leading solution for Auckland that was coming, the words \u201Croads\u201D and \u201Croading\u201D were not mentioned.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000485\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EThen we get to some more embarrassing stuff in terms of the track record on this issue, and it is to do with the funding of Auckland\u2019s roads. This bill is supposed to be setting up the administrative processes to fix it, but one of the most embarrassing things the Government has on its plate is the fact that its track record of putting money where its mouth is is so bad. This Government has been in power for 5 years. I asked the Minister of Transport a very specific question: how much money has been spent on the building of new roads, both local and State highways, by year, for the last 6 years? The first number we got was for the full year of the last year of the National Government\u2014$134 million\u2014then we got numbers for the corresponding years from that point on. I have tabled them in the House today, so they are on public record. In every year that this Government has been in power, the amount of money it has spent, in real dollar terms, on new roads in Auckland, both local and State highways, was less than what the National Government spent.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EIt could be said that that was because the Labour Government was so committed to spending its money elsewhere. I would have listened to that and said it was a reasonable argument, until I had a look at Transfund\u2019s books. Transfund has already told us that it will finish this financial year\u2014tomorrow, actually\u2014with a $250 million surplus in the coffers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000487\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224134c51046104dd1bc74f3a1f041adfe\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: How much?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000488\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022735c84b7cd874342888b169122d29761\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON\u003C/span\u003E: It will have $250 million. The people of Auckland who are in drive time\u2014unfortunately, in Auckland that is any time from about 3 o\u2019clock in the afternoon to 9 o\u2019clock at night nowadays, because it takes hours to get anywhere\u2014and are listening, will be asking why $250 million that was taken from them is sitting there when there is a desperate need for new roads. I am happy to go through the list of roads that need to be built. What is this legislation doing about it? It is setting up two new bureaucracies. I can just see the people stuck on the southern motorway right now saying \u201CYippee!\u201D about having two new bureaucracies!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022 data-id=\u00220c87a83ef0544a45967283bd71cf9fc7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000489\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220c87a83ef0544a45967283bd71cf9fc7\u0022\u003EDAIL JONES (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E New Zealand First\u2019s policy on roading, in Auckland or elsewhere, is very clear. We want to make sure that all money raised by taxing the motorist for the building of roads is used to build roads. We do not support the policies of this minority Labour Government, or the National Party, which say that some of that money\u2014$700 million or $800 million\u2014can be siphoned off into other areas. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000490\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EI was in the House in 1977-78 when we introduced the hubodometer tax. It was made absolutely clear by Sir Robert Muldoon and Colin McLachlan, the Minister of Transport, that that tax was to be spent on roads. We said that every truck could do as much damage as 40,000 cars and that the taxes raised from the hubodometer tax on trucks had to be spent on the roads. New Zealand First follows that view\u2014[Interruption] Mr Williamson can interject on me all the time, if he likes, but that is our policy and that is where we differ from the National Party and the Labour Party. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000491\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EI stood up in a meeting with Don Brash on the North Shore when I put this proposal forward, and I got no support from him. He wanted to make sure that that money was still spent on hospitals and suchlike. That is fair enough, but we want to make sure that every cent of the New Zealand Roads Board money\u2014all road-user taxes\u2014is spent on the roads, unlike the National Party as Dr Brash said on the North Shore. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000492\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EThis bill is like the old saying: half a loaf is better than no bread. We take the view that something has to be done for Auckland. This bill at least approaches the problem and gives some consideration to it, and it amalgamates many of the diverse local authorities and local institutions that govern Auckland roads and tries to put them together towards one solution\u2014one body looking at the problem and one body trying to solve it. We could wait 18 months for the National Party to come up with some dream idea, but we know that all Maurice Williamson ever did in Government was produce reports. We in New Zealand First cannot wait for reports. We are willing to give a proposal a try. As I say, it is half a loaf, not the full loaf, but we will give it a go because we believe that something positive has to be done for Auckland. We will not be like the National Party\u2014we will not rub our hands, say that this is a dreadful state of affairs, and then spend another 18 months saying how dreadful it is. We want some action. This offers us some action in Auckland. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000493\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EAs an Auckland member of Parliament and someone who helped to unchain the north-western motorway in 1979-80\u2014I was there when Sir Robert Muldoon and I opened the Western Springs link in 1982-83, and, really, nothing happened after that under the Labour Government or the National Government\u2014I am pleased that the north-western motorway will swing into the Auckland Harbour Bridge. I congratulate the Labour Party on, in this term at least, approaching that problem and doing something about it. If one drives on the city motorways today, there does seem to be something happening. It did not happen much between 1984 and, virtually, 2002. There was scant work being done. I congratulate the Minister and this Government, because something is happening at least, and it is not the hand-wringing, moaning, groaning, and whingeing that we constantly get from Maurice Williamson in yet another report. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000494\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EI am also very pleased that there is an extension of the rail link, with one line going up as far as Morningside. I hope it will go to Henderson. I wanted to see it go to Helensville\u2014there is no reason why that double rail link should not go there. I am looking forward to that double rail link going all the way to Helensville at the very least, because there is a growing population in that area. The Auckland Regional Council\u2014and that is part of what we are talking about today\u2014has plans for the growth of that area. Rail link is one of the ways in which the transport of that area can be improved. Also, I cannot see how people getting off a plane at Whenuapai at 8 o\u2019clock in the morning, or 6 o\u2019clock in the morning, will ever get to Auckland on the north-western motorway. They cannot do it today, and they will not be able to do it in the future as things stand. That is something that really has to be re-examined by those people who support the Infratil plan for Whenuapai. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000495\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EI congratulate our member Jim Peters on all the amendments the Minister will put forward in discussion with Jim Peters and New Zealand First. We believe that cooperation with the Government is very important if something positive can be achieved. We were at the Auckland Regional Council. The council was critical of this bill, Jim Peters was critical of this bill, but now we have worked through to a solution in this bill, which can only be a better result for the people of Auckland. That is very important, especially in an MMP situation. If there is a problem, it is no use just wringing one\u2019s hands and moaning about it; one tries to work towards a good solution to that problem. What we are getting in this bill is an improvement. It is half a loaf, but it is better than no bread.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022 data-id=\u002234d486be41c345538917aafce4492444\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000496\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002234d486be41c345538917aafce4492444\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS CARTER (Minister of Local Government):\u003C/span\u003E I would like to thank Dail Jones from New Zealand First for those kind and truthful comments. The Government has attempted to work through this process in as engaging and consensual a way as possible. It has involved a great deal of the time of my officials and Government members in meeting with Auckland territorial authorities and engaging with other political parties so that we can come up with solutions that start to address this critical problem of transport within Auckland, and particularly its governance structures. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000497\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003EThis bill is aimed at promoting increased integration of decision making. We had some presentations earlier from some National members stating that the bill increased the number of bodies making decisions. Actually, it does not; it goes a long way to integrate and streamline those processes. Part 1 is a fairly narrow part. It deals with title, commencement, purpose, and integration. I would like to comment very briefly on just two things. The first is the Supplementary Order Paper and the commencement part that I intend to introduce. The Auckland Regional Transport Authority is supposed to be up and running on 1 January. If it manages to appoint its chief executive and get everything ready before then, we are very keen for it to start as soon as possible. So the Supplementary Order Paper allows the authority the flexibility, if it is up and running earlier, to get started and take full responsibility. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000498\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003EThe other area I would like to comment on very briefly is the integration of all the Franklin district into the area that the Auckland Regional Transport Authority will be dealing with in its planning processes. The transport systems in the Waikato are very integrated with Auckland\u2019s transport structures. We have widened out the reach here beyond the Auckland Regional Council to the Waikato Regional Council in an attempt to try to integrate this incredibly complex Auckland transport network into an effective and efficient system. It will be a Herculean task, but this Government has both the commitment and the resources to try to address this question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022 data-id=\u002298aec7fca3164a68b30ad34aa531acf9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000499\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002298aec7fca3164a68b30ad34aa531acf9\u0022\u003EKEITH LOCKE (Green):\u003C/span\u003E I rise to speak on Part 1. The Green Party, of course, is supporting this bill. I want to talk particularly about the purpose of the bill. Part 1 states that one of the purposes of the bill is to improve the integration of the Auckland regional land transport system. A lot of people talk about integration. John Banks, the Mayor of Auckland, who has a somewhat different position from the Green Party on these matters, sometimes talks about integration too. So I think it is worthwhile looking at what integration is about. To people like John Banks it is, essentially, the code word for a motorway system as the backbone of transport, with perhaps a bit of rail, buses, cycling, and walking thrown in.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000500\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003ESitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000501\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224be6cdad45f24c09be28eb73d7043f8b\u0022\u003EKEITH LOCKE\u003C/span\u003E: Before the dinner break I was talking about how the purpose of the bill refers to the need for integrated transport, and about the fact that some people\u2014and I mentioned John Banks\u2014who use the word \u201Cintegration\u201D are really focusing on a whole motorway structure, with a bit of rail, bus, ferry, walking, and cycling hanging off it. That is what some people call \u201Cintegrated\u201D, whereas when we go around the world and look at other cities, we see that their transport backbone is public transport\u2014particularly rail transport. I think that is where Auckland has been missing the boat over the last few decades. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000502\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EWhat we need to build, particularly south of the harbour bridge, is a true backbone of rail transport as the hub for public transport in Auckland generally. There has been a huge decline in patronage from the old days when there were 100 million passenger movements per year. There is around half that number now, although that figure is coming up quite rapidly. When people argue against really putting the emphasis and money into rail, I think they should just look at Auckland today, where the problem is not that people refuse to go on trains but that the trains, particularly around commuter time, are full. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EI went to see the marketing manager of Connex Auckland, which is taking over the operation of the Auckland rail system very shortly. That manager has the rather unusual task of not wishing to encourage increasing commuter patronage at this point in time, because every time Connex Auckland puts on a new train it automatically fills up, and it has too many passengers for the trains it has now. The big task before Auckland\u2014and hopefully this new structure in the bill will advance it\u2014is that of getting a better track, getting many more carriages, double-tracking lines, and improving the stations, etc. So the job of that marketing manager is really to get these trains running right on time and to have good quality public transport for Auckland. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000504\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EI think that one of the tasks of the new Auckland Regional Transport Authority, which is being set up under this bill, will be to get the trains and the stations up to scratch. I think it is envisaged and possible in this bill for the Auckland Regional Transport Authority to actually own those carriages, etc., and to bring them on stream. Auckland Regional Holdings, as I understand it, is more the permanent asset infrastructure base, and the Auckland Regional Transport Authority will be in charge of making sure\u2014together with the operator, Connex Auckland\u2014that the carriages are there. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000505\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThe backbone of a true rail infrastructure is developing, with the Britomart complex having opened, but unfortunately there are too few trains going into that complex to date. There is work proceeding on double-tracking the western line\u2014that is good\u2014and talk about treble-tracking the line coming in from the east. But if we are to develop a true rail backbone, particularly where there is a weakness along the eastern corridor, we need to reject the idea of building another motorway down the eastern corridor. We need to reject the old vision of motorways being the backbone of transport, and really develop services along that eastern rail corridor, which, at the moment, at peak times are really quite infrequent. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022 data-id=\u0022b39a418392bf48d8afd5e921ad18f768\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000506\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b39a418392bf48d8afd5e921ad18f768\u0022\u003EDEBORAH CODDINGTON (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E I rise to address Part 1, which contains the purpose and interpretation clauses. If the Minister, Chris Carter, were serious about solving some of the transport problems in Auckland, he would urge his Government to make a decision on Whenuapai Air Base. Instead, Government members are sitting there twiddling their thumbs. The Government will not make a decision on Whenuapai Air Base because it is too political, and because it does not want to upset Auckland International Airport. While the people in west Auckland sit waiting for this airport so they do not have to sit in traffic for 3 hours to take a 1-hour flight to Wellington, Government members sit around passing legislation such as this in urgency. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000507\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003EClause 3 states that the purpose of this Act is to improve the integration of the Auckland regional land transport system and decisions on stormwater funding. It does not say anything about building roads, about pricing mechanisms, or about ending the gridlock in the Auckland transport system, which is a total disgrace. If this Government were serious in doing something about the Auckland transport system, it would bring in legislation such as that brought in for the America\u2019s Cup, which enabled the America\u2019s Cup village to be built in time for the event and enabled the money to be poured into the Auckland region. That benefited not just downtown Auckland, in terms of aesthetics and creating businesses, but the whole of New Zealand. All that is needed is a bill like that to set up some sort of central body that could hear all the submissions and objections in one piece. There would be one right of appeal, and then the whole roading network could go through. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000508\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003EAs I said before, there is no point just in building more roads, because cars will pour on to them\u2014especially in Auckland, which is built on a very narrow piece of land. As the Greens say, it is hopeless trying to get people to use rail. If people want to use rail, let them pay for rail. The motorists in Auckland pay through their road-user charges, through their accident compensation levies, through their drivers\u2019 licences, through registering their cars, and again and again through petrol taxes. Even though they pay all that money, less than 50 percent\u2014I think about 17 percent\u2014actually goes back into the roads. The rest goes into the consolidated account. Aucklanders are so desperate that they will agree, as a last measure, even to a regional petrol tax. That will not solve anything anyway, because people will just pour out of the area to fill up their vehicles and go back in again. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000509\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003EThis bill will do absolutely nothing, because this Government is ideologically opposed to any form of private enterprise. Until this Government\u2014or any Government\u2014allows private enterprise to come into the picture in terms of building, operating, and transferring roads we will never get anywhere. This bill is really an asset grab. It is an asset-grab bill. It would put Brierley\u2019s to shame in terms of grabbing all the assets that belong to Auckland people\u2014in the form of Infrastructure Auckland\u2014which they have paid for, and which, interestingly enough, it took an Alliance person to safeguard for them. Now it will just hand over those assets to the Auckland Regional Council, and it will not even require that all of those assets be used on the roads and the stormwater system. As I said during a prior debate on this bill, the Auckland Regional Council will be allowed to use 15 percent of the assets for whatever it wishes. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000510\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003EThis is the council that, with a straight face, unashamedly put up rates on the North Shore to $6,000 per year. Those people would have to pay for a rail system that they would never use, that some of them would never see, and that, because this Government is so soft and pathetic on crime, they would not want to use. A pensioner lady I spoke to, whose rates were going up to $6,000 per year, said: \u201CI would not use rail anyway, because the railway stations aren\u2019t safe. Why would I want to use it?\u201D This bill is just cosmetic public relations.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022 data-id=\u0022fc2068e7b51547d48180a95cc8ad9cd5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000511\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022fc2068e7b51547d48180a95cc8ad9cd5\u0022\u003EDr WAYNE MAPP (National\u2014North Shore):\u003C/span\u003E I note that clause 5 states: \u201CThis Act binds the Crown.\u201D What a noble gesture that is. It implies, does it not, that the Crown, the Government of New Zealand, has some grand design for the Auckland region in relation to transport. Unfortunately, that is not true and this bill fails in its basic objective. Members should look at clause 3, \u201CPurpose\u201D, which states: \u201CThe purpose of this Act is\u2014(a) to improve the integration of\u2014(i) the Auckland regional land transport system;\u201D. It actually does not do that, because we will still have the multiplicity of authorities and accountabilities. Certainly, it aggregates some stuff within the Auckland region. It gives some additional powers to the Auckland Regional Council and it deals with Auckland Regional Network Transport Ltd, but it does not deal with the big issue, which, as the Minister well knows, is the completion of the motorway network. Where in this bill do I find the inclusion and integration of Transit or Transfund\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000512\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f898070dd5bf447282dd7fb136f2e264\u0022\u003EHon Maurice Williamson\u003C/span\u003E: Or TrackCo.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000513\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002257209f030d70491da5bac348ef76dfc4\u0022\u003EDr WAYNE MAPP\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014or TrackCo. The big spending items are not here, so when I see the words: \u201CThis Act binds the Crown.\u201D, I realise that they are there purely as window-dressing. The Crown, to all intents and purposes, is doing absolutely nothing. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000514\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EI am appalled that after 7\u00BD years I have to stand here and say that the busway for the North Shore is yet to start. It is a project that has been thought about in our city, progressively planned during the 3 years I was a Government back-bencher, and now, 5 years later, is yet to start. Certainly, there are all sorts of honeyed words from the Government, with fine intentions and so forth, but our city is waiting for the bulldozers. I do not mean just on the Esmonde Road interchange; I mean on the entire network. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000515\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EIn fact, the speaker for the Greens takes direct and personal accountability, aided and abetted by the Minister in the chair, Chris Carter, for stopping the work entirely for the last 12 months, by a review. It was an unnecessary review of something that would have significant advantages for public transport, which, I presume, the Greens actually support and the city desires. It was an integration of public transport through buses and high-density vehicles\u2014that is, motor vehicles carrying three or more people. It was something that surely everyone would have supported; yet a review, lasting 12 months, effectively put the project back. So a project that should have been in operation no later than 2003, if the Government had taken a meaningful and serious approach to this issue, will, I suggest, not now operate until 2008 at the earliest. That is a whole decade for a very simple, straightforward project. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000516\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003ESo when Auckland people look at the actions of this Government and measure them, they will say: \u201CGosh, it took 10 years just to do a simple project like the North Shore busway. How on earth will the Government be able to complete its alleged programme in a meaningful sort of way?\u201D. There are much tougher decisions ahead. Has this Government made a single statement of serious funding intent in relation to the Eastern highway, for instance? It has not made even one. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000517\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EThe reality is that the city will wait until the Government is thrown out, because that is the only possible solution to this problem. We need to change the Government and get a clear and coherent policy in place.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022749a724d-1ef9-49cb-9ba2-2610403653ea\u0022 data-id=\u00228466651079f8434c991cd3a2e8d3cdc9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000518\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022749a724d-1ef9-49cb-9ba2-2610403653ea\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228466651079f8434c991cd3a2e8d3cdc9\u0022\u003EDIANNE YATES (Labour\u2014Hamilton East):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022 data-id=\u0022534978b25c61493aadcac51ef442a768\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000519\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022534978b25c61493aadcac51ef442a768\u0022\u003EDr the Hon LOCKWOOD SMITH (National\u2014Rodney):\u003C/span\u003E In speaking to Part 1 of this Local Government (Auckland) Amendment Bill, I want to say to Auckland people that they can relax, because help is on its way. In the next year or so there will be a National Government, and finally something will be done about the outrageous roading shambles in the Auckland region. It is a disgrace, and I say to the Minister in the chair, the Hon Chris Carter, that this bill is a sick joke. He thinks that fixing up Auckland\u2019s shambolic motorway and roading system will be achieved by creating two more committees. They are to be called the Auckland Regional Transport Authority and Auckland Regional Holdings, and that will fix up the roads? What a sick joke! The Minister in the chair should get his brain around what has to happen in Auckland. This legislation will not do a damned thing to fix that absolute shambles. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000520\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EI must tell my colleagues something funny. Do they know that we have a Minister responsible for assisting the Prime Minister on Auckland issues? Yes, I think it is the Hon Judith Tizard. Well, we had a meeting with the Auckland Regional Council, where we were being briefed on this legislation, because the council want changes in it. I got up and said: \u201CLook, the progress that is being made on roading in Auckland is such that it is actually getting worse and worse by the month. Things are falling further and further behind. For example, the traffic north of \u014Crewa is now getting so bad that there is a crisis right through to Wellsford.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000521\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EDo members know what the Hon Judith Tizard said? She said that this bill was only about the Auckland region. The Minister helping the Prime Minister on Auckland issues did not know where the Auckland region extended to. She thought Wellsford was outside the Auckland region. That is the Minister advising the Prime Minister on Auckland issues! We had news for her, of course. The Auckland region extends right up to just north of Te Hana, north of Wellsford\u2014and the Labour Government does not even know that? It brings this legislation into the House and it does not even know where the Auckland region extends to. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000522\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EI am going to tell this Minister in the chair that Part 1 is a joke, because it sets out the purpose, and there is nothing in that purpose that will do anything to fix the roading problem. I invite the Minister to name one thing in that purpose that will do anything to get the bulldozers moving and the dirt shifted to build a road in Auckland. When National was last in office, the motorway was going right through to P\u016Bhoi as a single construction, and the money was there to do it. What has Labour done? It has done nothing but establish, with this legislation, two more committees\u2014as if committees will build any roads. I say to that Minister in the chair that the public of Auckland will boot him and his mates out, because they are sick of being stuck in traffic. They are sick of it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000523\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EBut I want to be deadly serious about this. The problem is getting worse rapidly, and there is nothing in this legislation that will improve the situation. By 2008 apparently, the Albany to P\u016Bhoi realignment will be constructed through to P\u016Bhoi. I want to tell the Minister that by 2008 he will have such a shambles north of P\u016Bhoi to Warkworth and Wellsford that it will be impossible to get through. Already, the queues of traffic around Warkworth and Wellsford are such that it is impossible to get through. When there is an accident on that piece of State Highway 1, there is an absolute shambles. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000524\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EThere is a desperate need to actually shift some dirt and build some roads\u2014and this legislation just sets up two more committees. They are two more committees that will do nothing, because there is an absolute disconnect between Transit\u2019s priorities and the Auckland Regional Transport Authority\u2019s priorities. There is nothing in this legislation that requires Transit to do anything that the Auckland Regional Transport Authority thinks should be done, and there is nothing in Part 1, which sets out the purpose and the interpretation, that will fix that problem. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220e7e8da2-a6a1-41bb-aeb0-a49be255a293\u0022 data-id=\u0022adb97b2e2110475f9aa869d0b586df51\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000525\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220e7e8da2-a6a1-41bb-aeb0-a49be255a293\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022adb97b2e2110475f9aa869d0b586df51\u0022\u003ENANAIA MAHUTA (Labour\u2014Tainui):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022ab78d0f98af84e28a8932cf5cba50ad1\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 70\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 49\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000526\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 231 in the name of the Hon Chris Carter to Part 1 be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00225dad1fa8427e45989b82b32af9406141\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendments be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 83\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 36\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022860237dc2b5f483eb5f43ec0349669a4\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That Part 1 as amended be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 83\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 36\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 1 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022 data-id=\u00229c1ece78a71e4c44ac740b02d060bb36\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000527\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229c1ece78a71e4c44ac740b02d060bb36\u0022\u003ELINDSAY TISCH (Junior Whip\u2014National):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I would like it to be made known that on this side of the Chamber there are Auckland members who are concerned about this bill. In particular, members who were on the select committee would like to be given a call on such an important bill for Auckland, which is why Auckland members and not other members are speaking. I ask that when we move to Parts 2 and 3 and then back to the title, fair consideration be given to them when they seek the call.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000528\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222c7f053f369644a499576deafc5ed62c\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. I understand that, and I will take into account what the member has said. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000529\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022012ca96a7c05427fb8b32dab4bae3e0d\u0022\u003EPart 2  Auckland Region land transport and stormwater\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022 data-id=\u0022180fe0ca015a4a48835ee99974833686\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000530\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022180fe0ca015a4a48835ee99974833686\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: The question now is that Part 2, clauses 6 to 36 stand part. This includes debate on schedules 1, 2, 3, 4, and 4A.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000531\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002277c6c049bb944ca19cb6ea438af10507\u0022\u003EAuckland Region land transport and stormwater\u201D,\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022 data-id=\u002230fed734d22d4defb90e942c6c926c37\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000532\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002230fed734d22d4defb90e942c6c926c37\u0022\u003EJOHN KEY (National\u2014Helensville):\u003C/span\u003E The Labour Government thinks it knows a lot about land transport because it is good at giving out traffic tickets. That has been its contribution to land transport in New Zealand\u2014it is good at stopping law-abiding citizens and giving them traffic tickets, but not too good at fixing Auckland\u2019s problems or the motorway network. Aucklanders are not asking for a miracle or some wonderful thing. Members were talking before about the objectives of the Auckland Regional Transport Authority, as they are listed in Part 2, \u201C and the fact that fixing those roads is an impossible dream. Aucklanders have been waiting 40 long years for this network to be finished. In the 5 years this Government has been in office, it has achieved absolutely nothing, and this bill will continue to fail. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000533\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003EThe Government has shown scant regard for this bill. The members who have so far spoken on the bill are the Hon Rick Barker from Tukituki, Damien O\u2019Connor from the West Coast, and Harry Duynhoven from New Plymouth. They are not Auckland members. Where are the Auckland members? Those members are trying to close down the debate, and a couple of provincial members were also trying to close it down. Aucklanders care passionately about this issue. They want a resolution, but the Government does not. The Government does not care about fixing Auckland\u2019s problems. What it cares about is snuggling up to the Greens and its coalition partner arrangements. That is what made the Land Transport Management Bill a complete and utter failure, and that is what will make the Local Government (Auckland) Amendment Bill a similar failure. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000534\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003EFor anyone who needs more clarification of that point, I  urge that person to look at Part 2 of the bill, and in particular at clause 8(1A), which provides that the Auckland Regional Transport Authority \u201C\u2026 must exhibit a sense of social and environmental responsibility \u2026\u201D. That clause must have been drafted by the Green Party. [Interruption] I hear the Greens co-leader, Jeanette Fitzsimons, and she is nodding in approval of that statement. When she went to Heather Simpson on the ninth floor in the dark, she said: \u201CThis is the bottom line. I want these things in the bill. Let\u2019s make this one as unworkable as the Land Transport Management Bill. That is my aim.\u201D, and Heather Simpson quietly said to her: \u201CYes. Don\u2019t worry Jeanette Fitzsimons, we\u2019ll take care of it. We\u2019ll make this an unworkable piece of legislation, just the way the Land Transport Management Bill was.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000535\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003EThen we look at consultation as it is set out in clause 8(1A)(b)(i): \u201Censuring \u2026 that the views of affected communities are taken into account;\u201D. What is an affected community? For instance, looking at the Albany to Puhoi realignment B2 (ALPURT B2), the motorway north of Auckland, is the affected community someone who is paying the toll, someone living in the local area, someone trying to use that road to go to Northland, or someone in the south of Auckland, or in Wellington who is currently travelling through? Affected communities are very difficult things to define. When the select committee was discussing the Land Transport Management Bill\u2014which, I might say in hindsight, is really a subset of this bill\u2014we asked officials about affected communities, and the exact conclusion they drew was that affected communities were quite difficult to define. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000536\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003EI want also to make specific reference to Part 3, \u201CAmendments, repeals, and revocations\u201D, which again talks about the number of people who are required to be consulted. I want to draw members\u2019 attention back to why attempts to solve the problems have failed, and why it is likely that this legislation will continue to fail to deliver results for Aucklanders. That is the very important point that Don Brash made in his speech on roading, which I would encourage members to read, because it was a very good speech. It pointed out that the real problems in Auckland are the problems not addressed in these issues. The real problems are the Resource Management Act, the failure to have the private sector in any way engaged in road building in Auckland, and the inability to produce one seamless decision-making body. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000537\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003EWhat the press release of the Minister in the chair, the Hon Chris Carter, said was that this would be one body to solve Auckland\u2019s problems. What he forgot to tell the people of New Zealand was that this was not one body, but one more body, to add on to all those other bodies out there. That is right\u2014he meant more bureaucracy. My prediction is that if Aucklanders are waiting for the Local Government (Auckland) Amendment Bill and the Auckland Regional Transport Authority to fix their problems with no changes, they will be waiting a very long time indeed. The tragedy of that situation, of course, is that motorways in Auckland are at 95 percent capacity as we speak today. We cannot afford to wait. We cannot afford to have thousands of Aucklanders migrating into Auckland.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022 data-id=\u002212428fd70fcb4619b5c2d4124a87f92f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000538\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002212428fd70fcb4619b5c2d4124a87f92f\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON (National\u2014Pakuranga):\u003C/span\u003E I want to just pick up on\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000539\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c04cfb12540d4018b61bfe1dbbf863b1\u0022\u003EDail Jones\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. The call should go to Jim Peters.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000540\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220a71e761d5c6476a9428e62c46f1e110\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Could the member be seated. I am well aware of that, Mr Jones. I am looking at proportionality in the Parliament, and as long as proportionality takes place\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000541\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002228cd93c20e254cf19912b1921d163fbd\u0022\u003EDail Jones\u003C/span\u003E: But you have to alternate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000542\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022acc1a2dc55d54b8cb806b6d1e3968e87\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Not in Committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000543\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b29e7df6e79e43fd9b712a9c915d3a85\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON\u003C/span\u003E: I want to pick up on some of those points that John Key was making\u2014an Auckland member of Parliament. I do so in the knowledge that I will still be addressing the drive time audience in Auckland, because it will be at least another hour while they are trying to work their way home. They listen to Parliament for at least 4 hours at night on their way home. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000544\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EI went and found the Minister\u2019s press release\u2014here it is in all its glorious crimson colour\u2014on the web. I thought I would see whether my memory served me right, and I typed in the word \u201Croad\u201D and hit \u201Cfind\u201D. Low and behold, it found the word \u201Croad\u201D once, and I thought: \u201COh he did\u2014I got it wrong.\u201D But no it was not\u2014along the bottom of the website it says \u201CHome, Ministers, Portfolios, Initiatives, Newsletters, Broadcast\u201D\u2014and the word \u201Croad\u201D is in the word \u201Cbroadcast\u201D! That is the only place Chris Carter mentions \u201Croads\u201D. I have got it here. I am happy to table it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000545\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002212820473037c44a2a7074e018c290bdd\u0022\u003EJohn Key\u003C/span\u003E: Surely not! Is he on the right bill?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000546\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b474d592c16c446cbec95603eb739bce\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON\u003C/span\u003E: No, no! This was the big announcement on 12 December, and it says: \u201CSingle governing organisation for Auckland transport\u201D. That is the heading. It sounds good. It sounds really good. This is what Mr Carter, the Minister in the chair, says: \u201CI think everyone agrees that present governance arrangements for Auckland\u2019s transport are confused, inefficient and ineffectual. The Government believes these arrangements must be clarified so extra transport funding earmarked for Auckland can be used in the best possible way\u201D. That is what Mr Carter said. \u201CThe Government proposes that responsibility for Auckland transport issues, such as\u201D \u2014and members should listen to this\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000547\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002272a79e7d864e408f94dc252e7e6c32b9\u0022\u003ESimon Power\u003C/span\u003E: We\u2019re listening.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000548\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d247c277576348c1b7b29a1809d2947f\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON\u003C/span\u003E: No, this is really important; members have to listen carefully: \u201CAuckland transport issues, such as rail, bus, ferry, pedestrian and cycle transport, reside with one organisation\u201D. Where is the word \u201Croads\u201D? It is not mentioned. I will read it again: it states that the Government believes that the \u201Cresponsibility for Auckland transport issues, such as rail, bus, ferry, pedestrian and cycle transport\u201D\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000549\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002229c253c33fef4ae29e7af5b9b68a88ef\u0022\u003ESimon Power\u003C/span\u003E: No cars in that one.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000550\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228345a4ceab9b42e1ab461a256fea66ab\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, now we have worked out what the Albany to Puhoi realignment B2 (ALPURT B2) is going to be. It is going to have a little wee circular station and there will be walking buses from thereon north. People will get out of their cars and they will just trundle on with their walking bus. But let me get to the last bit of his press release. He says then: \u201Creside with one organisation to be called the Auckland Regional Transport Authority\u201D. That sounds good. So the responsibility for all of Auckland\u2019s transport is going to lie with one authority. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000551\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003ENow, the problem in the past was\u2014and I made this point in the second reading\u2014that there was a plethora of organisations. There were 18 of them. I have got the list, I have got the graph, I have got the printout. There were 18 of them, from the Auckland Regional Transport Network to TrackCo, to Transit, to the seven territorial authorities, to the regional council, to Infrastructure Auckland. God knows it was most complicated. The press release stated that it was going to be one. When I saw that, I thought \u201CBoy, I reckon these guys might have got it. They are going to move\u201D\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000552\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a35310a3ff154531a0ac1f476de9ff0b\u0022\u003ESimon Power\u003C/span\u003E: No.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000553\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dbb414458798409bbe0eb4269455a7c1\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON\u003C/span\u003E: No, I did, actually. Now I know that it was a foolish thing to have thought, because what we are passing tonight is legislation that does quite the opposite. It does not bring it all under one organisation at all. Now, I thought that Chris Carter has a bias, he is a local government Minister, he will not be into this. So I read the press release of  Judith Tizard, who says she is the Associate Minister of Transport. Here it is. I have it here. Well, I will find the word \u201Croad\u201D\u2014and, guess what? \u201CRoad\u201D is used in her press release\u2014once. Just once. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000554\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225795154f529d4a4388e256462be6e41d\u0022\u003ESimon Power\u003C/span\u003E: Just once?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000555\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220c36852059e741d785475e92fae1db72\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON\u003C/span\u003E: But, no, no, when I finally read the sentence it states: \u201CTransit New Zealand has just announced that it expects to begin work next month on the North Shore\u2019s $35 million Esmonde Road Bus Interchange.\u201D So the only place \u201Croad\u201D appears is in the mention of the bus interchange. So, Judith Tizard does not believe in roads. Minister Carter does not believe in roads. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000556\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003ESo I thought, well, I will go to the top. I thought that the Prime Minister Helen Clark would not be as stupid as that; she would have this fixed. She talks about there being a need. She says: \u201CThe structure involves a single body responsible for Auckland transport, under the auspices of the Auckland Regional Council.\u201D Well, it does not, does it? And the Minister has not told us in this Chamber about all these other bodies. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000557\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003ELet us ask one simple question, just one. There are lots of questions but I will ask just one and see whether I can get an answer. Why is Transit staying out, doing its own thing, if these press releases are true? Because if there were just one body, Transit would be dragged into it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022 data-id=\u0022f5b6752be53a4180a52eb7a12b1b9298\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000558\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f5b6752be53a4180a52eb7a12b1b9298\u0022\u003EJIM PETERS (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E First I want to draw the attention of the Committee to clause 8, just to pick up some of the modes of thinking that we have already heard in the last few minutes. The first thing is that the members on my right speak with great confidence about roads in Auckland. In Northland we are affected, as one member has already said, very much by what happens in Auckland. I am speaking on behalf of New Zealand First. We have no great interest in what the National Party, the Labour Party, or any other party thinks. We are guided by the fact that recently I heard a would-be voter in the United States interviewed about whether he would vote for Mr Kerry. His answer was very interesting. He said: \u201CI will vote for anyone who is positive, and I will vote for anyone who promises me that they can fix it.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000559\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003EThis bill is not one that fixes it completely, as my colleague has already said. But there are a number of elements in the bill\u2014and I particularly want to draw the attention of the Committee to clause 28\u2014that we in New Zealand First believe need to be expanded and developed. In relation to the development of clause 28 and other like provisions, the need to have clarity in regard to the Auckland Regional Land Transport Committee and a strategy, has been clarified. Therefore, New Zealand First will withdraw its Supplementary Order Paper and give strong support to the Government in that regard. The Auckland local authorities are not more numerous. In fact, the seven planning programmes are now reduced to two, with one more major funding agency. The issue here is not the record of the past, it is whether this Committee believes that in this bill the Auckland local authorities have the ability, as in clause 7, to plan, fund, and develop the Auckland regional land transport system in a way that can be integrated, safe, responsible, and sustainable. That is a very laudable objective. We know that it is but the beginning, but New Zealand First strongly supports it. It is a positive move that aims to fix a decades-long problem. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000560\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003EAs I said in the second reading, this is a beginning, and New Zealand First supports a beginning. We believe that the clarity that was not there in regard to the local authorities\u2019 ability to plan, and the broad framework that is now the land transport strategy, is there now. That will ensure that the Auckland Regional Transport Authority can get on with the massive operational job that it has to do. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000561\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003EThe last point is that the Minister has the ability, under the 2003 Act, to issue general directions. That guidance is there and one would hope therefore it will be guidance that will come with an understanding of the funding needs, step by step. As we know, nothing prevents the ways that funding can be achieved. It is the job of the Auckland Regional Transport Authority to get out there, do the job, find the money, and get it done. We strongly support this part. We will withdraw our proposed amendment and support that which is submitted by the Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022 data-id=\u0022a8bb790b25fc4587973d53571fb0e7e5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000562\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a8bb790b25fc4587973d53571fb0e7e5\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS CARTER (Minister of Local Government):\u003C/span\u003E It has been astonishing sitting in this Chamber since dinner time and seeing the crocodile tears coming from National Party members about this bill. Some of those National members were members of a Government that did nothing about Auckland transport. We heard that for 14 long years Aucklanders have been in queues. For how many of those 14 years was National the Government of this country? It was for at least 9 years. This Government has had the energy, the commitment, and the resources to commit to structures and funding that will start to address this complex and difficult question. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000563\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003EMr Williamson, who is a former Minister of Transport, asked why Transit should not be part of the Auckland Regional Transport Authority. Mr Williamson knows, although some members may not, that Transit is responsible for roading issues all over the country. It could not possibly be an integral part of the Auckland Regional Transport Authority. However, it is required to submit its plans to the authority, and the authority is required to submit its plans to Transit, to comment on each other\u2019s planning. This is the first time they have been required to consult each other, and this synergy\u2014this working together\u2014is the only way we will solve this problem. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000564\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003EWe were told that there are now two extra structures to fix up Auckland transport issues. I remind members that each of the eight territorial authorities had its own roading programmes. Now that has been integrated into the Auckland Regional Transport Authority whereby each of them has a representative sitting on the board. Now instead of eight authorities we have one\u2014the Auckland Regional Transport Authority. That is the progress that this bill seeks to arrive at. This Government has committed $1.6 billion to Auckland transport over 10 years. The Labour-led Government has delivered not just this new governance structure, designed to make a more effective and efficient delivery of transport outcomes, but also it has delivered the money. We have walked the walk; we have not talked the talk. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022 data-id=\u002293c9d8cba6b0474dbeb778e2b4b747fa\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000565\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002293c9d8cba6b0474dbeb778e2b4b747fa\u0022\u003EDEBORAH CODDINGTON (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E The Minister said \u201CWe have contributed $1.8 billion\u201D\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000566\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229227b6ec29334d258734b82549181542\u0022\u003EHon Chris Carter\u003C/span\u003E: $1.6 billion.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000567\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e6faef33ccff4836ab11d3d8c1712e10\u0022\u003EDEBORAH CODDINGTON\u003C/span\u003E: It is $1.6 billion. I ask the Minister whose money it is. Is that not telling! They think it is their money. It is actually other people\u2019s money. I hate to bring it to the Minister\u2019s attention, but it is not his money. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000568\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003EI will address Part 2, and in particular clause 8. We see in clause 8(1A) why this legislation will never, ever work. As Maurice Williamson said, this legislation does not even mention the dirty word \u201Croads\u201D. It does not even talk about roads. It is a \u201Cland transport system\u201D, and now we can see why. Clause 8(1A) states that the Auckland Regional Transport Authority, the new bureaucracy that will be set up, in meeting its objectives, \u201Cmust exhibit a sense of social and environmental responsibility\u201D. That is such a nebulous term. What on earth does that mean? The clause goes on: \u201Cavoiding, to the extent reasonable in the circumstances,\u201D. That could mean whatever an Environment Court judge could take it to mean. It could mean whatever a Resource Management Act consultant could take it to mean. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000569\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003EIn relation to \u201Cadverse effects on the environment\u201D, a road cannot be built without there being adverse effects on the environment. It is impossible to do so. With the dire circumstances in Auckland, the costs and benefits have to be weighed up. It would be lovely for Auckland to be in the same sort of pristine state the Marlborough Sounds are in. However, nobody in Auckland would ever be able to make a living. It would be absolutely impossible. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003EThe Auckland Regional Transport Authority has to ensure \u201Cto the extent practicable\u201D that the views of affected communities are taken into account. We will just go back down the kind of road we had with the highway being built through the Waikato, through Long Swamp and Meremere, where we saw in New Zealand the beginning of corruption; where anyone can say that \u201CThis affects the cultural sensibilities of my community. There is a taniwha under this bend. There is a Billy Goat Gruff under this bridge. To make it go away, to get this transport network, pay over some money and it will go away.\u201D This is what we will see more and more, when stupid clauses like clause 8 are put into legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000571\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003EClause 8(1A)(b)(ii) states that \u201Cland transport options and alternatives are given early and full consideration in a manner that contributes\u201D blah, blah, blah. As Maurice Williamson said, this is just a sop to the Greens. How can the Minister seriously think\u2014and he is an MP from west Auckland, he knows what it is like getting from west Auckland to the Auckland airport, or anywhere. One has to go into the city and out again, unless one goes around through Hillsborough. Whichever way one goes, it is a nightmare; it is frustrating. It affects the quality of life. It does not affect just the economy of the area. It affects people\u2019s quality of life. They hate it. I talked to a woman the other day whose daughter was a professional woman in Auckland doing very well and earning a good salary. She has left and gone to live in Sydney, because she just could not stand the transport problems any more. Sydney, with 12 million people, has got it right.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000572\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229bacd3a573c6480a9b8ed7807ab9eaf5\u0022\u003EDail Jones\u003C/span\u003E: Four million.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000573\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226541983c17694d05928cbaf05e11c76e\u0022\u003EDEBORAH CODDINGTON\u003C/span\u003E: I think it is six. We should settle on six million. Sydney has got it right, because it went for the boot system. It went for public-private partnerships and has solved its transport system. We will never ever solve Auckland\u2019s problem, especially with legislation like this, when clauses are put in that are a sop to people who live in the Coromandel and Nelson, who have a generic hatred of cars and motor vehicles, and who would love to see them all banned and the roads dug up. Those people do not realise that people in Auckland are suffering. This legislation will do nothing. I ask the Minister to take another call to explain exactly what the meaning of the words is in that clause.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002209278070-a54a-41e9-8a27-45166301277e\u0022 data-id=\u0022b1fad08338ec44098476ad30340e383c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000574\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209278070-a54a-41e9-8a27-45166301277e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b1fad08338ec44098476ad30340e383c\u0022\u003EJEANETTE FITZSIMONS (Co-Leader\u2014Green):\u003C/span\u003E The road addicts are really suffering withdrawal symptoms tonight, and their screams are truly touching. They cannot imagine moving 100 metres without carting a whole tonne of personal metal with each of them. They cannot bear the thought that anybody without a car should be able to move anywhere.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000575\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a53e1c8cafa64d9b849a50c89da78729\u0022\u003EDr the Hon Lockwood Smith\u003C/span\u003E: The member uses the lift. What a hypocrite!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000576\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224020cdd73a09415291ed5e4bc4ccdf4d\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Would the member be seated. The member on my left is a longstanding member. He has been in this House for a long time. He knows that what he yelled out\u2014the word he used\u2014is out of order and is unparliamentary. I ask him to stand, withdraw, and apologise.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000577\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002254f08e3e8fdf4852a9dcb5a7b566ef13\u0022\u003EDr the Hon Lockwood Smith\u003C/span\u003E: I apologise.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000578\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209278070-a54a-41e9-8a27-45166301277e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022afac8437f36f4d49bbabc69cc3c46ff9\u0022\u003EJEANETTE FITZSIMONS\u003C/span\u003E: They cannot bear the thought that anybody who does not have a car should be able to travel anywhere by any other means. We have just heard John Key say that transport agencies should be socially and environmentally irresponsible. That is what he has told us. Social and environmental irresponsibility is what he wants in this legislation. Who is transport for? Who do we plan transport for? If it is to be socially irresponsible and make the lives of people miserable, if it is to be environmentally irresponsible, then what exactly is its purpose? Decades of research shows that trying to build our way out of congestion with more and more motorways has not worked anywhere in the world and that good public transport provision improves accessibility and improves free-flowing traffic in a city. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000579\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209278070-a54a-41e9-8a27-45166301277e\u0022\u003EWe are in the middle of a paradigm shift in transport. It began with the New Zealand Transport Strategy. It continued with the Land Transport Management Act, and this bill takes us further. This bill recognises that transport planning and land-use planning cannot be done separately. That was well recognised in the literature 15 years ago when I was working at university, but there are still people who have not caught on. Decades of research shows that congestion and demand for transport are affected by things like housing density, location of workplaces, mixed land-use planning areas, and the routes that public transport takes. The bill does a very sensible thing that has never been done in legislation before, and has not been done by most local bodies before, either. It aligns transport-planning instruments, like the regional land transport strategy, with land-use planning instruments, and requires a review of the regional plan and the regional policy statement. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000580\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209278070-a54a-41e9-8a27-45166301277e\u0022\u003EAligning transport planning and the regional land transport strategy with the Auckland growth strategy has some chance of achieving a sane and integrated transport system in Auckland, where we have the combination of roads, rail, public transport, and travel demand management, and the opportunities for cycling and walking, which this legislation is all about. Moving to another topic\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000581\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223adc1124cbf74c64b85c71bcc41a9f16\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: I am sorry to interrupt the honourable member again. Can I just say to members who are interrupting each other across the floor that rules permitting interjections are predicated on the assumption that the person being interjected against has the call\u2014and none of the members interjecting, on my right or my left, has the call. Interjections are not permitted at all when they are directed at a member who does not have the call. I ask members to show some respect.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000582\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c16e0903a7054cfe94009f900365e964\u0022\u003ESimon Power\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. Those of us who have now been made subject to that ruling would appreciate an indication as to which Standing Order or Speaker\u2019s ruling you were referring to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000583\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228ceee1d1be4949868d109e066a22c778\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: It is my ruling\u2014it is a Chairman\u2019s ruling.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000584\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209278070-a54a-41e9-8a27-45166301277e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022de2367989c5b4a589a1e2587dac8a6b4\u0022\u003EJEANETTE FITZSIMONS\u003C/span\u003E: I guess the level of general barracking and abuse is indicative of how sensitive some car users are and how vulnerable they find themselves in a situation where people are promoting the idea that there should be alternatives to cars in cities like Auckland. I guess that they will, over time, get used to it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209278070-a54a-41e9-8a27-45166301277e\u0022\u003EI am concerned that of the money that is to be inherited by Auckland Regional Holdings from Infrastructure Auckland, only 85 percent is to be used for the purposes that Infrastructure Auckland originally had as its main purpose\u2014that is, stormwater and transport. Stormwater and transport infrastructure are such serious needs in Auckland that both of them could spend the Infrastructure Auckland money many times over. I am quite concerned that 15 percent of that money will now be available to the Auckland Regional Council to subsidise rates if that is what it chooses to do with it. I think we should have stuck with the original purposes of Infrastructure Auckland and used the money for those purposes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224e6caa14-14ae-43f5-b9da-fe479511fe74\u0022 data-id=\u0022cfb0c9c616f843d687c9299a41c56edc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000586\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224e6caa14-14ae-43f5-b9da-fe479511fe74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022cfb0c9c616f843d687c9299a41c56edc\u0022\u003EPAUL ADAMS (United Future):\u003C/span\u003E I rise to take a short call on behalf of United Future. I must pick up on the statement made by Jeanette Fitzsimons that none of the Auckland members are happy to go around Auckland without carting a tonne of metal with them. Let me assure her that I recognise many tonnes of metal, as I sit in traffic in Auckland, that belong to Green Party members. They are very easy to pick out because the owners have no respect for the motorcar whatsoever, and place GE-free stickers on the back bumpers. Those cars are usually puffing out great heaps of smoke, polluting the atmosphere like no other vehicle on the road. I can guarantee that all the smoky old diesels, all the old petrol ones that puff and puff as we sit behind them choking, have got \u201CVote Green\u201D or \u201CGE-free\u201D on the back of them. The Auckland roads have far too many of them. I suggest that the Green Party could do a lot to help the environment by putting out a circular to its members, suggesting that they choose not to use the motorcar, but also suggesting that if, like many Aucklanders, at present they find that the public transport is such that they cannot trust it to take them where they want to go, if they do need to use a motorcar to move from one particular place in Auckland to another, they should carpool and use vehicles that are more suitable to our Auckland roads than their current ones, which pollute the atmosphere.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000587\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224e6caa14-14ae-43f5-b9da-fe479511fe74\u0022\u003EI am surprised at National Party members speaking fervently against this legislation. I am surprised that they even dare to stand here to speak on a bill that will progress roading in Auckland, because they took funds that were due to be spent on our Auckland roads and shipped them to the South Island. How can they stand up here with a straight face and speak against this legislation, which endeavours to fast track\u2014[Interruption] As we have heard, we have had a situation where eight councils try to get their heads together. This legislation brings that number down to one body. We can deal with one body. One body can make decisions, one body is accountable for its actions, and if there are not the right people on it, we can simply go to it and deal with that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000588\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224e6caa14-14ae-43f5-b9da-fe479511fe74\u0022\u003EOne thing for sure is that, although Aucklanders may not have noticed because they only fly in their helicopters here, there, and everywhere, progress has happened in the last 5 years in terms of Auckland roads. The bulldozers are actually working, the bridges are being built, action is happening, and most Aucklanders I speak to are very happy to see action. But it is the old story: is the glass half full or is it half empty? Some members of this place look at any glass as being half empty. I believe that, with this legislation, the glass is half full and growing, and we will see great progress on roading in Auckland.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022 data-id=\u00224133f86d0228427d848e4b46ebbfb4ff\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000589\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224133f86d0228427d848e4b46ebbfb4ff\u0022\u003EDr the Hon LOCKWOOD SMITH (National\u2014Rodney):\u003C/span\u003E In speaking to Part 2, can I say it makes me feel sick to hear Jeanette Fitzsimons pontificate in this Chamber about energy use and people using motorcars. I want to put on the record that I always use the stairs in Parliament. People will never find me in a lift unless I am going more than four or five floors. I have never passed a Green member of this Parliament in the stairwells. I have seen Labour members, New Zealand First members, ACT members, and every other kind of member of this Parliament except Green members. Do members think Green members would ever save energy by using the stairs to go one floor? Not on your life! They use the lifts.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EPart 2 establishes the Auckland Regional Transport Authority. I want the Minister in the chair, Jim Sutton, to answer this question. Clause 7 establishes the Auckland Regional Transport Authority, and clause 8 sets out the objective and principles. Clause 8(1) states: \u201CThe objective of ARTA is to plan, fund, and develop the Auckland regional land transport system in a way that contributes to an integrated, safe, responsive, and sustainable land transport system for the Auckland Region.\u201D I want the Minister in the chair to tell this Committee whether the objective and principles of the Auckland Regional Transport Authority cover the construction of motorways. Do they, or do they not? Will State Highway 1 or any State highway in the Auckland region be covered by the objective and principles of the Auckland Regional Transport Authority? That is a clean and simple question. Is construction of the motorways, which are essentially State highways, covered by this bill?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000591\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222e7121af-c8f1-4d5c-b1f5-5646e4d9ca70\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b82bc133251e4f39b630538b694acc6d\u0022\u003EHon Jim Sutton\u003C/span\u003E: Yes and no.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000592\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221cd927c4d27044f39fd2ebfb45609899\u0022\u003EDr the Hon LOCKWOOD SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: I believe that the people of Auckland deserve better than that. It is my understanding that this bill does not cover the construction of motorways that are State highways; that Transit continues to have responsibility for all of that, and the Auckland Regional Transport Authority will have nothing to do with it. But this legislation does not make that clear.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000593\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EThe Minister in the chair should tell the Committee how decisions will be made as to which principal motorways will be Transit responsibilities and which will be the responsibility of the Auckland Regional Transport Authority. For example, is the extension of the motorway along State Highway 1, either north or south of Auckland\u2014in the Auckland region, though\u2014a responsibility of the Auckland Regional Transport Authority? If members read clause 8 they will see that it appears that it is, because it is part of the land transport system, but I suspect that the answer is that it is not. So this bureaucratic legislation, which, under clause 8(2)(d), requires the Auckland Regional Transport Authority to consider the cultural well-being of the people in the Auckland region, may not actually require the Auckland Regional Transport Authority to be at all responsible for the construction of the principal motorways.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000594\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EThe people of Auckland deserve some answers on this. How much of the motorway network will the Auckland Regional Transport Authority be responsible for? I contend that it is not at all clear from the legislation. The interrelationship between Transit and the Auckland Regional Transport Authority is not clear. Transit will tell us that it responds to the Auckland Regional Council\u2019s regional transport priorities, but there is nothing in this legislation that requires Transit to do that. In fact, the Auckland Regional Council\u2019s regional transport priorities are changed by this legislation. There is a total misfit here between Transit and the Auckland Regional Transport Authority. There is no clarity as to what the Auckland Regional Transport Authority is actually responsible for in respect of the motorway network.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000595\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EI suspect that this legislation will do nothing to extend construction of motorways in Auckland. And that is what is desperately needed. We should forget about setting up more bureaucratic bodies. We should get some bulldozers out there shifting some dirt to build some roads. At the moment there is a crisis, and it is getting worse by the month, and this legislation is doing nothing to solve it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022 data-id=\u002242bd256c8374490ba4be99b0cffc6a51\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000596\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002242bd256c8374490ba4be99b0cffc6a51\u0022\u003ESIMON POWER (National\u2014Rangitikei):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. Two speakers ago you ruled, by way of a Chairperson\u2019s ruling, that members interjecting across the Chamber whilst another member was making a contribution\u2014where that member was not part of that interchange by way of interjection\u2014was not fit and proper. I ask for your advice, and refer to Speaker\u2019s ruling 69/4. Whilst I do not dispute that you are the judge of all matters arising in the Committee of the whole House, I wonder whether you could give me some advice and guidance as to whether your ruling is now part of Speakers\u2019 rulings, or whether, as it was made by a Chairperson, it exists in some other fashion, and applies to conduct in the Committee of the whole House. Being only a relatively new member of the House, I would appreciate some guidance on how a Chairperson\u2019s ruling stands, compared with a Standing Order or a Speaker\u2019s ruling.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000597\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002206013b2059834a09982252079e103b2c\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Can I just say to the honourable member that there are no Speakers\u2019 rulings in relation to that. There previously has been a Chairman\u2019s ruling made on the particular issue. The whole issue of interjecting is predicated on the assumption that the person being interjected against has the call. In this particular instance, neither the member interjecting on this side nor the member interjecting on that side had the call. You were interjecting against each other when the member Jeanette Fitzsimons had the call. That is why the Chairman\u2019s ruling was made.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022 data-id=\u0022d4c2e6a87130414ea7ba3fb9d516e973\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000598\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d4c2e6a87130414ea7ba3fb9d516e973\u0022\u003ESIMON POWER (National\u2014Rangitikei):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. You made reference to the fact that there had been a previous Chairperson\u2019s ruling that that type of conduct was not to occur during the Committee of the whole House. I ask you quite genuinely whether there is a reference in Speakers\u2019 Rulings or in the Standing Orders where we can find a grounding for that ruling, or is it just part of the general flow of the Committee and your exercising your discretion pursuant to, presumably, Speaker\u2019s ruling 69/4? [Interruption]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000599\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a76c4623bb654cfd91abb56325807f0d\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: There will be no interjections at all during points of order; they will be heard in silence. I say to the member that the actual Chairman\u2019s ruling was read into the Committee of the whole House on a previous occasion. Whether it goes into Speakers\u2019 Rulings will be decided when the Standing Orders or Speakers\u2019 Rulings are reviewed. That is up to the Speaker of the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022 data-id=\u0022489591273c554c2b866d4beda239cd3f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000600\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022489591273c554c2b866d4beda239cd3f\u0022\u003EDr WAYNE MAPP (National\u2014North Shore):\u003C/span\u003E One of the extraordinary things about this debate is the way that the Green Party goes on about its responsibilities to the environment. I have been informed by a colleague that the car of one of the members of the Green Party\u2014a co-leader, Jeanette Fitzsimons\u2014failed an emissions test. That is an absolute fact. It is extraordinary that a member of a party that professes real concern for the environment would drive a car that was so polluting that it should not have been on this country\u2019s roads, because it was dangerous to the health of citizens. Fewer platitudes from the Greens and more practical action would be appreciated.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000601\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cf1e3915320546fd9d506bd08d0359da\u0022\u003EKeith Locke\u003C/span\u003E: Any evidence for that statement?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000602\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cf2939550a2d4c30882391ce332f4bf3\u0022\u003EDr WAYNE MAPP\u003C/span\u003E: In fact, it was supplied by a Minister. One of the very disturbing things about this bill is the\u2014[Interruption] I was advised by colleagues; I tell the member to ask his own colleague. One of the disturbing things I heard earlier today was an assertion by the Minister in the chair, Chris Carter, that this bill would establish a single organisation that would take all the roading responsibilities off the local authorities. The Minister is a member from the Auckland area, so one would think he knew the content of the bill. Unfortunately, that is not true. Mr Carter, who has now returned to the Chamber, was wrong when he said that. In fact, we have more authorities here; we have another bureaucracy created\u2014not the elimination of bureaucracies, but yet more bureaucracies. Now, the local authorities will still be dealing with all their local roads, and Auckland Regional Holdings and the Auckland Regional Transport Authority will be dealing with regional roads only. Most of their funding will come from Transfund, yet neither Transfund nor Transit is included in this bill. So rather than solving the problem, the bill is simply adding another layer of bureaucracy. That, fundamentally, is why National is voting against this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000603\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EThere is a proper way of dealing with these issues, and that is to have an integrated organisation. The Government keeps claiming that this bill provides an integrated organisation. Even the bill itself makes that claim, but it is false. It is a false claim. We still have central government with its two major entities, plus the ministry; we still have the Auckland Regional Council, and the entities created by this bill that come under the Auckland Regional Council; and we still have the local authorities\u2014eight of them, as the Minister noted. All of them will be making different decisions about roading in Auckland, and all of them will have different funding streams. We have not solved the problem\u2014or, more accurately, the Government has not solved the problem. That is the reason why National is opposed to this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000604\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EWe believe that there is a proper approach, and Dr Brash spoke about it last month. It is to have a single entity collecting together the local authorities, the regional entity, and the national entities; to bundle them together in one entity, and to give it both the funding and the authority to make decisions. Under the system that the Government proposes, we will be waiting and waiting and still not getting solutions. That is why we had to wait for such a long period of time for the northern regional busway. It was the simplest possible project. It goes alongside the motorway. It did not require land acquisition or anything of that nature, because the Crown already owned the land. Yet it still took 8 years. The Green Party demanded a review\u2014even though the project was actually to provide public transport\u2014which simply added another year.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000605\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003ESo this system will not fix the problem. There is a better way. National announced that better way last month, and that is why this country needs a new Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022 data-id=\u0022ae2fb178b1b9464b9215f16f6a1bcdb5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000606\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ae2fb178b1b9464b9215f16f6a1bcdb5\u0022\u003EDAIL JONES (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E This bill is a positive step towards doing something for the Auckland area. New Zealand First is prepared to put this minority Labour Government on its mettle, to establish that that will happen. So far, of course, from what we have seen, things do seem to be getting on in Auckland. When I go home on a Thursday night, quite often I am not allowed to get on to the Gillies Avenue entryway on to the motorway because it is being worked on. That is a good thing, as far as I am concerned. It means I get on to the motorway at Green Lane, rather than at Gillies Avenue. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000607\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EAnyone who goes on to the Auckland motorway from the eastern suburbs, or the central city \u201CSpaghetti Junction\u201D area, knows that there are problems in the Gillies Avenue, Mountain Road, and Khyber Pass areas, and that is because work is being done. As an Aucklander, I think that the main thing we are looking for is that some work is being done. We may not understand what those workers are doing, but we know they are inconveniencing us and that something must be happening, because the engineers must know what they are doing. All I can say is that I cannot recall any work being done between 1990 and 1999, and I cannot recall any work being done between 1999 and 2002 either, to be frank. But it is happening now, and it is reassuring. We have seen, of course, what has happened at Stanley Street. It upset the tennis this year. Stanley Street has been totally distorted, one might say, but it has been well developed because work has been done in that area. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000608\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EAs far as New Zealand First is concerned, something seems to be happening. This bill appears to be more progress in that direction. I would like to take a point off the Minister, Chris Carter. He said that this Labour Government is putting $1.6 billion into roads. As usual, that is over 10 years. An amount of $1.6 billion spent on motorways over 10 years is just chicken feed; it is neither here nor there. [Interruption] Better than me? When I was in Parliament between 1975 and 1984, we were right on track with everything. Unfortunately, a Labour Government came in in 1984, and things have gone downhill ever since. But that was in those days. What we are looking at now in New Zealand First is the future, and I would not want Mr O\u2019Connor to interrupt my flow of thought. We are looking at this from the point of the future, and progress is being made. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000609\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EThe other thing that I think probably happened between 1990 and 1999 was that all the funds, I suspect, went to the South Island for some reason or another. There are some lovely roads in the South Island. I have driven down the West Coast. There is no traffic, of course, but there are lots of lovely roads. When I drove down the West Coast my biggest problem was Italian cyclists. When I drove around a bend I saw them straining away on bicycles\u2014just like the Greens would like them to do\u2014with backpacks on their backs, and I had to worry about them more than I ever did about anything on four wheels! I think that is where all the National Party\u2019s money went\u2014down to the West Coast to try to win that West Coast - Tasman seat, with the usual result. But we are seeing things happen in Auckland now, and that is very encouraging. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000610\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EMy real question to the Minister is: with all the work that is under way, and with the money that should be available, are we going to have the ability to undertake this work? I am looking to see the Mount Roskill deviation coming on stream. That is what I am really looking for, from a west Auckland viewpoint, and I see that that has been announced in the paper. I think all the resource consents have now been finalised on that, and I am looking forward to people from the western area going around through Mount Roskill. The problem in Auckland is not getting into the city. We, in Auckland, do not want to go into the city; we want to go around it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000611\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022749a724d-1ef9-49cb-9ba2-2610403653ea\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224f6a9af4a57241c69bd6ecce19d2b3d6\u0022\u003EDianne Yates\u003C/span\u003E: Oh!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000612\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222015a74f4f0a4e858b55613956639840\u0022\u003EDAIL JONES\u003C/span\u003E: Well, we do not want to go into Auckland city. We are forced to at the moment. If one lives on the North Shore, or in west Auckland, one is forced to go into the city and then go out of it again. In Auckland what one really wants to do is to miss the city. When I was in business I went into Auckland only after 11 a.m. and I made sure I left by 3 p.m. because I hated going into Auckland. Aucklanders, on the whole, try to avoid the city, but we cannot avoid it at the moment, and that is why I am keen on this Mount Roskill development, and to make sure that the Mount Roskill roading system, which links up to the north-western motorway, gets under way quickly. There are people who want to use that to get across to Wiri and such like, and the south of Auckland, where they tend to work. That will relieve the pressure on the people who actually do want to go into Auckland. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000613\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EAs far as the eastern corridor is concerned, as I understand it, the National Party is going to cancel out the Resource Management Act. If that happens, what will that do to the eastern corridor? They will build that eastern corridor whether or not the people like it. If one gets rid of the Resource Management Act, which now prevents the development of an eastern corridor just overnight, the people out in Howick, Pakuranga, Remuera, and such like will have the eastern corridor forced on them by Maurice Williamson.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022 data-id=\u002264b8ac6839b9445798324fa79aa1617f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000614\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002264b8ac6839b9445798324fa79aa1617f\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS CARTER (Minister of Local Government):\u003C/span\u003E This is just a short contribution: I felt that Dail Jones asked in such a polite way that I should respond. There is good news for Mr Jones: State Highway 20, the Mount Roskill extension, was approved last week at $150 million, which is a good practical example of the Government delivering the goods. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000615\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003EAs for the North Shore busway we have heard so much about, that project has already begun, and the money for it was funded by this Government, not the previous one. Hearing Dr Wayne Mapp\u2019s crocodile tears about that project, I have to ask who delivered the goods? The Labour-led Government did.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022 data-id=\u00222686af46cda841a48a0808f21f1e32ac\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000616\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222686af46cda841a48a0808f21f1e32ac\u0022\u003EKEITH LOCKE (Green):\u003C/span\u003E Following on from what the Minister said in talking about the busway, the problem with the old system was that everything was related to making it easier for cars to get down the motorway. The problem with the North Shore busway was that funding was available only for little chunks of it at a time, according to the benefit-cost ratio, and one had to prove that one could get cars down a bit quicker if one had that chunk of busway. They were handicapped for years, but now we have a whole new land transport strategy, a Land Transport Act, and new bodies linking into that. Whole projects can be dealt with, rather than bits of projects, and things like the busway, or the rail developments that are going on through Auckland, speeded up. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000617\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThis is not, as other speakers in the National Party have claimed, breaking up the system even more or adding just one more organisation. It simply ties the various bodies together. There is already a system in Auckland of developing a regional land transport strategy involving representatives of local bodies and other interests. That strategy then governs what the new body being set up\u2014the Auckland Regional Transport Authority\u2014has to take into account. That new body is not now constrained by all those other local bodies in the region fighting with each other. The Auckland Regional Transport Authority will develop a land transport programme for the whole of Auckland, with priorities in it. It puts those proposals directly to, and works with, Transfund and the local authorities to fund those projects. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000618\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThey do not need to be, as in the past, just roading projects. The Auckland Regional Transport Authority board has to take social and environmental responsibility very much into its deliberations, and it has to meet all the concerns of the land transport strategy that I will outline later. It also has to tie in directly\u2014and this is where it is not competitive\u2014to the Auckland growth strategy, which is the development of Auckland around nodes along transport corridors. The logical thing to do is to have a good public transport system along those corridors. All those corridors, except on the North Shore, are essentially rail corridors\u2014sometimes having a road alongside as well\u2014but set up so that one can develop a much more efficient rail system and services along those corridors, linked in with the growth strategy. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000619\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThere was concern from Deborah Coddington that the Auckland Regional Transport Authority had to take into account the effects on communities and worry about them. I think she may be worried that if affected communities are taken into account the eastern highway will not be built. One just needs to remember that last Tuesday there was a public meeting of 750 people from those affected communities, and other citizens in Auckland, who unanimously opposed that eastern highway. At a meeting hosted by the Auckland City Council yesterday\u2014and I was one of the people giving a presentation\u2014there were a myriad of arguments against that eastern highway and how it would detrimentally affect communities, the environment, the creek, the waterfront, and everything along that route. That highway will not go ahead if the provisions of this bill are properly applied. What is worrying National members is that at last we are going to move the emphasis away from just a motorway system to one based on public transport with a rail backbone.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000620\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EAnother aspect of this bill that came up under discussion is that of Auckland Regional Holdings. One of the good provisions is that it will not be able to sell off Ports of Auckland. We know from all the debate over the Westhaven marina and everything else just how important it is not to have Ports of Auckland completely out of public control. Under this bill, Auckland Regional Holdings will not be able to sell more than 24.9 percent of Ports of Auckland.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022749a724d-1ef9-49cb-9ba2-2610403653ea\u0022 data-id=\u0022cc8558c2669d4d00a3c62fec08f64cf2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000621\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022749a724d-1ef9-49cb-9ba2-2610403653ea\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022cc8558c2669d4d00a3c62fec08f64cf2\u0022\u003EDIANNE YATES (Labour\u2014Hamilton East):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cfdabe42-521a-4dca-afab-3e781731a130\u0022 data-id=\u00221038b87baeca47f0859c41bd2a44cb4f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000622\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cfdabe42-521a-4dca-afab-3e781731a130\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221038b87baeca47f0859c41bd2a44cb4f\u0022\u003EDr PAUL HUTCHISON (National\u2014Port Waikato):\u003C/span\u003E I want to talk about clause 9, \u201CFunctions of ARTA\u201D. Unfortunately, those functions give the territorial authorities very little reassurance that they will be treated fairly or reasonably at all. I hope the Minister will take a call, particularly with regard to the rural district councils affected. I can think of Rodney, but I also think of the area I am so proud to represent, that of Port Waikato, and the Franklin District Council. The commentary on the bill makes reference to the Franklin District Council specifically, and so it should, because many members of the Franklin District Council are deeply distrustful of this Labour Government, and deeply distrustful of this bill that it has managed to conjure up. There is very good reason indeed for that, and that is why I want some assurances from the Minister in the chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000623\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cfdabe42-521a-4dca-afab-3e781731a130\u0022\u003E I note that the commentary on the bill states, under the heading \u201CFranklin District Council\u201D, that: \u201CThe majority recommend an amendment to clause 4 to provide for the inclusion of the entire Franklin District within the area to be managed by ARC and Auckland Regional Transport Authority for land transport purposes.\u201D Now, that may be fair enough. Maybe that has some rationale to it, but when we look at the second paragraph, we see that it states: \u201CThe majority agree with and respect the concern expressed in Franklin District Council\u2019s submission that systems set up to support the Auckland Regional Transport Authority\u2019s role should not affect the financial assistance rate for funding received by Franklin\u2014or that received by any other territorial authority\u2014from Transfund.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000624\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cfdabe42-521a-4dca-afab-3e781731a130\u0022\u003EThis is where the deep suspicion of the Labour Government and this bill lie\u2014because there is, quite frankly, absolutely no trust that the Government will live up to what the majority on the select committee agree. I would like the Minister in the chair, Chris Carter, who does not appear to be listening right now, to take a call and assure Parliament that indeed local territorial authorities like the Franklin District Council will not be adversely affected by this bill before us. After all, this is one of the rural district councils that has vast tracks of roading\u2014both State highways as well as rural roads\u2014bringing the enormous amounts of primary produce that this country is so dependent on to the major cities. Their responsibility is to ensure that they will not be adversely affected. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000625\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cfdabe42-521a-4dca-afab-3e781731a130\u0022\u003EIf the majority of the select committee believes that their interests should be looked after, the very least the Minister could do is give an assurance to this Parliament that that will indeed happen. Consequently, I have put forward an amendment to clause 9(1)(a) in Part 2. My amendment would add paragraph (v), and would mean that one of the functions of Auckland Regional Transport Authority would be to \u201Censure systems set up to support the Auckland Regional Transport Authority role will not affect the financial assistance rate for funding received by the Franklin District Council or that received by any other territorial from Transfund.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cfdabe42-521a-4dca-afab-3e781731a130\u0022\u003ERight throughout my speech, the Minister in the chair has been wittering away to his colleagues. He has not acknowledged the fact that this was an assurance given by the majority of select committee members\u2014his members\u2014and he ignores the very important point that the rural district councils need to be assured by him that they will not be adversely affected. So I am hoping the Minister will stand up and support my amendment. If he does not, then he is demonstrating an absolute, abject inconsistency that would be consistent with the fact that people from Auckland, particularly the Franklin District Council, are deeply cynical of him, his Government, and indeed this bill. I certainly hope that Mr Carter will get up and give us those assurances.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229df41e27-6082-4bc7-9fda-bab499cb9246\u0022 data-id=\u0022a6c2eaf1a1494fe388b397c7c40319b7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000627\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229df41e27-6082-4bc7-9fda-bab499cb9246\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a6c2eaf1a1494fe388b397c7c40319b7\u0022\u003EHELEN DUNCAN (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00221fad72b440744e53bc4a743ce3c609e8\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 51\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; Progressive 2; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000628\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Dr Paul Hutchison to clause 9(1)(a) be agreed to:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000629\u0022\u003Eto add the following new subparagraph:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000630\u0022\u003E(v)\tensure systems set up to support the Auckland Regional Transport Authority\u2019s role will not affect the financial assistance rate for funding received by Franklin District Council or that received by any other territorial authority from Transfund.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00229d521f884d8f40dfbbdefba2d06fa2ee\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 35\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 84\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000631\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 231 in the name of the Hon Chris Carter to Part 2 be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022dff2fb4c51834d9b95dc2c153e302af4\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendments be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 83\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 36\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00221226dbc70a144b83b2efb1fc0c84c591\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That Part 2 as amended be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 83\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 36\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 2 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000632\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022e559283d71fa40ddb6de1dddc0628a0c\u0022\u003EPart 3  Amendments, repeals, and revocations\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220ed9ad81-05c1-4171-80c6-24fa02cade42\u0022 data-id=\u002236dd00d2036d4e13987f7c34cf4594c6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000633\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ed9ad81-05c1-4171-80c6-24fa02cade42\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002236dd00d2036d4e13987f7c34cf4594c6\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich)\u003C/span\u003E: This debate includes schedules 5 and 6.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022 data-id=\u00222f06af80853645cb8e8b91085e857db1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000634\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222f06af80853645cb8e8b91085e857db1\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON (National\u2014Pakuranga):\u003C/span\u003E Part 3 is a reasonably specific part. It occupies only about half of one page and half of another, and in many places it is just to do with revocations of, and amendments to, some quite detailed legislation, such as the Transport Services Licensing Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000635\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EI think the most important clause in this part is clause 37, \u201CAmendments to Land Transport Management Act 2003\u201D, which states: \u201CThe Land Transport Management Act 2003 is amended in the manner indicated in Schedule 5.\u201D I think the debate on this legislation, the whole way through, has been about whether it will achieve the focus and the expectations of Auckland\u2014that is, whether it will solve our transport gridlock. Everybody in Auckland is looking towards Parliament.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000636\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EActually, Aucklanders were looking towards Parliament in respect of the Land Transport Management Bill; they were desperate to see a bill that would see the bulldozer engines start, and start now, and desperate to see a whole lot of infrastructure rolling out. The amount of infrastructure that has been rolling out in the last 5 years, under this Labour Government, is less than what rolled out under the National Government, and those figures were tabled in the House today. I will clarify that for the United Future member, so that he is clear. When we were in power National was funding the Albany to P\u016Bhoi realignment, a massive extension of the northern motorway, the M\u0101ngere motorway, the eastern access to the airport, a whole lot of work around \u201CSpaghetti Junction\u201D, and so on. Massive projects were going on. But every year that this Government has been in power it has spent fewer dollars in real terms than we did in our last year.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000637\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EThen it brought in the Land Transport Management Act, which this clause makes some amendments to. We thought that legislation would be about getting some more roads; we were convinced of it. Sadly, the Land Transport Management Act, when it was passed, became known around Auckland and Auckland local authorities as the legislation a Government passes when it is trying to stop any new roads from being built. What a tragedy it is that we are here tonight with another bill! One would have hoped that it would be a capitulation; that it would say that the Government really got it wrong first time round, and this Local Government (Auckland) Amendment Bill will amend the Land Transport Management Act to give it the clout it needs to see the bulldozers start.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000638\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EOne would have hoped that it would rev up the elements in that legislation about the private sector\u2019s involvement, because, despite all the rhetoric from the Government, how many private sector roading projects have there been in Auckland so far? Zero\u2014a big, fat zero. My next question is how many private sector roading projects look likely to occur in the next couple of years. The answer\u2014and I have talked to most of the major players in the private sector roading area\u2014is a big, fat zero. Why would we get involved, they say, with the Land Transport Management Act being as restrictive and regressive as it is? [Interruption] Rod Donald has just confirmed exactly what everyone knows. Helen Clark and many other Ministers in this Government have said to a number of people in Auckland local government that they were really wrong to have rolled over and let the Greens have so much say in the Land Transport Management Act. Helen Clark regrets it. She says it was a sop to the Greens, and so is this bill. I pointed out earlier that, in all the press releases that came out from the Ministers\u2014and they all looked brilliant with their red colour\u2014roads did not get a mention.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000639\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003ESo the Government is amending the Land Transport Management Act, and I thought we would now see some amendments that would actually ensure that some roads were built. But the amendments in schedule 5, which are driven by clause 37, in Part 3, make no improvement to the Land Transport Management Act. If anything, they are a retrograde step.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000640\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EWhat was clearly needed was some work on the Resource Management Act. Why did we not see some clauses in the Local Government (Auckland) Amendment Bill that freed up the resource consent process? The Committee needs to know that Transit told the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee at the end of last year that it now takes considerably longer to get consent for a major project than it does to build it. I have done some checking with comparable jurisdictions, like New South Wales, Victoria, and so on, and in none of those cases did they even have a clue what I was talking about. This bill does not do it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022 data-id=\u00223cf4940da4364e21aacbc8669a8747fc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000641\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223cf4940da4364e21aacbc8669a8747fc\u0022\u003EDr WAYNE MAPP (National\u2014North Shore):\u003C/span\u003E I take this opportunity to contribute to this short part, and also to the schedules. I follow on from a particular point made by the Hon Maurice Williamson, and it is this: in the life of a Government there is not much opportunity, in a legislative sense, to deal with any particular issue. Essentially, a Government has one shot at it\u2014well, perhaps in this case the Government has had two. It had the Land Transport Management Act and amendments thereto, and it has had this bill\u2014the Local Government (Auckland) Amendment Bill. There will not be any other legislation in this Parliament that deals with the administration of the roading and transport issues in Auckland and indeed in New Zealand. So what the public look for in a Government is that it gives it its best shot and comes with a complete package that will actually make a difference. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000642\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EIf the Government had done that and had really attempted to come up with an inclusive, complete solution embodied in the two pieces of legislation\u2014the Land Transport Management Act last year and the Local Government (Auckland) Amendment Bill this year\u2014we might have been able to support it. Unfortunately, we cannot. The reason we cannot is that the legislation represents such a missed opportunity. I find it appalling that the Minister in the chair, Chris Carter, is so woefully lacking in knowledge about the transport situation in Auckland that he thinks that this bill will take away the authority of local authorities and compact it all into the Auckland Regional Transport Authority. That is simply not true, and that is why the Government is in such a mess on this stuff. It is that kind of ignorance that has led to such a miserable attempt. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000643\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EAt the select committee a proposition was put to the submitters, which were all the territorial local authorities in the Auckland region\u2014all eight of them. The select committee asked whether the submitters would like to compact together central government, local government, and regional government into a single organisation that had funding powers and management powers to really get to grips with the crisis. They said yes, that it would be the best solution. If the Government had come up with that solution, we would have voted for it. That is what Auckland City Council wants. That is what North Shore City Council, Manukau City Council, and Waitakere City Council want. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000644\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EAll the territorial authorities in Auckland want a complete solution. Instead, they are served up a half-baked solution, and one wonders why. We hear it from the Greens\u2014they are actually anti-development. They do not want roads. They are against roads. They oppose every innovative and reasonable project. They even oppose the North Shore busway, and I find that extraordinary. They delayed it for a whole year. That is the reality. The Minister got up and said it has started. The Minister is wrong yet again. What has actually started is the development of the Esmonde Road Interchange. That is not part of the busway. The busway is the roading and the stations associated with that. The interchanges have to be done first, and only then will the busway be done. I predict that it will take 10 years from inception, through all the myriad of planning processes, through the blockage put in place by the Greens, before a single bus or car travels on that busway\u2014and that is a simple project. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000645\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EIf we really want to get to grips with transport in Auckland, we have to make big changes; not these fiddling little changes that the Government has delivered up. The public in Auckland will give its verdict in 12 months\u2019 time. It will say that the miserable efforts of the Labour Government are not good enough. It will vote for a party that has a concrete and complete solution, because that is what is needed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022 data-id=\u0022238ce66a91fd48f4a90bc45b34d2a86f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000646\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022238ce66a91fd48f4a90bc45b34d2a86f\u0022\u003EPETER BROWN (Deputy Leader\u2014NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E Unfortunately, I have missed much of the debate on this bill, but I am very pleased to be able to make a contribution. I am quite concerned about what the National Party is saying, because it was in power for 9 years and it did little or nothing for roading in this country. Indeed, when I was a consultant involved with an operation in the Ports of Auckland and the Port of Tauranga, setting up a commercial entity, I went to the Rt Hon Winston Peters, who was then a National Party MP. I explained to him that by increasing the hours of waterfront work by using more modern equipment and by moving into the container age, we would be having so many trucks and so much traffic on the roads\u2014coupled with the Japanese vehicles that were coming in at a fairly significant rate at that time\u2014that our roads would not keep pace. The honourable member might recall that Winston Peters produced his own member\u2019s bill to get better funding for roading in this country by using the excise tax in full. So to hear the National Party bleating on that this bill will not do what it is meant to do, I find a bit unusual. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000647\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EI realise that we are dealing with Part 3, but the purpose clause basically tells me that the bill is worth supporting. The objectives and the principles in the purpose clause tell me that the bill is worth supporting. Basically, the roads in Auckland need to be fully addressed. I was at a NGC Winter Lecture Series lecture the other night, where Dr Cullen was the guest speaker. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000648\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bb39bfc8f8e74f56b51b83f30e7dec6a\u0022\u003EDarren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: Great speaker!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000649\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022aea0ba7ba97d4850a566bca671e9e143\u0022\u003EPETER BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: It was a good speech. Actually, it was quite different from what he has been delivering in this Chamber. He said that walkways and pathways have a role to play. He said that public transport has a role to play, but to have no doubt\u2014I think those were his exact words\u2014that we need roads in this country, and more of them. I have never heard that Government say that so forcefully. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000650\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EI say to the Greens that they have been hoodwinked to some degree, because the Labour Government has suddenly realised that we need more roads, and that there are people who want to drive their cars on roads free of traffic congestion. Some years ago, I drove through Auckland on my way to Whangarei. Members might recall that a cow jumped off a truck, and the police were trying to shoot it. That stopped the whole of the traffic in Auckland at that time. I realise I am ranging wide but I want to address some of these issues.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000651\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022322598300a7b4b22a898c1aca9471222\u0022\u003EDarren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: How\u2019s the cow?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000652\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e696c6ca673a428896ce77ad3078483b\u0022\u003EPETER BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: The cow was not very good. The policeman had five attempts at it before he killed it. It stopped the whole of the traffic in Auckland for hours. The situation in Auckland is deplorable. No modern city in the world would tolerate it. It pleases me\u2014I am back on to schedule 5 now, Mr Chairman\u2014that, finally, there is an amendment that will allow the local strategy to be taken into account. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000653\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EThis bill is about building roads for Auckland, for the benefit of Aucklanders, and for the benefit of this country. If we do not get the local people pulling together and working out what they want, with the appropriate amount of funding to deliver it, then we will get nowhere fast. This bill is but a start. I would have thought that the National Party would be a little bit more understanding of the fact that to be able to start on the roading system in this country\u2014on Auckland in particular\u2014we need first of all to pull the local bodies together. The paragraphs added to new section 12(6)(b) in schedule 5, as set out in Supplementary Order Paper 231, make some solid attempt to do that. Paragraph (b) states: \u201Cfrom a date appointed by the Governor-General by Order in Council, give effect to the matters in the Auckland regional land transport strategy required by section 175(2) of the Land Transport Act 1998,\u201D, and so it goes on. That is exceedingly important. It is a small paragraph, and it is a change in the bill as it came back from the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000654\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EI have to say that if the Government had not chosen to change that, New Zealand First would not be supporting the bill. Mr Jim Peters represented us on the select committee because he is a specialist in local Government. [Interruption] I say to Mr Power that this is an important clause. He would be well advised to read it. I know he is a lawyer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022 data-id=\u002264187c7d31144f58b87013b6b8e1b3af\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000655\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002264187c7d31144f58b87013b6b8e1b3af\u0022\u003EKEITH LOCKE (Green):\u003C/span\u003E I am a bit unsure whose assessment to take, in terms of the last speaker or two. First we had Maurice Williamson, who gave quite a tribute to the Greens. He said that Helen Clark was upset that this bill would be passed, and I thought that gee, I did not know we were quite as powerful as that. Then I listened to Peter Brown, and he said that we have been hoodwinked. So I am not quite sure what the case is. Certainly the Greens fully support this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000656\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EPart 3, as has been pointed out, refers to schedule 5, in terms of the way legislation is to be amended, and schedule 5 refers particularly to the criteria in the land transport strategy. I will just go through those criteria with members, to show how they may operate in the concrete instance of what should be done with the eastern corridor in Auckland. Under this legislation, the first of the five objectives in the land transport strategy for the Auckland Regional Transport Authority to consider is whether a project will assist economic development. The eastern highway project has many economic downsides. It will induce more car travel, putting additional strain on the economy\u2014particularly when oil prices are moving to a higher level\u2014and there are significant congestion-related costs associated with more cars entering the Auckland central business district. A recently publicised study by Astrid Jacobs of Auckland University estimated that there are external costs of $736 million per year as a result of car use, including significant health costs. A highway would significantly add to such costs. To build it would, of course, cost $3 billion or $4 billion, which would be enough to revamp the whole rail system in Auckland\u2014the stations, the rolling stock, the tracks, and the whole works.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000657\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003E Secondly, projects that the Auckland Regional Transport Authority is supposed to support have to add to safety and personal security. Clearly, simply upgrading rail transport would be a much better way to go there. As long as we avoid rail-crossing accidents, rail transport is much safer than road transport. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000658\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThirdly, the Auckland Regional Transport Authority is supposed to contribute to improving access and mobility. At present that is sorely lacking for the young, the old, and the sick, and for people who are too poor to afford to make very many long car journeys. Those people need public transport. They need to have rail along the eastern corridor, not a big highway. If we can get train services down that corridor and improve the whole system to a frequency of 10 minutes or less, then we can have all the bus and rail connections, and public transport use will skyrocket. Already it is going up very rapidly in Auckland, as I mentioned before. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000659\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EFourthly, schedule 5 states that the Auckland Regional Transport Authority is supposed to contribute to protecting and promoting public health. Clearly a new eastern highway would produce extra pollution and noise, and there would be more stress on drivers as cars become backed up on reaching the central business district. That highway would only pour more cars into the centre of Auckland. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000660\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThe fifth thing that the Auckland Regional Transport Authority has to contribute to under this legislation is ensuring environmental sustainability. Quite clearly, one has just to read the official project director\u2019s report on the eastern highway project, in which he admits that just the crossing of Hobson Bay\u2014the bay that the highway comes out on before it goes into Auckland City\u2014will cause: \u201CSignificant environmental, visual (including light spill at night), noise and community acceptance issues.\u201D As someone who recreationally uses the waterfront, I totally agree with that\u2014and there will be further devastating environmental effects up the Purewa stream and further up that highway. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000661\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EOn all those counts, what we need down the eastern corridor is rail rather than a new highway.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022 data-id=\u00229d64373b3dc24ff4930e910e4aef4846\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000662\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229d64373b3dc24ff4930e910e4aef4846\u0022\u003EDEBORAH CODDINGTON (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E To give Keith Locke credit\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000663\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229e8c3f7a471c4f4397ed6efdc661f702\u0022\u003ESimon Power\u003C/span\u003E: Steady!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000664\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d94877cac4e14e5f806faa7d8f08b31f\u0022\u003EDEBORAH CODDINGTON\u003C/span\u003E: It is late, and I am feeling kind. He is the only Green person I see when I am running in the morning. He is the only Green person I see out there on his feet, getting some air in his fur. But the Greens just do not get it, do they? They think that if we put all the money into public transport and into rail in the eastern corridor, then everyone\u2019s problems will be solved. At one stage I had four children at four different schools in Auckland. It is impossible for working parents to get around Auckland efficiently just by using public transport. They have to have cars. It will not be all-polluting to use cars if there are good roads and congestion tolling, which the Greens also do not seem to get. Congestion tolling to me is one of the best ways of getting rid of pollution, because one of the worst things for the air is to have cars idle in the huge car-park we call the motorway. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000665\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003EBut in going to Part 3 and the schedules, I see that this is the part that gets rid of the Auckland Regional Services Trust\u2014or what was the Auckland Regional Services Trust but then became Infrastructure Auckland, and will now become the Auckland Regional Holdings part of the Auckland Regional Council. It is not, as Peter Brown said, an amalgamation of local bodies; it is the creation of whole new bureaucracies. Let us just remember how we got to this stage. We now have schedule 5, in which we are already amending the Land Transport Management Act passed last year. It has been such an abject failure that we have to have this legislation to amend it. Let us backtrack, rewind the video a bit, and remember why we ended up with such a shambles as the Land Transport Management Act. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000666\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003EWhat started out as a strategy to improve the roading system in Auckland was hijacked a bit on the way, because of certain dinners at certain restaurants, like Vinnies in Auckland, because of certain discussions about prime-mover status and public-private partnerships, and because of the Prime Minister and Ross Armstrong.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000667\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003EThe ACT party wanted an inquiry into that whole dodgy, sleazy-looking affair, where Ross Armstrong had the ear of the Prime Minister and was inviting people from Australia to come over and talk about prime-mover status. We wanted a select committee inquiry into it. We almost had one, until the Greens were wooed by the Labour Government and promised that they would be given all the special concessions for alternative forms of land transport if they did not support an inquiry into the Ross Armstrong shenanigans. We saw evidence of that when Jeanette Fitzsimons stood up here in the Chamber and announced the land transport management strategy, with the Labour Government. So we ended up with that disastrous legislation, which we are now already amending with this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000668\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e7bfee5-ac9c-4ae2-b85d-7d3b7a785561\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221b5b9210be2b4903b54a48f1ce96445b\u0022\u003ERod Donald\u003C/span\u003E: Excellent legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000669\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002229eecbdec68b4f75a5e6d5c42fe47f5b\u0022\u003EDEBORAH CODDINGTON\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, well the Greens would say it is excellent legislation, because it will not allow a single road to be built, will it? There will not be one road completed under that\u2014[Interruption] I say to Mr Donald that of course it will be reduced, because everybody will go broke. But the Greens do not care about that. They care about humanity, but they do not care about individuals. That is the role of the socialist. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000670\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003EAs I said before, I do not usually agree with Brian Rudman. He is probably further to the left than most people in this Parliament; in fact, if he took another step to the left he would bump into Joe Stalin. But members should listen to what Brian Rudman wrote in April this year, when he talked about the dismantling of Infrastructure Auckland and the transfer of assets under the management of the Auckland Regional Council. He said: \u201CNow Big Sister Helen Clark has decided that her fellow Aucklanders might just be adult enough to be trusted with the stewardship of 15 percent of our money, but we have to submit our bank accounts to her in 2008 so she can check we haven\u2019t indulged in anything she considers frivolous.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022 data-id=\u00224b5802fa84f9467daadad102f6cda9eb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000671\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224b5802fa84f9467daadad102f6cda9eb\u0022\u003EDr the Hon LOCKWOOD SMITH (National\u2014Rodney):\u003C/span\u003E In speaking to the final provisions of the Local Government (Auckland) Amendment Bill I want to focus particularly on schedule 5, in which the Land Transport Management Act is amended. It seems to me that schedule 5 will put a whole other layer of bureaucracy in place with regard to the funding of local roads. I draw the attention of the Minister in the chair to subsections (4) and (5) of the new section 39, \u201CSpecial provisions relating to Auckland Region\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000672\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EAt the moment, if territorial local authorities want to do something about roading in their area, they can apply to the national land transport account for subsidies. As long as they stump up with their money, they can usually get those subsidies from Transfund, and can get on and do roading projects. Subsection (4) tells us: \u201CDespite an Auckland territorial authority being an approved organisation for the purposes of this Act, it may not after 1 July 2005\u2014 \u2026 (b) receive any funds directly from the national land transport account;\u201D. As I read it, local authorities will now have to go through this new bureaucracy to get any funding to do anything in their area. They will have to get the Auckland Regional Transport Authority to do it for them. That authority will have to get the funds from the national land transport account, it would seem. The authority gets the money, then passes it on to the local authority. As I read it, we have extra bureaucracy. We have a new step in the process. People will have to go through the Auckland Regional Transport Authority if they want to get a road done. I would like the Minister to confirm whether that is correct\u2014whether a new step in this whole bureaucratic process is brought in by Part 3.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000673\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EI would also like the Minister to tell Auckland people which roads this part will see built. I want to know specifically whether the Penlink toll road will be covered by this legislation. Will Rodney District Council have to go through the Auckland Regional Transport Authority to get funding for the Penlink toll road, or will that road be a Transit road? State Highway 20 is the extension of the M\u0101ngere motorway. Is it covered by this legislation, or not? What is the next big project in Auckland? It is the Albany to P\u016Bhoi realignment B2 (ALPURT B2). Is it covered by this legislation? I want to know from the Minister whether that big project is covered. Is \u201CSpaghetti Junction\u201D, the big work on State Highway 1 in the middle of Auckland, covered by this legislation? Is the planning of State Highway 1 up to the Warkworth bypass and the Wellsford bypass covered by this legislation? I have named about five of the major roading projects in Auckland. Are any of them covered by this legislation?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000674\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EI think the Minister owes the people of Auckland an explanation. Does this legislation cover any significant roading, or does the fact, as my colleague Maurice Williamson pointed out, that roading is not mentioned in any of the publicity, or in any of the Minister\u2019s statements relating to this legislation, mean that this legislation does nothing for roading or any of those major roading projects? I invite the Minister to tell the Committee which roading projects this legislation covers. I do not think it covers State Highway 1. Is \u201CSpaghetti Junction\u201D part of State Highway 1? Does it cover anything to do with State Highway 20? Does it cover anything to do with State Highway 1\u2019s extension, ALPURT B2? Does it cover the Penlink toll road? I think the people of Auckland deserve to know whether this legislation covers any major roading projects at all. It seems to me that Part 3 and especially schedule 5 simply add more bureaucracy, and make no progress on roads. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223a0e52c8-5bb1-4325-9870-21f4e3eb3702\u0022 data-id=\u0022f3062c620df3443992919ad56b7338f8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000675\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223a0e52c8-5bb1-4325-9870-21f4e3eb3702\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f3062c620df3443992919ad56b7338f8\u0022\u003EMARTIN GALLAGHER (Labour\u2014Hamilton West):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022 data-id=\u0022b47ac4b776cf4b26993dfb19a5cee63e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000676\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b47ac4b776cf4b26993dfb19a5cee63e\u0022\u003EJOHN KEY (National\u2014Helensville):\u003C/span\u003E As I reflect on Part 3 and the schedules, I want to talk for a moment about Auckland Regional Holdings. But before I do so I want to reflect on the comments made by the Green member Keith Locke about public transport. Many of the comments made about public transport are grossly exaggerated. Mr Locke told the Committee that this bill would somehow be the salvation of Auckland, and that somehow rail transportation would be the solution to Auckland\u2019s transport problems. This year there will about 2.5 million trips on trains around Auckland. [Interruption] Does Mr Locke disagree with me? There will be about 2.5 million trips, up from about 2 million. This year there will be a billion trips in cars around Auckland, and that number is going up\u2014there will be 1.2 billion before this legislation has had time to dry at the printers. Yet Mr Locke thinks the salvation of Auckland will be public transport and trains. It is false thinking.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000677\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003EThe Greens do not\u2014contrary to public perception\u2014come to Parliament on public transport. When I get my taxi on a Tuesday morning from Wellington Airport, I do not see Green members standing outside the bus station, waiting for a bus. They travel in a car, like everyone else\u2014like everyone in Auckland\u2014and that is the problem. They want everyone else to use public transport, but they themselves do not use public transport. Those members do not want to look at the economics. Currently, for every train trip around Auckland there is a $10-$20 subsidy\u2014a total of $20 million for 2 million trips a year\u2014and it will go up after this Government has spent about $1.5 billion on the railway network in Auckland. The subsidy for 20 million trips\u2014if the Government can ever achieve that number\u2014will be about $4 per trip, so the cost will be about $80 million to $100 million.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000678\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003EThe solution is not public transport; it is to get on and fix the motorway network\u2014to complete what was designed in 1963 or 1965. Auckland has been waiting 40 years, and there is no solution in sight. It is an absolute disgrace. No wonder Aucklanders are up at night now, wondering what has gone so horribly wrong with this Government, which promised them a solution but has failed on every account.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000679\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003EIt has failed in its press releases. My prediction is that, very close to the election, there will not be any press releases from the Labour Government\u2014from Judith Tizard, or from the Rt Hon Prime Minister, Helen Clark, or from the Minister of Local Government, Chris Carter\u2014that fail to talk about roads and cars. That is the sort of stuff that happens when one is making coalition arrangements with the Greens on the Land Transport Management Bill, or on this Local Government (Auckland) Amendment Bill. It is important at the moment, but when the Government is trying to get votes a couple of months before the election, there will be plenty of press releases coming out about roads and cars, because that is what Aucklanders really want and need. They know where it is at. [Interruption] Well, that member will be looking for a new job, or he will be back at intermediate school\u2014that is what will happen. He will be back at intermediate school, or maybe at high school, because he has missed a few years. He will go and learn about cars\u2014that is what will happen. That member will be back at intermediate school being taught about combustion engines. That is the sort of thing that has been going on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000680\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003EI want to talk about Auckland Regional Holdings, because never in my life have I seen such a sop to a political outfit as there is in this bill. Eighty-five percent of the funds that Infrastructure Auckland worked so hard to preserve and to grow\u2014John Robertson and Richard Maher have done a wonderful job of growing those reserves and of turning hundreds of millions of dollars into the better part of a billion dollars\u2014are to go to transport and stormwater purposes. Lo and behold, is all the money to be used to fix roads or stormwater problems? Not on your nelly! Again, what is more important is to put aside 15 percent in what could loosely be termed a slush fund, to be used for, essentially, anything that Auckland Regional Holdings and its political appointees find relevant, as priorities might change over time. What does that mean? Does it mean that if Labour makes yet another dip in the polls, if the Greens look even more like they could be a hopeless coalition arrangement, priorities will change, and Auckland Regional Holdings will be hijacked once more?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002212f01718-dc1f-4307-b0b3-451098ab73df\u0022 data-id=\u002295b7864ecb8f454c8c3c4643105f023e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000681\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002212f01718-dc1f-4307-b0b3-451098ab73df\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002295b7864ecb8f454c8c3c4643105f023e\u0022\u003EDr ASHRAF CHOUDHARY (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022a5eb21b0b8cf464497fc657cb7fe0197\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 70\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 49\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002203c17e46536e432ebad1f18adc3411d3\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That Part 3 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 83\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 36\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 3 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000682\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022dfbe2fc08bad4976b21eb03d54fe418f\u0022\u003ESchedule 1\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022c1d14de7e6244c1ea181b3adc3932e0d\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That schedule 1 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 83\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 36\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESchedule 1 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000683\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002284d2a619fa7143f0835119483b092779\u0022\u003ESchedule 2\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022d84e93b86f8446539beb51e6d87123db\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That schedule 2 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 83\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 36\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESchedule 2 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000684\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00224be9fe60850745aab9eddb199e3c6853\u0022\u003ESchedule 3\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000685\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 231 in the name of the Hon Chris Carter to schedule 3 be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002228f676446e60482f9c1578be19305aed\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendments be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 83\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 36\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00228113cdf1c3d3496bb378aa02d5aa705b\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That schedule 3 as amended be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 83\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 36\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESchedule 3 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000686\u0022\u003ESchedule 4\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000687\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 231 in the name of the Hon Chris Carter to schedule 4 be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022e6e72e2156d34fa0a9bc85f9476b5272\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendments be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 83\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 36\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00226112f6a292b840a7ae0f2b4c32f7d95b\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That schedule 4 as amended be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 83\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 36\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESchedule 4 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000688\u0022\u003ESchedule 4A\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000689\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 231 in the name of the Hon Chris Carter to schedule 4A be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00221b0617bd07134255951232fd82a519a3\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 83\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 36\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002231587313c91244b7bdd1967d9f5c1e8f\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That schedule 4A as amended be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 83\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 36\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESchedule 4A as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000690\u0022\u003ESchedule 5\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000691\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 231 in the name of the Hon Chris Carter to schedule 5 be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002276d05f307476494a820c8a36141bed88\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendments be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 83\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 36\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022438205317c4e4643bdb9f0085976b350\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That schedule 5 as amended be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 83\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 36\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESchedule 5 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000692\u0022\u003ESchedule 6\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000693\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 231 in the name of the Hon Chris Carter to schedule 6 be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022d5a4631382bb4cacada70e9fbcd79c57\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 83\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 36\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022c8a093212d624184887f02cdccb5ce42\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That schedule 6 as amended be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 83\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 36\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESchedule 6 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000694\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00225340378a7e1c41aa82b8756c3d8e4dc6\u0022\u003EClauses 1 and 2\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022 data-id=\u002242a70d2a668f4ff9aee528a061d3ce36\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000695\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002242a70d2a668f4ff9aee528a061d3ce36\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON (National\u2014Pakuranga):\u003C/span\u003E This is about the title of the bill. Clause 1 is the title, and as members will know, the bill is called the Local Government (Auckland) Amendment Bill. But that is not really what this bill is about. It is about how legislation is passed to make it nigh impossible to get roads built in Auckland. That is what it is. It is a sop to the Greens. The Greens hate roads, they hate the things that drive on them, and they hate the people who drive in the things that drive on the roads. That is why all the press releases of Chris Carter, Judith Tizard, and the Prime Minister, and the big announcement on 12 December, talked about\u2014I want members to remember this\u2014fixing Auckland\u2019s transport issues such as rail, bus, ferry, pedestrian, and cycle transport needs. There was not a mention, not a mutter or a murmur, about the one thing that will fix Auckland\u2019s problems, and that is roads. We in the National Opposition will have a policy that will have bulldozer engines started within no time. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000696\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EThere are a number of things one can do, in order to do that. We will not be like Judith Tizard and just have our photo taken with a bulldozer every now and then, and that is all one does. We will do a number of things.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000697\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002200f6c835336343a4a61a0fab8e47e4a1\u0022\u003EDeborah Coddington\u003C/span\u003E: How can you tell the difference?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000698\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cd16095b2c0745f89db4c66a9281c10b\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON\u003C/span\u003E: The member has raised a fantastic, important question. No legislation will work without one thing, and that is the political will of the Government to make it happen. Any legislation with any number of clauses can be passed, but if a Government is not committed to seeing it happen, not committed to seeing the tar-seal being poured, and not committed to seeing the carryalls moving hills, filling in valleys, and seeing the roads being built, then it will never happen.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000699\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E It is not so much the Government members themselves\u2014although some of them are as bad as that\u2014but it is because of their coalition commitment to the Greens, who do not want to ever talk about roads, and I do not know why it is such a phobia. They should try it with me. Try the word \u201Ctoad\u201D. That is easy. It is green, and I am sure they would like it. Try it again: \u201Ctoad\u201D. It is easy. The word \u201Croad\u201D is not very different. It is just a first-letter change. They should say: \u201Croad\u201D. It is quite easy. They will say \u201Cbroadcasting\u201D, and I did not know until tonight that the word \u201Croad\u2019 is hidden in there. \u201CRoad\u201D is in the middle of \u201Cbroadcasting\u201D. They should say \u201Cbroadcasting\u201D, then I will say: \u201CGotcha, you at least said \u2018road\u2019 as part of the word.\u201D But, no, Green members do not want to mention it. There has not been a mutter or a murmur from them about roads. This legislation is just adding more bureaucracy to Auckland. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000700\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EWould any member here come with me to do a survey down around Stanley Street at 5 o\u2019clock next Friday night and say: \u201CHands up those of you motorists who wanted some more bureaucracy for your roads to be fixed.\u201D? I double-dog dare anyone to come with me. We will ask the question: \u201CDo you think more bureaucracy will fix this?\u201D. Members of this Committee know the answer to that question without even starting. The answer, of course, is that the last thing Auckland needs is some more bureaucracy: \u201CARTA\u201D\u2014\u201CARTA\u201D, and  \u201CMARTHA\u201D, and \u201CFARTHA\u201D, and everything else that has gone into the bureaucracies. People want actual solutions, and this will delay it even further. My colleague the Hon Lockwood Smith is dead right. It will delay it even further. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000701\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EThe title of this bill has to be the most misleading title I have ever seen. It is the Local Government (Auckland) Amendment Bill. No, it is not; it is the \u201CWe Hate Roads and We Are Going to Try and Stop Them or Slow Them Down as Much as We  Can by Putting Barriers in Front of Them Bill\u201D. That is not good enough. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000702\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EI know that drive time will now be coming to an end in Auckland at about 10 to 10. Some of my constituents in Pakuranga will still be wending their way home, having left town about 5.30, but some will now be home. Some will have got really angry and put a hole in the wall because of the frustration and anger that they feel every night as they drive home. But will this legislation solve that? No. According to this legislation, people will see solutions. But when I look at the dates published in the national land transport programme I see: \u201CState Highway 20 completion date 2017, State Highway 18 completion date 2018\u201D, I see  \u201C2020\u201D and  \u201C2021\u201D. That is just a joke. People in Auckland cannot wait until 2007 or 2008, let alone 2017 or 2018. This bill is a disgrace.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022 data-id=\u0022127453ab5a5645b599c2bbf04deb9113\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000703\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022127453ab5a5645b599c2bbf04deb9113\u0022\u003EJIM PETERS (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E What a brilliant speech! It was a re-recording of comments made over the last decade by a very experienced member of Parliament who knows all the form and the drill. In fact, he was actually starting to worry me because he mentioned the word \u201Cvision\u201D, and I thought, hello, are we going to go into another stratosphere here? That is my experience of that party over there that made all those comments about the bill and did not refer once to local government except in a very slighting and disparaging way. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000704\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003EI say to those members of the Committee who have some doubts, that one is convinced by the record. I am talking about roads, and about coming from Northland. Over the last 3 years we have seen more additional funding put into Northland roads than ever before, and that trend is still continuing. That is on the record as happening, it has happened, and if that is the intention of the Government as manifested in Northland, then I have some confidence that this bill will be a sound local government bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000705\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003EI want to draw attention to the term \u201Clocal government\u201D. In relation to some of the comments made I have sensed that there is no faith in local government\u2014those who represent ratepayers\u2014and no understanding of the considerable funding that is required from ratepayers year by year. As I said earlier, for those who do not with some faith see local bodies as unitary authorities or councils, at least they are a democratic process, and those who do not agree with the whole thrust of local government\u2014and we have already heard allusions made to the Auckland Regional Transport Authority\u2014have got every opportunity in October to register their democratic rights with regard to those bodies.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000706\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003E I want to say that New Zealand First supports the title, because the greater funding for this bill and for the Acts that this bill will bring into being, will come from ratepayers. I have faith, therefore, in the ratepayer groups doing what they do best, and that is to represent their people. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000707\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003ESecondly, there is an intention in clause 2 to begin as soon as possible. If members of the Committee have been following through the steps that are already in place, I have some confidence that after tomorrow morning this bill can be advanced in a fairly quick fashion. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000708\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003EI say again that New Zealand First supports this bill because it is a first step. It is an opportunity to make a move and do things in Auckland that have not been done in the past. Last of all, we support the bill because, as I said earlier, if there is goodwill and a positive attitude, these things can happen. That is not just pious thinking; it is the reality of things, day to day.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022 data-id=\u00222b0f4b8c7bb44ceca90763b29a0e6216\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000709\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222b0f4b8c7bb44ceca90763b29a0e6216\u0022\u003EKEITH LOCKE (Green):\u003C/span\u003E As we are in the tradition of English lessons, started by Maurice Williamson this evening, there is one word that perhaps Maurice Williamson and his National colleagues should learn and that is \u201Cchoice\u201D. That is what this bill is all about. It is about giving people in Auckland, through an improved transport planning and funding structure, the choice about how they get from A to B\u2014how they get to work, how they get to recreational activities, so that not only do they have the choice of a motorcar, caught in a traffic jam, but they also have the choice of going along a road on a bus or on a bicycle, walking along the footpath on the road, having a cycle track or a walkway to go along, or having a ferry to use; that is, so that they have real choice. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000710\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EIt is obvious to anyone who looks closely at Auckland and compares it with any other major city in the world, that Auckland\u2019s public transport infrastructure is much weaker than that of any other city, such as Sydney, or Melbourne, or any of the European cities one cares to name. In those cities they have choice. We have to get Auckland to be a modern city, and to remove the overheads, which I referred to in a previous contribution, of $736 million lost. That is the external downside of car travel. Those costs are going up, as the oil price rises. It is just blindness if we do not look at making our transport more efficient, in terms of the carriage of people, by providing a proper rail backbone to Auckland, with buses linked off it, linked up to ferries, and giving people the opportunity to walk and cycle. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000711\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EIf we look at the goals in this bill for the Auckland Regional Transport Authority, for Auckland Regional Holdings, and for the Auckland Regional Council, they do very much relate to developing Auckland. Schedule 4A talks about the task as proceeding in a multimodal way. I think if Mr Mapp had gone to a North Shore event last year and listened to the head of Transfund talking about Transfund\u2019s approach under the new legislation, he would know that Transfund is very much oriented now towards looking at all transport in terms of a multimodal approach\u2014not just looking at car transport. That is the way we want to go. We want to be able to integrate the various modes of transport, and in that integration give people true choice. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000712\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EAs Mr Key said, Auckland\u2019s rail usage, particularly compared with the past when rail usage was several times greater than it is now, is very low when compared with any other similar-sized city in Europe or Australia. We have to get that usage up, through improvements and putting in the planning and the investment, which this bill under this new system will do.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000713\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EProgress reported.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000714\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThe House adjourned at 10 p.m.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200406292ebc8d43ae0541fcb975e393bca0ab7f000715\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003E\u003Cbr\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000001\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022b3aeb75fa79249b1865af19ae6a5a53a\u0022\u003ETuesday, 29 June 2004\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000002\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002282a4579e45784b3a80278e8fe97dded5\u0022\u003E(continued on Wednesday, 30 June 2004)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000003\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00223ecc04870df94e0eaa26b4ae5192f577\u0022\u003ELocal Government (Auckland) Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000004\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022d6508bc01e0440f7b0e46b8ef9584ff0\u0022\u003EIn Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000005\u0022\u003EDebate resumed.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000006\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022d9f06f4a81ef4ecd9ad7dfceb5ded6a1\u0022\u003EClauses 1 and 2 (continued)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022 data-id=\u00224325cf6d1d9f4676a29da9199df51b82\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000007\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224325cf6d1d9f4676a29da9199df51b82\u0022\u003EDr WAYNE MAPP (National\u2014North Shore):\u003C/span\u003E One of the important points to note about this bill is clause 2. The bulk of this legislation comes into force on 1 July 2004. In the real world, that is tomorrow, but in this Chamber it is still 29 June. We are trapped in a time warp. That is the whole trouble with Labour, is it not? Not only is it trapped in its own time warp, but we are dealing with this whole issue under urgency, simply to get this bill through before tomorrow. The Government is proud that it has so mismanaged its legislative affairs that the senior Government whip thinks it is a remarkable testament to Labour\u2019s political skills that it runs things right to the wire and keeps New Zealanders poised on the brink. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000008\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EWell, the one thing that New Zealanders are not pleased about is the time it takes to get to work. As my colleague Maurice Williamson said last night, there will be drivers in Auckland who probably started their journeys at half-past 6, and they will be ambitiously planning to arrive at maybe 9 o\u2019clock. That is what happens. In Esmonde Road on the North Shore, one can be in a traffic jam for 1 hour just to go 400 metres. Yet members who do not come from Auckland might say that that is not possible\u2014no one could imagine being stuck for 1 hour on a customary basis to go 400 metres. It is a daily occurrence\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000009\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222a849ed4-a817-45a7-8b86-dbc9dd210193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eaaf6037e3f442c7957c525b624cb6aa\u0022\u003EJill Pettis\u003C/span\u003E: They could walk.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000010\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022254a24f3ecc948bab41c487299020856\u0022\u003EDr WAYNE MAPP\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014and this bill will do absolutely nothing to change that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000011\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b44b0f2c2a384bedac9c7f087288773d\u0022\u003EHon Maurice Williamson\u003C/span\u003E: Jill Pettis said they could walk!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000012\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227fdbf64bbddf42a587a2ec8c7149cc87\u0022\u003EDr WAYNE MAPP\u003C/span\u003E: Is not that a great collaboration between the Government and the Greens\u2014that everyone could walk? That is obviously the grand design. I was reading in the Independent magazine today of Chris Trotter\u2019s concerns about the future of oil. It will run out in 2016. He suggested, in effect, that this kind of legislative approach is all about preparing us to walk. The Government wants to hasten it, and that is why it is passing this bill\u2014and I say this advisedly\u2014on the 29th of this month. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000013\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EThis bill is a failure. There was a real opportunity to bring together central government, regional government, and local government\u2014to have a single authority. That is National\u2019s plan, and it is a plan put out there for the judgment of the people. We are doing it because we want a coherent, integrated strategy\u2014the sort of words that are in this bill, but which this bill cannot possibly deliver. One has to make meaningful decisions to bring the three key groups together to achieve that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000014\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EA Government has an opportunity maybe only once in a 3-year term to get this kind of legislation right and make a real legislative difference. I presume we will not be revisiting this issue next year, yet that is exactly what will be required, because this bill will be completely inadequate to deal with the real challenges. The motorway network, which is used by private motorists and public transport, is largely paid for by Transit and Transfund. There is absolutely nothing in this bill that includes Transit and Transfund in the overall network. No money goes into it, and no money is designated directly from those two entities. They are not part of the Auckland Regional Transport Authority, they are not part of Auckland Regional Holdings, yet they are the key players. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000015\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EGiven that this is Government legislation, and that it is legislation for Auckland as a whole, one would think that the Government would have taken that crucial step of imagination, because only it can bring together central government, regional government, and local government. Instead, it has fiddled. All this bill has done is deal with the Auckland regional entities, and that is essentially Infrastructure Auckland, the Auckland Regional Transport Network, and the Auckland Regional Land Transport Committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000016\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eafee6abd61b44f6b61a7f4ef70acf4b\u0022\u003EHon Maurice Williamson\u003C/span\u003E: Have they got rid of all those? Has the Auckland Regional Transport Network gone?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000017\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002228c2f8323d5f48b1871b278b11a70d95\u0022\u003EDr WAYNE MAPP\u003C/span\u003E: The Auckland Regional Transport Network will be going into the Auckland Regional Transport Authority. TrackCo will still be there. Effectively, all the Government has done is rename existing entities. Infrastructure Auckland effectively becomes Auckland Regional Holdings. The Auckland Regional Transport Committee effectively becomes the Auckland Regional Transport Authority, perhaps bringing in the Auckland Regional Transport Network as well. That is a pathetic\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000018\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223513914bccdc4b3ca003caee3f9aba5a\u0022\u003EHon Maurice Williamson\u003C/span\u003E: So it\u2019s sort of deck chairs on the Titanic.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000019\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002235bec8f0c89f4957aa4e01ffeaeee992\u0022\u003EDr WAYNE MAPP\u003C/span\u003E: Deck chairs on the Titanic, as my colleague Maurice Williamson would say. It is just reshuffling, none of which, I suggest, will make any difference to the actual needs of the city. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000020\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003ENational believes in an integrated approach. We do not just say \u201Croads only\u201D; we recognise that there is a place for public transport. In that integrated approach, we would have roads and public transport, and the most efficient public transport by a country mile is buses, not railways. The real fact of the railways is this, and the Green Party, in particular, needs to take it on board: in Auckland, 2.5 million trips per year are done by rail, and the annual subsidy today is $20 million. Members should work that out\u2014it is a $10 subsidy per rail trip. For a large number of those people, it would be cheaper\u2014say, two people together\u2014to go by taxi, and it would be more efficient. Many people go by car to the station, then wait for a train that is often delayed by an hour. They go by train to the centre of the city, and then get a bus back up town to where they are going. It is grossly inefficient. In fact, if one analyses it from an energy point of view, it is almost sure to be less efficient than two people using a taxi. It is remarkable, is it not? That is the sort of thing the Greens praise. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000021\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EThe most optimistic prediction is that rail might, in 10 to 15 years from now, produce 20 million passenger trips. That is a tenfold increase. It is hard to imagine that a tenfold increase could actually be achieved, but even then the subsidy is predicted to be $4 a trip. Members should work that out. That is $100 million a year subsidy for rail for 20 million trips out of, by then, probably 1.5 billion trips. That is $100 million of taxpayers\u2019 and ratepayers\u2019 money to subsidise less than 2 percent of the trips. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EOne of the parties supporting this bill, which therefore must be supporting that kind of lunacy, is United Future. I have heard Mr Adams talk about the cost of rates, particularly regional rates\u2014Auckland Regional Council rates. He is very concerned about how they will increase. What he does not seem to have absorbed\u2014both in supporting this bill and the potential $100 million subsidy for 2 percent of trips in Auckland\u2014is that there will be an absolute explosion in rates over the next 10 years. So on just about every conceivable basis, this bill is flawed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000023\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228d786446c5674c1d93fc67d1fb2132b4\u0022\u003EHon Maurice Williamson\u003C/span\u003E: He doesn\u0027t care, at all.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000024\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ce7439981e154577bdb550ee607b4684\u0022\u003EDr WAYNE MAPP\u003C/span\u003E: He does not care, and his party does not care, about the impost and burden on the hard-working people of New Zealand as they have to deal, on a daily basis, with that huge rates burden. I do not want to go to another public meeting and hear Mr Adams saying how terrible Auckland Regional Council rates are, because his vote today will add to the burden. That is the reality. What we want to see from the Government is a realistic plan for Auckland.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022 data-id=\u002254a6cac3f22a497ab7815104fe9ad358\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000025\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002254a6cac3f22a497ab7815104fe9ad358\u0022\u003EHon RUTH DYSON (Minister for ACC):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000026\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00222adc0fbe3f834d2e90555370c65a0900\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That clause 1 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 83\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 35\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 1 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000027\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 231 in the name of the Hon Chris Carter to clause 2 be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00224962872bddc846459a7724c642f3342d\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 83\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 35\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00225969db4729704274bf628ee973d8f041\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That clause 2 as amended be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 83\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 35\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 2 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000028\u0022\u003EBill reported with amendment.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000029\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00229f2d68a0a69449e5949df643cb74f2b9\u0022\u003EThird Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022 data-id=\u002237f30a206d9643958eb3bf8537f46476\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000030\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002237f30a206d9643958eb3bf8537f46476\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS CARTER (Minister of Local Government):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the Local Government (Auckland) Amendment Bill be now read a third time. This bill is an important step forward in resolving Auckland\u0027s transport problems. New Zealand\u0027s largest city is being held back by traffic congestion that is impacting not only on Auckland but on the whole country because of Auckland\u0027s importance to the national economy. To deal with the lack of past investment, the Government is providing an additional $1.62 billion to be spent on Auckland transport over the next 10 years. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000031\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003EThis bill deals with the necessary changes in the governance structures for Auckland transport. The Government\u0027s Investing for Growth package and the transport sector review address these funding and governance issues at the national level. Together, these proposals consolidate transport governance in the Auckland region and provide a firm foundation for integrated, safe, responsible, and sustainable decision making. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000032\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003EUnder the bill the Auckland Regional Council will be given overarching responsibility for Auckland transport. The council will continue to be directly responsible for the Auckland regional land transport strategy but will undertake its operations through a new arm\u0027s-length, council-controlled organisation called the Auckland Regional Transport Authority. The authority will be responsible for planning, funding, and developing the Auckland regional land transport system, including setting land transport priorities in the region. The bill disestablishes Infrastructure Auckland and transfers its assets to the Auckland Regional Council\u0027s second new council-controlled organisation called Auckland Regional Holdings. It provides effective governance and accountability mechanisms for both the Auckland Regional Transport Authority and Auckland Regional Holdings, and a firm basis for improvements in Auckland\u0027s transport to be achieved. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000033\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003EThe passing of this legislation will give Auckland a real opportunity both to determine, for itself, the priorities that will address its transport problems and to implement those priorities. The bill is only the beginning. There is still much work to be done by all of us\u2014the Auckland Regional Council, Auckland Regional Transport Authority, Auckland Regional Holdings, Auckland territorial authorities, and Government agencies. This Government has had the courage, the will, and the resources to do something about Auckland\u0027s transport problems.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022 data-id=\u0022995c59256f78419b8a58c63aba7cb69f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000034\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022995c59256f78419b8a58c63aba7cb69f\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON (National\u2014Pakuranga):\u003C/span\u003E That speech was a very sad defence of a very sad bill. In it, the Minister talked about the courage and bravery of a solution. The fact that Auckland is screaming out for a solution is not in doubt. However, I challenged him during the Committee stage last night, and I issue the challenge again: \u201CCome with me on Friday night, at 5 o\u0027clock, down into the mangled, stopped, traffic jam\u2014the sort of moving car parks\u2014and let us put on our red-flare jackets to do a survey. We\u2019ll knock on the windows of the cars and ask the people in them: \u0022What do you think should be done to fix Auckland\u0027s traffic problems?\u0022. I double-dog dare the Minister to do that. I guarantee\u2014indeed, I will put up 20 bucks\u2014that not one person who winds down a window down will say: \u201CI know what we need\u2014another bureaucracy. That would fix it.\u201D I guarantee no one would say that. Yet that is exactly what this legislation is about. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000035\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EThe real significant difference between the left and the right in politics on this issue is that National is unashamedly supporting the building, construction, and completion of new roads. The Minister did not say the word \u0022roads\u0022. The left do not even like the word. The Greens cannot bring themselves even to say the word \u0022roads\u0022. They think it is evil. They do not like roads or the things that drive on them. They do not even like the people who drive in the things that drive on the roads. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000036\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EThere was no more telling evidence about what the Government\u0027s view on roads in Auckland is than the press release that came out when this package, announcing the intent to put this legislation into the House, came out on 12 December. I have it here in its glorious blood-red Labour Party colours. I am happy to report that during the Committee stage I read this out, and given that Auckland\u0027s drive-time traffic will still be stuck in their cars, I would like people to hear this again. The Minister said: \u201CI think everyone agrees that the present governance arrangements for Auckland\u0027s transport are confused, inefficient and ineffectual.\u0022 Given that one, I think that is right. There are 18 bodies\u2014that is right, 18 various bodies\u2014responsible for Auckland\u0027s transport solutions at present. There is a plethora of them: Auckland Regional Transport Network Ltd, TrackCo, the seven territorial authorities, Auckland Regional Council, Infrastructure Auckland, Connex, the ferries, and so on. Everyone knows that. The wiring diagram was appalling, and the Minister was right\u2014hopeless. Then he goes on to say: \u201CThe Government proposes that responsibility for Auckland transport issues\u201D\u2014now this is the real thing\u2014\u201Csuch as rail, bus, ferry, pedestrian and cycle transport reside with but one organisation.\u201D That is from the Minister\u2019s own press release. There is not a mutter, not a mention, of roads. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000037\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EThe Government does not think roads are part of Auckland\u2019s solution. \u201CWalking will fix it.\u201D, I heard Jill Pettis yell out to my colleague Wayne Mapp when he was speaking about the Esmonde Road congestion\u2014\u201CMake them walk.\u201D We will have to put up a big sign at Esmonde Road during the next election campaign, stating: \u201CLabour thinks you should all be walking.\u201D That will be a great sign. We will have the Hansard to show it\u2014\u201CLabour\u2019s senior whip says that to fix the Esmonde Road congestion problem you should all be walking.\u201D We are just adding one more body called the Auckland Regional Transport Authority. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000038\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EI again double-dog dare the Labour Party to survey ordinary people in Auckland on what they think all the organisations are. The other night I mentioned something called \u201CARTNL\u201D to my wife, who takes a modest interest in this matter, and she asked: \u201CWhat\u2019s \u2018ARTNL\u2019?\u201D I said: \u201CDon\u2019t you know what \u2018ARTNL\u2019 is? It is one of the most important elements for infrastructure and transport issues in Auckland.\u201D She had never heard of it. She had heard of the Auckland Regional Council\u2014the \u201CARC\u201D\u2014because she gets the rates demands that are going through the ceiling all the time. And another survey we need to run in Auckland should be: \u201CWho trusts the Auckland Regional Council to solve Auckland\u2019s transport issues?\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000039\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222e1c7b072dc240c5a9dbc3ad1f2cf278\u0022\u003EDr Wayne Mapp\u003C/span\u003E: Paul Adams.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000040\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002212517f82a8064f288c4be4ceccc744b4\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON\u003C/span\u003E: No one, not even Paul Adams, trusts it. Yet what organisation has been given the total power and control of this, at least in the hotchpotch mismatch that is coming out of the Auckland Regional Transport Authority? It is coming under the control of the Auckland Regional Council. The one failed body that no one would trust to solve Auckland\u2019s problems gets it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000041\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EDr Michael Cullen said something interesting just before we began this morning. He said that the biggest issues in Auckland are things like State Highway 20\u2014the M\u0101ngere motorway, which sort of stops at both ends. I think he is right. Dr Cullen and I agree on a number of things, and this is one of them. The biggest issue in Auckland right now is State Highway 20 and getting the southern end of it joined up to the southern motorway in Manukau City, pushing on through Mt Roskill, and adjoining the north-western motorway. I agree with him. Does Auckland Regional Transport Authority have any responsibility for State highways? Does this new entity that is created by this legislation we are passing under urgency in the dead of day, right now, have any responsibility for State Highway 20? No, it does not. It is a Transit road, a State highway road, and it will still be the \u201Csame old same old\u201D as before. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000042\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EAucklanders are now saying\u2014and the Automobile Association survey shows this in great depth\u2014that the private sector will have to be involved in building a huge amount of roading, and that that roading will have to be tolled. We need to go to no further a jurisdiction than Sydney, Brisbane, or Melbourne for examples. All those cities have left-wing Labor Governments. I am not sure whether people understand that roading over there is funded at State Government level. I have spent a lot of time with Carl Scully, the Minister for Roads in New South Wales, and he said that the only solution to their problem was to haul the private sector in and get it building\u2014let the private sector build the tunnels, the south-eastern extensions, the western links, and so on. It works brilliantly. Some people think Australians and New Zealanders are very different\u2014that Australians are funny, and so on\u2014but it has worked brilliantly for Australians under a Labor Government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EWhere is the incentive in this legislation for getting the private sector involved in roading? We have seen no interest so far, and again I tell the Labour Government that this legislation will do nothing. That is simply because Labour has rolled over and played dead to keep its coalition partner, the Greens, happy. The Greens hate roads. They will not bring themselves even to say the word \u201Croads\u201D. They will say \u201Dcycleways\u201D, \u201Cwalkways\u201D, and \u201Dwalking buses\u201D. Forget building a motorway\u2014the Albany to P\u016Bhoi realignment B2 to \u014Crewa North\u2014and from where the B1 finishes to Whangarei we will just have walking buses. Jill Pettis will probably sign up to that. It is madness. Yes, public transport initiatives will be important, and the vast bulk of those will come through buses, but Labour has not worked this one out: what do buses travel on?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000044\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e7826ee4c549432ebe57b19c8d55199b\u0022\u003EDr Wayne Mapp\u003C/span\u003E: Roads.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000045\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224406c21274f741c3bf2d935eb6e924eb\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON\u003C/span\u003E: Wayne Mapp got it just like that, and Labour still cannot answer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000046\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ad5f0c772c7f4bf492b4114e5830a39e\u0022\u003EDarren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: He\u2019s got a PhD.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000047\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b84177f6e2574f9a9bc47ce4af1d6ff4\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON\u003C/span\u003E: That is right. Maybe Labour should get some people with PhDs to advise it. Buses travel on roads, and that is why Auckland needs more roads, because even the public transport solution comes from roads. What percentage of Auckland\u2019s public transport-users right now use rail? Firstly, rail hardly goes to anywhere that the people live. Howick and Pakuranga, where I am from, does not have a railway line. We do not want one\u2014just in case anyone is getting excited and thinking we might start to build one out there\u2014because the costs of building one are astronomical and the subsidy per person is crippling. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000048\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EAgain, the Greens will never stump up to this next issue: name one city the size of Auckland where rail works. They will come up with London, Hong Kong, and New York, where rail works well. I am sure that if we had 7 million people between Ponsonby and Parnell, we would have a wonderful underground railway system. It would be brilliant, it would work, and it would actually be profitable. But with Auckland\u2019s population of only 1 million spread across a huge block of land, and the trips going in all directions rather than focusing on the central business district as they are in Wellington, rail is not a solution. It is less than about half of 1 percent at present. Even with the most optimistic outlook it would be about 1 percent. But, no, the Greens say they want to get everybody on to public transport. Of course, they do not use it. The Greens drive their cars to every public meeting they attend. They like to do that. They think it is the great unwashed out there who should use public transport. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000049\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EI repeat: the major difference between the National Party and the Labour Government regarding this point on transport is that we believe Auckland\u2019s roads need to be built, and built now. The network needs to be finished and we need to see what was planned many, many years ago come to fruition. Dr Cullen\u2019s comments on State Highway 20 were right. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000050\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EThe last thing I find so galling\u2014and members of this House should be appalled by it\u2014is that while Auckland has been screaming out for new infrastructure to be laid, and while the private sector has been shut out by dreadful legislation like the Land Transport Management Act, Transfund has a surplus of $250 million in its kitty, unspent. I want the next Labour speaker to justify why $250 million is sitting in the bank unspent today while we are passing stupid legislation to increase the bureaucracy in Auckland.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223a0e52c8-5bb1-4325-9870-21f4e3eb3702\u0022 data-id=\u00227f68ce60ea6741d69ef14f3f6918c186\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000051\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223a0e52c8-5bb1-4325-9870-21f4e3eb3702\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227f68ce60ea6741d69ef14f3f6918c186\u0022\u003EMARTIN GALLAGHER (Labour\u2014Hamilton West):\u003C/span\u003E I listened with interest to the previous speaker. He is very much like a bird that has been finally let out of its cage. He was silenced by the National Party for a couple of years, and he is obviously revelling in the ability to speak in this Chamber\u2014and an interesting address it was, too. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000052\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223a0e52c8-5bb1-4325-9870-21f4e3eb3702\u0022\u003EI am speaking as a Waikato and Hamilton member. I want to reflect that if one looks at the history books\u2014History 101\u2014one sees that from 1990-99 there was a National Government. What did it do for transport in Auckland? If I turn the pages of one of those books, I see they are all blank. I am not allowed to use that \u201CH\u201D word. Under this Government, on behalf of Paul Swain, it was my pleasure to open part of the expressway near Rangiriri\u2014the \u014Chinewai expressway. We are actually doing it. We are not talking about it; we are doing it. Hamilton and the Waikato have an absolutely crucial interest in Auckland sorting out its transport woes, because our economy is absolutely integrated into the Auckland economy. I applaud this bill if it will be a means by which Auckland moves to sort out its transport woes. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000053\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223a0e52c8-5bb1-4325-9870-21f4e3eb3702\u0022\u003EI commend the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee. This is a good bill. Let us get on with it, and let us pass it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022 data-id=\u0022f829da81b7d54921b0da9750506d0843\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000054\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f829da81b7d54921b0da9750506d0843\u0022\u003EJIM PETERS (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E In following that member, I too, as a Northland member, express the same sentiment. The future and issues of Auckland\u2019s transport vitally affect us. That is why some years ago, when we found that Auckland was thinking of a drastic light rail solution, we were very, very concerned. We realise that our future, particularly our commercial future, is linked to our ability to get goods into and through Auckland, and out into, particularly, South Auckland\u2014and it is the same for the Waikato. Therefore, we in New Zealand First take a personal interest in this bill. In our party policy that we are developing, under the heading of \u201CNew Directions\u201D, we have Auckland\u2019s solutions as one of the issues we have to contend with in our policy development.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000055\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003EIn the select committee hearings the issue of whether there should be one entity was expressly covered. I want to pick up what was said by some people in response to that concept, because we have heard it enunciated and developed in the House as being the answer. An answer was sought from Mr Maher of Infrastructure Auckland, who has been mentioned here, and he said that to put Transit and TrackCo into one organisation was quite risky. That was his considered opinion, from the point of view of his knowledge of Auckland. An alignment of plans must have a mechanism to make sure that those plans are strong enough.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000056\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003EThat, to me, is an indication that there needs to be a two-phase development for the issues of Auckland. Federated Farmers is a very conservative, sound-thinking group. Its advocate said to us that it generally supports the provisions of the bill. Alisdair Thompson is known for his views on Auckland and on business infrastructure, and when he was asked\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000057\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222d2749588ff24ce8bd41eb4cede3adde\u0022\u003EHon Maurice Williamson\u003C/span\u003E: Tell the whole story. Mr Thompson said it didn\u2019t go far enough.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000058\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224464f5f55b8d412db38cc6abe846f5fc\u0022\u003EJIM PETERS\u003C/span\u003E: I say to Mr Williamson that when Mr Thompson pointedly was asked the question whether the suggestions within the bill could advance Auckland\u2019s transport issues, his answer was a qualified yes, which is not the answer I have been hearing in press statements from people from the business forum and elsewhere. An honest, qualified yes was Mr Thompson\u2019s comment. The Automobile Association, as has already been mentioned in the House, had a very strong view of the joint venture between the Crown, the Auckland Regional Council, and the territorial bodies where appropriate. But having some knowledge of the way in which those things work, I find that it is part of a phased development.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000059\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003ESo where are we in 2004? We have before us a bill that largely meets Auckland\u2019s present needs, but not in the time-warp sense of the last speaker from the National Party, who seemed to have a very static, backward view of Auckland. Instead, there is an opportunity here for the Auckland Regional Council to work with other groups\u2014territorial groups, in particular\u2014in a far more robust strategic development than it has been able to do in the past. As I said previously, unlike others, I see this 2004 model continuing over the next 10 years. The core question that was always asked of Auckland was if more money was made available\u2014and this question would have been asked by the present Government\u2014what would Auckland do with it. How would Auckland use it? How would it be spent? The 2003 Act was an Act of mixed parts, but it certainly reinforced the need for more robust development with regard to road strategy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000060\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003EIn that regard, both Transit and Transfund have shown a remarkable change over the last 4 to 5 years in the way they work and in their understanding. I have to say that, in my experience, that has been very gratifying, particularly in areas such as Northland.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000061\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003EWe come to the addition in 2004 of this bill in its revised form\u2014I want to emphasise that\u2014as we see it before the House now. It restores the Auckland regional land transport strategy as the primary mechanism for Auckland\u2019s input\u2014that is, territorial input; that is, the input made by other groups and bodies that make up the regional land transport committee. In turn, over 10 years those views will provide the Auckland Regional Transport Authority with the comprehensive regional transport directions that it must undertake on behalf of Auckland. Clause 28 now allows references to activities and allows them to be prioritised, but it gives the operational arm\u2014the Auckland Regional Transport Authority\u2014the ability to get on with the job. New Zealand First applauds that attempt to do just that. It is the Auckland Regional Transport Authority\u2019s task to go through the fine detail. It will be the Auckland Regional Transport Authority\u2019s task to seek the funding, and that funding can come from other sources. I have heard talk in the House about private funding. Among the things that are needed are toll roads, which were allowed in last year\u2019s bill. That, in turn, needs rethinking with regard to some of the strategies for Auckland\u2019s future.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000062\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003ESo this bill, in encompassing the regional land transport strategy, the earlier regional policy statement, and, in particular, the impact of the regional growth strategy and the changes that that strategy will make over the next 5 to 10 years, puts together a strong ability for the Auckland Regional Transport Authority to work for the sustainable development of Auckland\u2019s transport. No one in this House who has lived in Auckland or has gone through Auckland would underestimate that task. By the way, over 30 years ago, as a youngish teacher teaching at T\u0101maki Intermediate, some of the members of our staff had to leave from the North Shore at a quarter to 7 to get to T\u0101maki Intermediate in time for an 8.30 start. That gives some indication that some of the supposed recent problems in Auckland have in actual fact always been there. There has been decade after decade of inadequate development and thinking about the real issues of Auckland.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000063\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003EIn conclusion, New Zealand First believes that this bill is a brave attempt to provide an integrated approach to the management of Auckland\u2019s land transport system. In my dictionary, \u201Ctransport\u201D does mean roads, does mean buses, might mean cycling, and might mean walking\u2014in other words, making way for those people who want to walk, as well. The 1998 Act, the 2003 Act, and this bill together will give Auckland an opportunity. I recall the words of John Law, the Mayor of Rodney District, who gave the councils\u2019 combined submission. He said to us in Auckland that the councils were in broad agreement. They had some differences with the Auckland Regional Council, and they suggested that Transit and Transfund should have a more integrated role. But I believe that this is a reasonable attempt to look at the establishment of what will become, and should become, a strong working relationship, whereby we have the Auckland Regional Council, the Auckland Regional Transport Authority, and Auckland Regional Holdings working together, with the authority of the regional territorial bodies, towards improving passenger transport and roading. It is but a step. In time, the other issues\u2014TrackCo, Transit\u2019s future role, and all the other components of a regional transport strategy and package\u2014will be further developed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000064\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003EOn behalf of New Zealand First, I accept the intention of the legislation. We were uncertain at the beginning as to whether the bill would have focus and clarity. We believe that that has been restored in the bill, and we believe that the Auckland Regional Council has the energy and ability to see this thing through. We await with interest the next 5 to 10 years, because this is a long-term development. Nothing will happen tomorrow, and perhaps nothing will be seen even next year, apart from the concentrated energy of the people who start working in those new bodies from 1 July as they put together a long-term, comprehensive plan for Auckland\u2019s needs, in a systematic way and in a manner that we have not seen in the past. New Zealand First supports this further reading of the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224e6caa14-14ae-43f5-b9da-fe479511fe74\u0022 data-id=\u00227a9aa4b534624f7585cc1bd6d80a75c6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000065\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224e6caa14-14ae-43f5-b9da-fe479511fe74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227a9aa4b534624f7585cc1bd6d80a75c6\u0022\u003EPAUL ADAMS (United Future):\u003C/span\u003E I rise on behalf of United Future to speak on the third reading of this bill, which we are very pleased to support. It has indeed been an interesting debate, as we have been through the Committee stage and other stages. It has been fascinating to see the two parties that are not supporting this bill, the first being the National Party. I think all Aucklanders need to understand that neither the National Party nor ACT has chosen to support this bill, which is primarily about addressing the transport problems in Auckland. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000066\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224e6caa14-14ae-43f5-b9da-fe479511fe74\u0022\u003EIt has been interesting to listen to the concerns of those who do not support this bill. The Hon Maurice Williamson has been very vocal against this bill, and has tended to fascinate me. Let us pick up just one point he made. He pointed out that $250 million is unspent. I believe that the years when we just spent the budget because the money was there have gone. I believe we need to be wise when spending our money. In the Dominion Post this morning, we saw a wonderful full-page advertisement from the National Party. Was that advertisement placed because we are at the end of the financial year and the money was in the budget, therefore National spends it? We could have been given the information in black and white, but unfortunately that would have been too cheap. That was not expensive enough to use up all the budget\u2014they had to add colour to the advertisement. That was not to give any more information to the public\u2014no, no; no more information was required\u2014but they had to go for colour for the mere fact it used up the budget. I have been waiting to hear from National, when its members have been speaking, what its brilliant alternative to this would be. I have heard many criticisms about this being another bureaucracy, whereas in actual fact the number of organisations involved has been reduced. So I see less bureaucracy. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000067\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ae33e444e5c747e18cf7963ada9e2d00\u0022\u003EHon Maurice Williamson\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s not.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000068\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224e6caa14-14ae-43f5-b9da-fe479511fe74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229f43e94d36aa4b41ab120f8945ff0130\u0022\u003EPAUL ADAMS\u003C/span\u003E: The Hon Maurice Williamson, who has been very vocal here\u2014he is trying to interject as I speak\u2014has had one major concern. He has continually pointed out the fact that in Auckland he can see no bulldozers. Well, poor Maurice Williamson! Obviously it is something from his past, when he thought that there has to be a bulldozer to get progress. He has been extremely concerned that he has been travelling on the roads of Auckland and, up till now, he has seen no bulldozers. I tell the member that, unfortunately, the roadworks being done at present do not require bulldozers, but if he looks carefully he will see diggers working. A digger is not a bulldozer, and I appreciate that the member might have a fascination for a bulldozer, but there are diggers working up there. There are Kangos working there, there are lots of noises, and there is lots of action going on as the roads are being built around \u201CSpaghetti Junction\u201D. So perhaps Mr Williamson needs to go back to the toy box. Maybe his parents only ever bought him a bulldozer, and maybe he thought a bulldozer was required for all roadworks. Well, we have moved on. Technology has gone forward, thank goodness, and we have other instruments we can use. Anyway, I will do my very best. I will speak to the Government and ask whether we can possibly get a bulldozer on some parts of the road in the days ahead. I am sure we will get cooperation on that from the Government, and Mr Williamson will be happy. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000069\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224e6caa14-14ae-43f5-b9da-fe479511fe74\u0022\u003EThere are two sides to every story. Normally, we can hear one side of the story when we listen, and sometimes it can make the utmost sense. Then the Opposition will bring the other side of the story, and then we sometimes have to weigh up, and we say: \u201CWell, that is a very good point. We had not considered that.\u201D But in all the hours of debate we have had on this bill, I have been listening and waiting to hear the Opposition come up with the alternative\u2014with the other side of the story. But what have we heard? We have heard zip\u2014nothing. Yet Mr Maurice Williamson did mention something to us. To be honest, one could see the amazement on his face when he suddenly discovered this\u2014after being Minister of Transport for a large number of years. I do not know how many. Was it 5 years or was it 6 years? All of a sudden, as though he could not believe it, he made a discovery, as he was trying to do some research on the Auckland roading issue. He discovered, with amazement, that National, despite all his efforts, managed to spend, in one year out of nine, the last year\u2014he was there for 9 years\u2014some money on Auckland roads. I think that that is a very sad state of affairs. That was after 9 years, yet he has continually come down here, as we have been going through this bill, and criticised the Government on its performance over 5 years. Well, I ask Mr Williamson this: what happened on the Auckland roads in year 6, after the National Party was last in power? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000070\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224e6caa14-14ae-43f5-b9da-fe479511fe74\u0022\u003EI have lived in Auckland for many years, and I was one of those who saw nothing happening\u2014absolutely zip, zero. Yet now I can see that progress is happening, and I know that as United Future supports this legislation we are putting things in place so that Auckland, that great city, will have its transport system improved. Yes, there are needs for alternatives. We would be supportive of those\u2014bus lanes, trams, trains, whatever. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000071\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002233f9ce127fe941ed963ccec96b8806de\u0022\u003EHon Maurice Williamson\u003C/span\u003E: Trams?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000072\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224e6caa14-14ae-43f5-b9da-fe479511fe74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226f9c5a4d5a6846b68fe30d27c5424dc4\u0022\u003EPAUL ADAMS\u003C/span\u003E: Trams are very good. Has the member never thought of trams? There are many, many alternatives, but at least this legislation, which we will see passed today, will put in place bodies that can forward plan. As I have said, it is never just a body of people. The most important aspect is that those people in those organisations are really forward-thinking. I hope they are, and I hope they get good plans, but at least we will know who to deal with. So United Future is very pleased with this legislation and is very happy to support it. We can leave on my final words, promising Maurice Williamson that there will be a bulldozer. We will organise one, and maybe we could get the former Minister a ride on that bulldozer if he is a very good boy, as it puts the blade down for the first turn. I know that that will just delight his heart. I can see that he is a man who loves a bulldozer. In fact, he has spent more time talking about bulldozers than talking about the legislation itself. United Future is happy to support this legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022 data-id=\u002276d58cfcf30c473f9721ffd6d5003182\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000073\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002276d58cfcf30c473f9721ffd6d5003182\u0022\u003EDEBORAH CODDINGTON (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E I rise on behalf of the ACT party to say that we do not support this legislation. We oppose it because it will not do anything to fix Auckland\u2019s transport problems. On the face of it, we could give this Government a small tick for trying to solve the problems in Auckland, but when we read the bill we realise that all that this legislation will do is to make a bad situation worse. By the bill\u2019s own admission, it promotes only the integration of decision-making processes. There is nothing in the purpose clause about building more roads, ending the gridlock, or solving Auckland\u2019s transport problems. That is not a hard thing to do, given there are only a million people in Auckland. Other cities in the world have solved their problems. We can look at what London has done. London had a culture shock, and brought in legislation with new ideas to solve its problems. Sydney did it by using private enterprise to build and develop roads for the State. But no, because this Government is ideologically opposed to any form of private enterprise, it will not even go there. At the very most it will allow tolling on some roading, but that will not solve the problems. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000074\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003EThe Minister himself in his third reading speech admitted that traffic problems in Auckland impact on the rest of the country. That is the reason why the rest of the country should realise that Auckland is being penalised in this bill by having to use its own assets, built up by Aucklanders over the years, to fund in large part the solving of its transport problems. If we went and asked Aucklanders whether they wanted to sit in traffic for hours and hours every day, of course they would say no. If we went and told them that there was a piece of legislation in which the Government was going to do something about that, they would probably be pleased. But if we then said to them that that legislation would just set up more bureaucracies, and put the new bureaucracies under the control of the Auckland Regional Council, they would be horrified. They would know that all that would happen would be more talkfests and more arguing, and not one new piece of roading would be built. This bill is an asset grab. That is what it is; it will take $1 billion in assets that belong to Aucklanders. Previous Governments and this Government have dictated to Aucklanders what they can do with those assets, and now the Government is giving them to the Auckland Regional Transport Authority and Auckland Regional Holdings. The last thing that Auckland needs is more bureaucracy. We already have enough bureaucracy in Auckland, and the last thing we need is more of it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000075\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003E If we look at the clauses in this bill and analyse it clause by clause, we can see that the bill will not do anything. Any fool can see that, when the roading network is not even a priority. The priority is land transport alternatives. They are stuck between the same rock and a hard place that the Land Transport Management Bill was when we passed it last year. That legislation actually did set out to solve the whole country\u2019s transport problems, but it was hijacked along the way by the Green Party, and deals were done. What happens is that two issues now stymie the whole development of a roading network. The first is that we have to look at land transport alternatives, and not just look at them. They have to play a major part in the decision-making process about whether to build a road or instead put that money\u2014money paid in by motorists, by the way, using cars\u2014into funding cycle lanes, walking lanes, or other alternative forms of land transport. The other issue that stymies development is consultation with affected communities. On top of the Resource Management Act, this endless consultation will mean that we will never get anywhere. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000076\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003EThe United Future member said that no Opposition party had put up an alternative solution. Well, he obviously has not been listening, because there is an alternative. The ACT party has consistently put up that alternative, and has likened it to the America\u2019s Cup legislation. A Labour Government\u2014I think it was Labour\u2014saw the need for the development of the America\u2019s Cup village, given the advantages it would bring not just to Auckland but also to the whole country. So it set up in the legislation one entity to hear all applications, and gave the right of appeal\u2014I am not saying that matters should go through in a dictatorship. People did have the right of appeal under the America\u2019s Cup legislation, but it was fast, efficient, and smooth. If the Greens had had the influence on that legislation that they have had on this legislation, we would never have ended up with the America\u2019s Cup village and all the boatbuilding industries, wonderful restaurants, and activity that still goes on there long after the America\u2019s Cup has gone. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000077\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003EBuilding more roads on its own is not a solution. If one builds more roads\u2014yes, of course the Greens are right\u2014people will just flock on to them in their cars. That is why I do not understand why the Greens do not support issues like congestion tolling. Congestion tolling is the ideal way to get rid of the pollution caused by cars idling on motorways. People would have a choice between paying a bit more to go on a faster road or, if they do not want to pay, going on a slower road. What is wrong with that, if it gets people moving? Those are the only sorts of things that will solve the transport problems in Auckland. We have to have pricing mechanisms, but at the moment, we do not. People just go out and get in their cars. These days, most families in Auckland have at least two cars, and they get in them and drive, because the roads are perceived as being free. Roads are not free; the Minister talked about spending $1.6 billion on them. Where does that money come from? People need to be reminded that they pay for those roads, and the only way they will be allowed to make decisions about when and where they use roads is by means of pricing mechanisms. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000078\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003EWe need practical legislation. More of the Labour Government members who understand the pragmatism of the situation need to take more control over what is being done. When the Land Transport Management Bill was before the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee, the Minister went around the country urging submitters to be strong on the legislation, and to support the public-private partnerships and the Build, Own, Operate, and Transfer proposals, whereby developers could come in from overseas, build roads, operate them, and transfer them to the State after a certain number of years. However, those matters were lost from the legislation, because the Minister of Transport was not strong enough and deals were done with the Greens. But Auckland\u2019s transport problems could have been solved through such schemes. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000079\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003EIn conclusion, I would like to answer the United Future member who criticised the National Party for saying that $250 million was still in the kitty and had not been spent. That is money that motorists have paid up in user charges, petrol taxes, and Accident Compensation Corporation levies, and the United Future Party says it should not be spent on the roads. Those members said that just because that money is there, that does not mean to say it should be spent. Obviously, they would rather spend it on something like the Families Commission. Well, I would love to know what the Families Commission will do for Auckland families when, in 10 years\u2019 time, mum and dad have to leave home before dawn and do not get back until after dark, because no new roads will have been built as a result of this legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022 data-id=\u00226ebe8909d172444da477fe4a4c3784ef\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000080\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226ebe8909d172444da477fe4a4c3784ef\u0022\u003ESTEVE CHADWICK (Labour\u2014Rotorua):\u003C/span\u003E I am pleased to speak after that rather sad speech from that ACT member. It was obviously caught up in Mr Rodney Hide\u2019s ideology, when he asked for there to be rates caps on local government. That party wants the Government to get out, but that member says the Government needs to climb in more, with regard to local authorities and their decision making. That is absolutely amazing. The ACT members have complained about the impact of regulation in the last decade, but now they are demanding more regulation and want to go in there to tell local authorities and local government what they have to do for their roads. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000081\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003EThis is a wonderful bill. It is about enabling local authorities to avoid duplicating their efforts. They are to come together, make decisions, reach consensus, avoid duplication and confusion, and then come up with the decisions that work best for them. And, of course, they will be working to our national land transport strategy. That was another wonderful piece of work that this Government undertook, and it will be completed by 2010. I support this bill. The 33 submitters supported this bill. The only thing they wanted to do was to make sure that we amended one clause, in order to avoid duplication. This is a wonderful bill, and we can get on with it now for the benefit of Auckland.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022 data-id=\u0022808ac2913d1d4ce0885d741303b0ec66\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000082\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022808ac2913d1d4ce0885d741303b0ec66\u0022\u003EDr WAYNE MAPP (National\u2014North Shore):\u003C/span\u003E What a pathetic speech that last one was. Obviously the member has not read the bill, because if she had she would know how inadequate it is. The Government talks about its integrated transport strategy and about bringing people together, and one would think the bill would reflect that. Unfortunately, when we distil the bill we find that all it does is rename existing institutions. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000083\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EWhy do I say that? Currently in Auckland\u2014or at least until tomorrow\u2014there is the Auckland Regional Land Transport Committee, which was put together by the Auckland Regional Council and has on it representatives from each of the local authorities. In addition, there is Infrastructure Auckland and the Auckland Regional Transport Network Ltd. Those are the three regional entities. What this bill does, and all it does, is rename Infrastructure Auckland as Auckland Regional Holdings\u2014a dramatic move, I guess, in the eyes of the Government. Secondly, it effectively renames the Auckland Regional Land Transport Committee as the Auckland Regional Transport Authority. That is all the bill does. So for years the Government has laboured to produce this dramatic measure, and believes it will fix the problem. That is the Government\u2019s serious intent. It has seduced and cajoled New Zealand First\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e180fe02bef74e3fbcef2ec36cb4dd8e\u0022\u003EJim Peters\u003C/span\u003E: Rubbish\u2014absolute rubbish!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000085\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222ff3746f8ec644008cbe178e672463bd\u0022\u003EDr WAYNE MAPP\u003C/span\u003E: What does that member mean\u2014\u201Crubbish\u201D? New Zealand First and United Future members have been seduced and cajoled into supporting what has to be one of the most pathetic attempts at regional reorganisation this Parliament has ever had to witness. Some people have been asking\u2014particularly United Future members\u2014what National\u2019s plan is. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000086\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EWe have been saying very clearly what our plan is, and members who heard the submissions know that it has the endorsement of the local authorities. That is where they want to get to. At best, they see this Government\u2019s mishmash of an effort as a small step towards it. What they want is the plan announced last month by Dr Brash, and it is very clear: a single organisation that brings together central government, regional government, and local government and that has both planning and funding responsibilities. That is what our city needs\u2014a simple plan, clear directions, and completion of the network. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EWe must get the structure right\u2014and this Parliament has only one opportunity in each 3-year period, unless the Government intends to visit this again next year, which seems unlikely\u2014because it has been talked about for years in Auckland, and unless it is done, we simply will not see completion. I would not be surprised to hear the Government proudly proclaim that the completion of State Highway 20 will occur in 2020. That is the sort of time frame it has in mind for completing the network. It simply will not do. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000088\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003ENational has a clear plan. We want to simplify the structure. We want to bring together central, regional, and local government, the territorial local authorities, and the funding and planning schemes so that we get progress. That is the bill the Government should have put up. If it had done that, it would have had support. If the Government had put up that coherent plan\u2014the one that is actually desired by Auckland\u2014then it could have had support. But we will not support the pathetic, half-baked attempt that the Government so proudly proclaims as its solution. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000089\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EWhat will the strategic plan look like for Auckland? Everyone is clear about that. Even the Government occasionally acknowledges it. Everyone would concede\u2014and I know that my colleague, Mr Dail Jones, who will be speaking shortly, knows\u2014that Auckland wants completion of the motorway network. Aucklanders do not want to wait 10 or 20 years. The amount of $1.6 billion over 10 years simply will not do it. They want public-private partnerships, and they want action. They want the completion of the strategic motorway network, and that does include the eastern highway, because when the network is completed the traffic will flow. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000090\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EThis is not just about private cars, or trucks and vans doing deliveries around the city; it is also about public transport. The major component of public transport in Auckland is buses, and they have to use the roads. They need to take part in the overall network. Rail has a limited place. Ironically, I would concede that Britomart would work better if there were some form of limited loop so trains do not come in and then have to back out. That is half the problem of rail not working efficiently. When will people develop some form of loop\u2014maybe one that would go under the university and back to Parnell\u2014to get the flow that would make the railway system work efficiently? That is what we need to do. Trains need to go in one direction, rather than come into the station and have to back up, thereby jamming the system. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000091\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EThe Associate Minister of Transport, Harry Duynhoven, well knows what I am talking about. I am talking about traffic flows and getting a one-way flow in the system. That is the kind of integrated approach required and that the bill absolutely fails to provide. It simply does not put in place the structural approach that brings central government together. So that is National\u2019s plan. It is clear, it is straightforward, and it is exactly what Auckland wants. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000092\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b1b5881-3b86-4894-ac77-72905f786141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225e270bc18af047128dc682851538f0d2\u0022\u003EHon Judith Tizard\u003C/span\u003E: No plans, no policy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000093\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022badeac8b65e6429bae11cd0a7d5644d3\u0022\u003EDr WAYNE MAPP\u003C/span\u003E: If the Minister with responsibility for Auckland Issues actually listened to people instead of giving them lectures, she would get a very clear message from them. Their message is that they want to have a single structure, to get on with the job\u2014at least, that is the real message they would give her\u2014and to complete the system. There was an opportunity here. The Government had an opportunity and has simply failed to take it. Those are the sorts of issues that this Parliament should be able to deal with by consensus. Not everything in Parliament should divide us. But to have that situation, the Government has to listen to the people and to the clear voice of Auckland. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000094\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EWhen Mr Peters says that the local authorities and entities give the bill qualified support, he knows full well that the real objective they have is a single entity. That question was asked of them, and in each and every case they said that that is what they wanted. Unfortunately, all we have is this half-baked solution, which they felt was better than zero. I suspect it will be proved to be no better than zero, and Parliament will be back in about 18 months\u2019 time\u2014after the election, when National is in office\u2014and we will provide the real solution. We will provide the money and a real opportunity for public-private partnerships, and we will spend the $250 million that has sat in the kitty because of the Government\u2019s mishmash of planning\u2014and that includes fixing the Resource Management Act. This bill is a lost opportunity. Only National can fix it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229df41e27-6082-4bc7-9fda-bab499cb9246\u0022 data-id=\u002284f4a746e7f54050b1e1fc501c057135\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000095\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229df41e27-6082-4bc7-9fda-bab499cb9246\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002284f4a746e7f54050b1e1fc501c057135\u0022\u003EHELEN DUNCAN (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E That was a rather sad little speech from the member. He talked a lot about what National will do when it becomes the Government. Of course, that will not happen. One has to say that the National Party had 9 long years to do something, and what did it do? It did absolutely nothing. The citizens of Auckland know what that Government did, and they are really pleased to see this Government making the changes to land transport governance in Auckland that will make it more efficient and effective. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000096\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229df41e27-6082-4bc7-9fda-bab499cb9246\u0022\u003EAlmost all the submitters who came along to the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee supported the intent of the bill. They had some suggestions for small changes, which, by and large, the committee was pleased to implement. The bill is a better bill now that it has been through the select committee process. It addresses the issue of the fragmentation of the land transport plans and the work of the territorial authorities in Auckland. It will give us an integrated and sustainable programme that will address the transport ills of Auckland, which were not addressed when that member\u2019s party was in Government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000097\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229df41e27-6082-4bc7-9fda-bab499cb9246\u0022\u003EThe people of Auckland have waited a long time for a Government that will listen to their concerns and take action, and that is what we plan to do. Aucklanders are really pleased about this, as that member well knows. We are just going to get on and do the job.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002209278070-a54a-41e9-8a27-45166301277e\u0022 data-id=\u002237427548ca38438db1c4e2f0fb6d6469\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000098\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209278070-a54a-41e9-8a27-45166301277e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002237427548ca38438db1c4e2f0fb6d6469\u0022\u003EJEANETTE FITZSIMONS (Co-Leader\u2014Green):\u003C/span\u003E We have a choice here between two different kinds of future. We can build more roads, we can build more and larger vehicles, we can smash down more houses to build the eastern highway, we can take up more and more land with roads, we can clog up those roads with more and more vehicles, and then we can face chaos as, eventually, oil production reaches its peak, prices rise astronomically, and people have no alternatives. That is the future being proposed here by the National Party. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000099\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209278070-a54a-41e9-8a27-45166301277e\u0022\u003EOr there is another future. We can spread our options, we can build those alternatives, and we can give people choices. We can make sure that, as well as roads, we have a functioning national rail system capable of carrying a lot more of our freight than it does at present, and passengers as well. We can make sure there is faster, more frequent, and much more used commuter public transport in our main cities. We can make sure we have at least occasional rural bus services between centres for those who do not have cars. We can make sure we have a balance of modes\u2014ferries, buses, trains, and cycleways. We can put in place travel demand management plans\u2014for example, carpooling to common workplaces, and safe walking options for children going to school. Then we will have a resilient society. We will have cities that are capable of surviving much higher oil prices, cities where the air is much cleaner, cities that are convivial for walking in and where people are able to meet other people, and cities that are not constantly divided by roads and pollution. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000100\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209278070-a54a-41e9-8a27-45166301277e\u0022\u003EThis bill is part of the Government\u2019s strategy of moving to that second option. It tries to apply to Auckland the principles of the New Zealand Transport Strategy and the new Land Transport Management Act: principles of integration, of sustainability, of community consultation, and of responsiveness to social needs. Auckland, of course, is the supreme test of this new approach to transport. It is sprawled over an area similar to London with a twentieth of the population, heavily dependent on cars containing one person, its motorway system congested for much of the day, with freight from New Zealand\u2019s largest port needing to cross the sprawling city before it can go anywhere else, and with weak public transport systems and a weak city centre so that radial transport services cater for only a minority of the needs. That is the challenge of Auckland, and this bill gives us an opportunity to try to meet that challenge. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000101\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209278070-a54a-41e9-8a27-45166301277e\u0022\u003EThe difficulties have been compounded for many years by political difficulties in Auckland local authorities working constructively together. With seven city and district councils and a regional authority, all having statutory roles in provision of transport services and planning, new governance and accountability structures are needed, as well as new transport arrangements. After the passing of the Land Transport Management Act, central and local government officials worked together on what is now known as the \u201CJOG report\u201D\u2014the report of the Joint Officials Group\u2014looking at how Auckland\u2019s needs could best be met. Unlike many who believe that more motorways are the only answer, the Joint Official Group, the experts in transport planning in that area, established clearly that if we want to address congestion\u2014and does not everyone want to address congestion\u2014then the priority is travel demand management and better public transport, followed by a system of road pricing. Only then should there be a reassessment of what new roads are still needed to complete the system and have not been made unnecessary by the alternatives that have already been built. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209278070-a54a-41e9-8a27-45166301277e\u0022\u003EFor decades Auckland has had expert transport reports prepared, which have stated: \u201CHere is what you should do to develop your roading system on one hand; here is what you should do to develop your public transport system on the other hand.\u201D For decades the roading options have largely been built and the public transport options have not, and we now have an extremely unbalanced situation in Auckland that needs to be addressed, that needs to be rebalanced, before we look at building more roads. The new structure for local government in Auckland depends on a complex system of accountabilities to deliver the outcomes that are anticipated by the new strategy. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000103\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209278070-a54a-41e9-8a27-45166301277e\u0022\u003EThree arms are needed to deliver those outcomes: planning, operations, and funding. At the planning level, the aim is to integrate land-use planning through the regional growth strategy and the regional plan with regional transport planning, via the regional land transport strategy. I spoke a little yesterday on how necessary it is to bring land-use planning and transport planning to be parallel with each other so that the one can support the other. All successful cities overseas are now trying to do that. Here the Auckland Regional Council is the key organisation responsible for both land-use planning and transport planning through its subcommittee, the Auckland Regional Land Transport Committee. This is why the regional planning documents must be revised to provide in an integrated way for land-use planning and transport planning consistent with the Auckland regional growth strategy, and the bill provides for that revision to be done. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000104\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209278070-a54a-41e9-8a27-45166301277e\u0022\u003EThe bill requires that the regional land transport strategy is not a list of projects to build in order of priority, as they tended to be in the past, but a genuine strategy taking an overview of the transport needs of the region, looking at access, corridors, and integration. There has been a lot of confusion about what this actually means, and some people criticised the bill as introduced for not allowing the regional land transport strategy to get its teeth into any real issues at all. That was never the intention, but I am glad that the wording has been clarified through the select committee so that it is now clear that the regional land transport strategy can and should look at modes and prioritise those. It should look at corridors and the needs on those corridors, but it should be more of a structure plan than a wish list of activities. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000105\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209278070-a54a-41e9-8a27-45166301277e\u0022\u003EThe Auckland Regional Transport Authority, on the other hand, is the operational agency. It should prepare a list of projects and prioritise them in order to meet the high-level needs identified in the strategy. It needs to integrate the planning for local roads, public transport\u2014both rail and bus\u2014cycle routes, and travel demand management, such as school travel plans. Funding comes from two sources. The capital currently held by Infrastructure Auckland passes to the new Auckland Regional Holdings, owned by the Auckland Regional Council, and that will continue to fund transport projects, particularly public transport. Other projects, such as local roads, will be funded by Transfund as they are now, but the applications will be prepared together by the Auckland Regional Transport Authority in an integrated way rather than by eight different territorial authorities. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000106\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209278070-a54a-41e9-8a27-45166301277e\u0022\u003EThis system is dependent for its smooth operation and policy consistency on strong governance by the Auckland Regional Council, which must ensure that the statement of intent for both the Auckland Regional Transport Authority and Auckland Regional Holdings reflects the principles and objectives of the Land Transport Management Act carried over into this bill. It must also ensure that the Regional Land Transport Committee reflects the objectives of the Act and has on it people with experience in those areas\u2014economic development, public health, sustainability, accessibility. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000107\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209278070-a54a-41e9-8a27-45166301277e\u0022\u003EThere is one problem that has not been solved. Perverse incentives have been written into the system of transport funding for as long as State highways have been fully funded by central government and local roads and public transport have not. Any local community hesitating between proposing a new State highway in its area and a new rail or bus service will opt for the former, because it does not have to contribute any of the money. That is not integration and it is not sustainability, and it is often not cost effective. Likewise, any council that can persuade Transit and Transfund that a particular road should be a State highway rather than a local road absolves itself from paying for it. That is not an easy problem to solve, but it should remain a priority for policy work in the ministry to find ways of ensuring that all options for meeting a particular transport need are considered and compared on a level playing field.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022 data-id=\u0022c4cd7073ba99411bb729a5bb166f5ddc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000108\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c4cd7073ba99411bb729a5bb166f5ddc\u0022\u003EDAIL JONES (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E New Zealand First is of the view that something has to be done for Auckland. We are here in Parliament and we have to deal with what is on the Table. All that is on the Table is this particular bill. New Zealand First has to look at the bill and see whether it can make the best of it and whether it will do at least something to improve the situation in Auckland. We are of the view that it does. Our spokesman, Jim Peters, has been on the select committee and has made a very valuable contribution to it. That became clear at the meeting held by the Auckland Regional Council about 2 or 3 weeks ago attended by 27 members of Parliament from Auckland. That must be a record, and it shows there is a feeling amongst Auckland members of Parliament that something has to be done. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000109\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003ENew Zealand First is willing to take up any plan that might improve situations. We have this plan from Labour. We heard a plan announced by Mr Mapp in this House\u2014I think for the first time by the National Party\u2014in the third reading today. That was an interesting plan. If National were in Government, New Zealand First would have to consider that plan and whether it would improve the situation in Auckland. That is the dilemma, and it is the role that New Zealand First as the third party in Parliament must face. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000110\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EAt the moment this plan does seem to improve the situation, and New Zealand First will therefore support it. We will support anything that will improve the situation in Auckland. We want the roads built. They should have been built yesterday and the day before yesterday. Mr Williamson talks about roads being built now. He had the chance for 9 years as a Minister of Transport to do something about it between 1990 and 1999, and, as every Aucklander knows, he did nothing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000111\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003E The evidence was before our very eyes as we drove through Auckland, time and time again, in those years. New Zealand First will look at Mr Mapp\u2019s plan. However, I ask Mr Mapp to have another think about it. His National Party plan seems to mean that everyone would be involved, including the Government. Aucklanders want Auckland to resolve Auckland\u2019s problems. They do not want a Wellington solution to Auckland\u2019s problems. Auckland has had that for many years now. I suggest Mr Mapp and the National Party think about that. They would have difficulty selling that plan to Auckland, because it is a Wellington plan, not an Auckland plan. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000112\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EThe advantage of this legislation is that it is an Auckland solution worked out by Aucklanders through the Auckland Regional Council and the Auckland Regional Transport Authority. As an Auckland member of Parliament, that appeals to me. I put it to the National Party that I do not want some fancy consultants in Wellington or around the world coming up with yet another plan or fancy idea to resolve Auckland\u2019s problems. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000113\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EI say to the House, and especially to the National Party and the ACT party, that we have to do something for Auckland. Auckland members of Parliament should be working together to try to improve the situation in Auckland, and not do what was done while Mr Mapp was putting up his proposal. He had an idea, but his speech was chipped in on and interjected on, time and time again, by Labour members. Of course, when the Labour Party put up its proposal Mr Williamson constantly nagged and interjected on Labour Party members about that proposal. There should be wide-ranging consensus and agreement amongst members that some proposal must be accepted, rather than constant bagging by the National Party against the Labour Party, and the Labour Party against the National Party. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000114\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003ENew Zealand First does not want to be part of that. We want to make sure something positive is done for Auckland. We will support any plan that has a possibility of working for Auckland and, generally speaking, in other areas, for New Zealand\u2019s future. New Zealand First wants to see an integrated proposal by rail, road, and water. We have a wonderful ferry opportunity in Auckland, as well. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000115\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EAs a member of Parliament who has represented West Auckland in the past, and who still takes a very strong interest in the Helensville electorate, I am delighted that the double rail network is being established in Auckland. The Auckland Regional Council, along with the Government, I understand, is involved with that, and they are both to be congratulated on it. Congratulations should be given where they are due. I am disappointed that the National Party fails to do that, at every opportunity. The double lines are going in. I want to see that double line going up to Helensville. I have not heard anything from the National Party member for Helensville, who has had ample opportunity to speak in this debate to implore the Government and the Auckland Regional Council to make sure that the double link goes up to Helensville. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000116\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EI am a New Zealand First member who has represented Helensville, I was the first member of Parliament to represent the electorate, I have lived in the electorate, and I want to see the double line going up to Helensville. I am disappointed that I am getting no support from the National Party in that respect. I take a good interest in Helensville and I am there regularly. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000117\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EAuckland bodies need to get together and they need to speak as one. Auckland members of Parliament need to speak as one. We do not want what Mr Williamson has suggested today, perhaps in a humorous vein, which is yet another survey of Aucklanders as to what Auckland wants. I know that what Auckland wants, and what New Zealand wants, is a New Zealand First policy on the roading situation. We want all the money gathered from road taxes to be spent on the roads. That is our policy. When New Zealand First was part of the coalition Government, that is what it was starting to achieve. We started to increase the allocation especially for all roading taxes to be spent on roads. After the split-up, the National Party got back into the third year of the term and reversed that policy. If National had maintained our policy, it would have been possible to do more roading in Auckland, and generally. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000118\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003E\\What appears to have happened also between 1990 and 1999 is that more roading money was spent out of Auckland than in Auckland. Clearly, the demand was in Auckland, but unfortunately, for political pot-boiling purposes, that money was spent outside that area. New Zealand First, and I think all New Zealand now, recognises that something has to be done for Auckland, and that is why this bill is before this House. But even though this legislation is meant to support Auckland, the National Party and the ACT party are opposing it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000119\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EWe are seeing the developments currently, and New Zealand First commends and supports them. For example, in the North Shore area, I was invited to a North Shore City Council meeting. I do not seem to have been invited again, but I look forward to attending another meeting again. I support the Esmonde Road interchange. I support the development of the Constellation Drive bus depot and the bus depot at Albany at Oteha Valley Road, and I am doing all I can to make sure that happens. After the North Shore City Council meeting where the North Shore City Council complained that the Auckland Regional Council was not doing anything about it, I went to an Auckland Regional Council meeting, and would members believe, the Auckland Regional Council suggested that perhaps the North Shore City Council could be doing a bit more. That is typical local body politics. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000120\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EFortunately, all that is behind us now, because funds have been made available for the Esmonde Road interchange, and we will be seeing those developments. I have got back to Parliament in only this last session, 2002. However, I am seeing roading developments taking place. I have to recognise that that is the case, and I commend the North Shore City Council for that happening. I commend the North Shore City Council for developments in that area. I see that the second upper-harbour bridge is being built. That is great news. I have not heard one National Party member, even the member whose electorate it is, Mr Key, mention the second upper-harbour bridge. That is about the only new work that is being done, because all the resource consents have been finalised, and they are always the problem. I commend that development. I understand that the Mount Roskill development has now been approved. We have read all this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000121\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fe465d49c2a44907bf2160972727a25f\u0022\u003EPhil Heatley\u003C/span\u003E: This is a socialist speech.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000122\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229b88fb923a2e4f0c9dc536c34a654eef\u0022\u003EDAIL JONES\u003C/span\u003E: The member for King Country and the member for Whangarei may not like to see Auckland being dealt with. Those National Party members want to attack the new development at Mount Roskill. They can, and of course, Mr Connell can, too. National Party rural members do not want the money being spent in Auckland. That is what it boils down to, does it not? Otherwise, they would be commending this speech and the developers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000123\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221286a53b59004a30bc5a6932b1a1e693\u0022\u003EBrian Connell\u003C/span\u003E: We just don\u2019t want to pay for it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000124\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002286ea6ccbb68741148236f77570a15e3c\u0022\u003EDAIL JONES\u003C/span\u003E: Those members have told the House that if National gets back into office it will not support development in Auckland. I stand in this House and I hear those rural members say that they will go back to their old ways. Aucklanders, and people coming to Auckland from Whangarei, do not want to have to go through Auckland to go south. They want to go around Auckland. People who come from Whangarei\u2014Mr Carter\u2019s electorate\u2014do not want to come into Auckland. They are forced to come into Auckland now, because in the old days Auckland City people wanted money from the business. I want to see the Mount Roskill interchange and development proceed. People from Whangarei and Hamilton, or vice versa, can avoid Auckland. When I travel to Auckland I want to avoid Auckland. When I say \u201Ctravel to Auckland\u201D I mean that if I want to go to Howick, I do not want to have to go through Auckland. [Interruption] I hate going into Auckland. That is right. I do not like to go to Auckland. I avoid it. I shop at the North Shore, Lynnmall, and any other place in Auckland. I do not like going into Auckland. That is why I want to see this legislation get under way. I want to avoid travelling into Auckland. I want to go south without all those problems on the interchange and get to the airport without the interchange.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000125\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002235931900684e41f58766d8d3a9c158d9\u0022\u003EBrian Connell\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I seek the leave of the House for that Government member to have an extension to his speech.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000126\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bb6c88cd35e84b7da70d6cfa58b784d3\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: That member is not a member of the Government. The member should read his Hansard sometime.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022620ffbb033d5444980ed6557ded739cd\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the Local Government (Auckland) Amendment Bill be now read a third time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 83\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 36\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill read a third time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000127\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002249283a9ade0e44fdb15bbe1c16bb8b06\u0022\u003EMeat Board Restructuring Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000128\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022392948ad56154699a1f39511d9fd8cd5\u0022\u003ESecond Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222e7121af-c8f1-4d5c-b1f5-5646e4d9ca70\u0022 data-id=\u00223f751a5335744d17af5de5ae6a28baac\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000129\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222e7121af-c8f1-4d5c-b1f5-5646e4d9ca70\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223f751a5335744d17af5de5ae6a28baac\u0022\u003EHon JIM SUTTON (Minister of Agriculture):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the Meat Board Restructuring Bill be now read a second time. The bill was introduced on 2 December 2003, it had its first reading on 17 February 2004, and has been considered by the Primary Production Committee. The bill provides for the Meat Board to focus in future on its critical meat export quota management role. The bill removes the current board\u2019s levying powers. Industry-good activities in the meat industry can now be undertaken by a non-statutory industry organisation funded under the Commodity Levies Act. The meat and wool industries have formed a new joint organisation for this purpose. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000130\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222e7121af-c8f1-4d5c-b1f5-5646e4d9ca70\u0022\u003EThe bill has new provisions governing the management of the Meat Board\u2019s reserve funds. The board currently holds around $100 million in farmer reserves. The bill provides for the new board to manage the board\u2019s reserves and other assets in the interests of livestock farmers, including managing the reserves for action in relation to any major industry crisis, preserving the integrity of the quota management systems, and funding specific industry-good activities. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000131\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222e7121af-c8f1-4d5c-b1f5-5646e4d9ca70\u0022\u003ESome submissions to the committee opposed the proposal to maintain reserves to preserve the integrity of quota management systems, on the grounds that the reserves could become a potential litigation target, and that quota holders, as the direct beneficiaries of quota, should meet such costs. I support the committee\u2019s recommendation to insert a clear definition of reserves in the bill, and its recommendations for clarification of the board\u2019s powers to recover the costs of quota management and to replenish any reserves used to meet quota management costs. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000132\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222e7121af-c8f1-4d5c-b1f5-5646e4d9ca70\u0022\u003EThe bill provides for two of the 10 or 11 directors of the Meat Board to be appointed by the Minister. Some submissions to the committee considered a board of 10 to 11 directors to be excessive, and some opposed having two ministerial appointees to the board. The committee has not recommended any change to this requirement. It agreed with the original intent that having two ministerial appointees on the board will help to ensure that the board has around its board table directors with in-depth expertise in the international meat trade, quota management, and international trade relations, and would ensure that the wider national interest was considered when quota management decisions are being made. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000133\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222e7121af-c8f1-4d5c-b1f5-5646e4d9ca70\u0022\u003EAs the remaining directors will come from the new meat and wool industry-good organisation, I consider that as directors of that organisation, the two ministerial appointees on the Meat Board are necessary to ensure that proper attention is given to its key function of quota management. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000134\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222e7121af-c8f1-4d5c-b1f5-5646e4d9ca70\u0022\u003EThe size of the board reflects the industry\u2019s desire for most, or all, of the industry-good organisation directors to also be directors of the Meat Board. The bill retains and updates the Meat Board\u2019s export quota management functions. It provides that the Crown owns the rights to secure the economic benefits deriving from quota markets, and that the meat industry is the recipient of the economic benefits deriving from quota markets. I support the committee\u2019s recommendation that it be made clearer in the bill that the economic benefits deriving from quota markets are assigned for the benefit of the meat industry. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000135\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222e7121af-c8f1-4d5c-b1f5-5646e4d9ca70\u0022\u003EThe Meat Board\u2019s quota management functions, including any costs associated with litigation arising out of events postdating the commencement of this Act, will be funded on a cost-recovery basis by export quota holders and applicants for quota. I agree with the committee\u2019s recommendation to clarify that this provision does not authorise the board to collect fees relating to costs arising from events that took place prior to the commencement of this Act, except for costs that could have been recovered under the Meat Board Act. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000136\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222e7121af-c8f1-4d5c-b1f5-5646e4d9ca70\u0022\u003EThe bill continues to require a part of meat export quotas to be available for allocation to new entrants as provided for in the Meat Board Act. The new entrants provisions make it easier for new entrants to get access to quota and are intended to encourage innovation in the industry. I accept the committee\u2019s recommendation that all applicants for a quota allocation under the new entrant provision, even if unsuccessful, should be able to be charged application fees. Every application would impose some processing costs on the board. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000137\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222e7121af-c8f1-4d5c-b1f5-5646e4d9ca70\u0022\u003EThe bill provides for the Crown to audit aspects of the board\u2019s quota management systems. These audits will assess the nature of the board\u2019s compliance enforcement systems to provide a high level of assurance that such systems comply with New Zealand\u2019s international obligations relating to meat export quota management. The committee has recommended amendments to these quota compliance audit provisions in the bill in order to distinguish more clearly between scheduled and unscheduled audits. I support the committee\u2019s recommendations. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000138\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222e7121af-c8f1-4d5c-b1f5-5646e4d9ca70\u0022\u003EThis bill represents an important step in the ongoing evolution of the New Zealand meat industry. I would like to thank the members of the Primary Production Committee for their consideration of the bill and for their report tabled on 27 May 2004. I commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022 data-id=\u0022dda281aba6f749dbbd99fb6746a2422b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000139\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022dda281aba6f749dbbd99fb6746a2422b\u0022\u003ESHANE ARDERN (National\u2014Taranaki - King Country):\u003C/span\u003E It is with great pleasure that I rise to speak in favour of the proposed bill. When we listened to the Minister give his speech\u2014this is the Minister, of course, who in Opposition campaigned vigorously for years against this kind of proposal\u2014we can understand what happens to a person when he has to carry 19 socialists on his back as the only Minister carrying the flag for primary producers in New Zealand. The National Party supports agriculture 110 percent\u2014not the 51 percent, or sometimes 49.5 percent, that that Minister can scratch up occasionally. We are 110 percent behind the agricultural industries of this country. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000140\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003EThis bill is a very good move forward for a number of reasons. One is that it identifies the synergies that exist between both the former Wool Board and Meat New Zealand. Over 80.3 percent of farmers on stock numbers voted in favour of this move, so it is an industry-driven move, supported, reluctantly, by a tired Minister who had to work and break arms in his own Cabinet to get it through. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003ELet me just give members an example of some of the things that the very well chaired, National-led select committee had to alter in this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000142\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002280261b46022c4f068f62b0f597a60683\u0022\u003EBrian Connell\u003C/span\u003E: Who was the chairperson?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000143\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022755e5e06194646b481e9be1f68b4344c\u0022\u003ESHANE ARDERN\u003C/span\u003E: The Hon David Carter, the agriculture spokesperson, chaired the select committee, and chaired it very well. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000144\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003EFirstly, an allocation for both women and M\u0101ori was going to be inserted into board management. I recognise that women play a leading role in this industry, and I also recognise that M\u0101ori are quite a large minority in the meat and wool industries of New Zealand, but to suggest that they should be put on the board just by right because of some politically correct philosophy just shows us where this Government would take us if it were given a chance. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000145\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003EThe second major issue that was discussed at length in the select committee\u2014even though I am not a member of the committee, I have read the submissions\u2014was quota management, which is the essential part of this legislation. Here lies the major philosophical difference between that side of the House\u2014that Labour minority Government\u2014and those on this side of the House, who understand the farming industry. I acknowledge the officials here. I recognise some of them from days gone by when I was on that committee, and acknowledge the fine work that they must have done in cajoling this Government into not going down the track it would have gone down\u2014that is, quota ownership and quota management. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000146\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003EIt is true that quota is negotiated Minister-to-Minister, Government-to-Government, and State-to-State internationally at the direction of the industries generally, and as a result of the industries identifying a potential market. That is how it works. But here is where National differs from Labour. Labour believes that once the Minister has negotiated the quota, it owns it. The socialists will nationalise it, it is theirs, and they should have benefits from that over and above what they are entitled to. That is where National differs. National believes strongly that the industry the Government negotiated on behalf of owns the quota. For that reason, and because of the very good work of the Primary Production Committee, the following words have been inserted in clause 22, in Part 3: \u201CThe Crown owns the rights to secure the economic benefits deriving from quota markets, and those benefits are assigned for the benefit of the meat industry \u2026\u201D. It is not for the benefit of the socialist Government\u2019s tax or for the socialist Government to get its sticky fingers into. It is for the benefit of the industry. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000147\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003EI say to those members on the select committee, who are supported by the very good officials: \u201CWell done for getting that put in!\u201D It was clear to me, and it would be clear to anybody who took more than 5 minutes to read the bill, where the socialists were heading with this legislation. They were going to nationalise the quotas of the meat and wool industries, and there would be an opening for them to do that. Once we changed the legal structure of the board for which those quotas were negotiated, we would open up an opportunity for people to say: \u201CHey, you have changed the deal, so all bets are off and we\u2019re going to change the structure of this quota.\u201D The socialists would love that. We can just see it. Look at them, baying over there! They could get their sticky fingers into this. They think it would be a great thing if they were able to take on that quota. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000148\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003EThe industry-good activities, which the Minister touched on in his speech, are also hugely important. Here is the interesting point, which this Government has not understood and never will understand. The socialists are busy out there, looking for the new Nokia, or some other magical star that will be coming over the horizon. What they do not understand is that we already have it in New Zealand; it is already here. It is called our primary industries. The growth rates in the economy are marginally successful at about 3 percent, compared with about 2.7 percent OECD average over the last 5 or 6 years. Where have they come from? Primary industry growth rates over the last 10 years have been about 4.5 percent, so not only does the agricultural sector underpin the New Zealand economy, it is the one that is leading the New Zealand economy. It is the Nokia of New Zealand. So forget about looking for that magical star! We already have it\u2014it is called our agricultural sector, and we should recognise and understand it. Did we see anything in the Budget about it? Not on your Nelly! We saw a $7 billion surplus on the back of this industry, but did we see any recognition of it? Never have we seen any recognition, and never will we see any recognition of this industry from that lot. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000149\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003EAny farmers out there who are listening\u2014led by the very capable chairman of the New Zealand Meat Board, Jeff Grant, who knows a bit about how things happen in this House\u2014will know that what I am saying is true. They are lining up in droves against this Government, and they will continue to do so. This combined industry earned $6 billion in export earnings for this country last year. Name an industry on the horizon in the Jim Anderton photo opportunity, travel around the country, regional development programme\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000150\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228d49aec81745429aa608cd12114f95f1\u0022\u003EJohn Carter\u003C/span\u003E: Or in Auckland.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000151\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002250313be703a8428a8333ca72e0b0cafb\u0022\u003ESHANE ARDERN\u003C/span\u003E: Or in Auckland. This is about five times the size of the export earnings from Auckland, but is there any recognition of it? Not on your Nelly! We will never see that, not from this Government. Not on a cold day in hell would we see that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000152\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003EOn 30 October 2003 the Minister said: \u201CYes, we will accept the direction that this industry is wanting to go in, and we will accept, under the Commodity Levies Act of 1990, that a levy could and should be charged for industry good.\u201D I come back to that point in my closing notes. I record in this House today that the future of this country will be driven on the back of value-added products coming out of primary industry, such as nutraceuticals, pharmaceuticals, the high-tech fibres that will come out of the wool industry, and products that come out of wool, like lanolin, that we have never even heard of in terms of what they can be used for. This will come as a result of a robust science and research and development programme, which this industry will invest in as it goes forward. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000153\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003EOf course, without some kind of levy mechanism, not only to negotiate the quota access and maintain it, but also for investment in research and development, those things would not be possible. I say to the Minister: \u201CGood on you for allowing that to happen!\u201D, because without it the industry will not survive in the future.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022 data-id=\u0022c66a7b74584347828dcf623036930759\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000154\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c66a7b74584347828dcf623036930759\u0022\u003ECLAYTON COSGROVE (Labour\u2014Waimakariri):\u003C/span\u003E I rise as a member of the Primary Production Committee to support the Meat Board Restructuring Bill. I say, in a charitable way, that that was not a bad speech from the Opposition member. I am sure that Mr Woolerton, who is also a member of the Primary Production Committee, would back me in saying that after the last election we had hoped that Shane Ardern would end up chairing that committee. A bill like this is close to that member\u2019s heart. He is a real farmer\u2014one of the few left in the National Party.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000155\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002287b43014dd1f402788d3325a50113424\u0022\u003EDarren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: Phil Heatley did the numbers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000156\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cfaec782ef8a42c2a8e866333e0055f5\u0022\u003ECLAYTON COSGROVE\u003C/span\u003E: With all his fingers and toes, Phil Heatley did the numbers. Unlike the present chairman, who is a Colombo Street farmer out of Christchurch, we know that Shane Ardern is a real farmer and a good bloke. He has a lot of support around the place as a bloke\u2014a real farmer. He is not even on the committee, but has been sent down to the House for this second reading to put the boot into the bill, because David Carter refuses to take a call. I rise to support this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000157\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221772e9f5-5379-4bfe-9d9b-eaffb4c61b02\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c030c312c5fe402d8483fc9e9aaa249e\u0022\u003EHon Harry Duynhoven\u003C/span\u003E: He wasn\u2019t even on the committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000158\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e90a7b203c584bc7b49622b5aaf8f659\u0022\u003ECLAYTON COSGROVE\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, he is not even on the committee. A good bloke like Mr Ardern, a good, substantial farmer in our community, is not even on the committee. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000159\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003EI rise to support this bill. This bill follows what occurred in the wool industry and the dairy industry. The farming communities, the growers, held a referendum and came to the Government. This bill meets our criterion, which is that if there is substantial, overwhelming grower support for the measure, then we will move to deregulate. That is unlike the previous Government, which had one crack at deregulation with the fruit legislation. Fruitgrowers wanted a certain scheme of arrangement, and the then Minister, Mr Luxton, corporatised the fruit industry and blew it apart, and now the industry has collapsed around our feet, as we have seen in the last couple of years. This bill does what the industry itself wants. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000160\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003EThe other interesting thing about this bill is that it allows the Meat Board to retain its reserves of around $100 million for the purposes of assisting the industry. I think that is quite substantial, and is a very good safeguard. But of course we know\u2014and I will refer to a quote from the chairman of the Primary Production Committee, Mr David Carter, who will not take a call but stuck poor old Shane Ardern out on a pole today. David Carter said that if he had his way, those hundred-million-dollar reserves would be gone\u2014they would be sold. He stated, in the Rural News of 8 June 2004:\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000161\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003E \u201CWe indicated before the last election that we would sell, for instance, Landcorp if we got into power, and I don\u2019t see that changing.\u201D It means that a National Government would sell assets. It would do away with the Meat Board\u2014flog the lot. As with the apple industry, the poor old grower, the hard-working grower with the intellectual property and all those assets, would be left out in the cold. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000162\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003EI pity Shane Ardern, in a lot of ways. I reckon, from the speech he made, that he knows that the Primary Production Committee is the most depoliticised committee in this Parliament. Poor old Shane Ardern has been stuck out on a pole this morning, on his own. He is the only real farmer on the Opposition side of the House. He was told to ramp up the debate, and politicise it. What a shame that was. I think Shane Ardern should have said to the chairman of that committee there was no way he would do that, and the chairman should do his own dirty work. But the chairman has refused to come to the House to take a call. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000163\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003EAs I said, this bill will assist the industry. It will give some synergies and some cost efficiencies. It has the support of growers, as demonstrated by a substantial referendum in August last year. But let me also point this out: the committee made a unanimous report on the bill. Again, I say this is not a political issue. I think that even our ACT colleague, our New Zealand First colleague, and our other colleagues on the committee support this legislation as a good way to go forward for the meat industry. I just say to the Opposition members that they should look at their own legacy from the time they were in Government, in terms of what they did in the agricultural sector. The only crack those members had at a restructuring was in the fruit industry. Shane Ardern will not stand and agree with me now, but I know even he will agree with me in the lobbies that National blew that industry apart. The growers came to us on wool and on dairying, and we have ticked those requests off. Now they have come to us on meat, and we can tick that one off. We have done what the industry wanted, in putting a substantial bill and a substantial entity together. More especially, we are ensuring that the $100 million of reserves are kept out of the hands of the Opposition members and out of the hands of this Parliament, to ensure that the industry is protected and the money is used to benefit it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000164\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003EI tell the Opposition members to give it all a break, to support the growers and the industry, and not to politicise this legislation, because all that that will do is to send the wrong message to the industry. The industry knows that we have backed it. The industry knows the real speech that Shane Ardern really wanted to make this morning but was not allowed to, because Mr Heatley over there on the Opposition benches put the axe into him, so that he could not chair the Primary Production Committee. I thank Mr Ardern for the speech that he could not make. The speech that he did not make was a very good speech, and I agree with the speech that he could not make. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000165\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003ELet us just get on with it. This is a good bill. It is non-partisan, it supports the industry, and it is good for this country.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022 data-id=\u0022bb7f2348646d4712b14500d6d0bd9f03\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000166\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bb7f2348646d4712b14500d6d0bd9f03\u0022\u003ER DOUG WOOLERTON (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E New Zealand First, likewise, supports this bill, and as previous speakers have said it has cross-party support\u2014as many things do in agriculture, because we have a habit of being very practical people\u2014and the solutions are sensible ones. Mr Speaker, you would know, as I know\u2014and I apologise for bringing you into the debate, but I do so purposely\u2014that we are watchers of the political scene. That is as far as you go, Mr Speaker. But it is one of the beautiful ironies of politics, and watching from the centre of the political spectrum it is interesting to see, that there is something that is a fact in New Zealand. Even in my earlier days of farming, I recognised that the National Party, the Tories, or the parties of the right\u2014call them what one will\u2014will talk about agriculture, and say how important it is and that it needs to be kept strong in order to keep the country strong. Thereafter, National biffs the agricultural sector around, kicks it in the guts, and uses it mercilessly. Unfortunately for National, along came a Labour-led Government in due course, and the farmers prospered. Now that is a delicious irony, because the farmers do not respect that fact and, by and large, do not give Labour credit for that. National, of course, answers by saying that it set the scene and Labour has reaped the reward. Well, I wish I had somebody to set the scene, so I could reap the reward. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000167\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003ENew Zealand First supports the passage of this bill. We have it as a matter of policy that if an industry conducts a vote and 75 percent of the participants in that industry agree to change, we will accept and support that change. That is what has happened in this industry, so we very definitely support it, and support it enthusiastically. It is true that the restructuring of the farming sector, which has led to Meat and Wool New Zealand Limited and to the retention of the board that we are discussing now, was started by National. It will have escaped no one\u2019s notice to see that a very good business person, or, in fact, two very good business people who were previously members of this House, have gone out and taken full advantage\u2014and good luck to them\u2014of the restructuring of the Dairy Board by starting up their own dairy factory, something that previously they could not do. I do not criticise that, at all. But I think it is worthy of note that they were able to do that, and that they have done so because of the restructuring they initiated. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000168\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003EIt is also worth noting that some of the restructuring in the early days, as Mr Cosgrove has rightly said, and as Mr Shane Ardern will admit privately when we are talking as farmers over the fence or somewhere else, was less than successful, shall we say, initially. It has come right in the case of the fruit industry, but that industry is largely privatised. Interestingly enough, the kiwifruit industry, which was at the forefront of the need for change, so it was said, did not restructure along the private model but on the cooperative model. The dairy restructuring retained to a large degree the cooperative model. Both those industries are working well. The cooperative model was not followed in the fruit industry, where the restructuring did not work as well as in the kiwifruit and dairy industries. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003ENew Zealand First sees no need for a period of destabilisation following change, and sees no need for farmers to be affected detrimentally. New Zealand First sees no need at all for there to be disruption in an industry when change takes place. In this case there is to be none. There are significant advantages in what has happened, and New Zealand First enthusiastically supports the retention of a board to specifically make sure that our quotas, which give us access into foreign countries, are looked after, nurtured, and monitored. Those quotas are our access into very, very, lucrative markets, and it would be nice if we could have all our products go through them, but that is not to be. The quotas are important. They add the icing on the cake for this very important industry, an industry that is at the present time enjoying quite substantial benefits. I made a small note that Mr Shane Ardern did not mention that the returns for meat at the present time are at, or very near, record levels. I do not blame Mr Ardern for failing to mention that. Mr Ardern was around when Rob Muldoon was around, and Rob Muldoon had a saying, which was: \u201CIf you can\u2019t kick \u2018em, don\u2019t hug \u2018em.\u201D So Shane Ardern would not mention the fact that\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000170\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002223c89f17218f43b08442c9ff841935e9\u0022\u003EPhil Heatley\u003C/span\u003E: He went to school with Rob Muldoon!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000171\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b0804636f883438c9621b7fbd3669fcb\u0022\u003ER DOUG WOOLERTON\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, but Rob Muldoon is somewhere far colder than this House, and he is somewhere where I am not yet, and where I am not likely to be for a number of years. God bless his soul. But it is true that I was wandering amongst the dinosaurs at one time. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000172\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003ENew Zealand First is pleased to see the retention of this board, which will nurture the quotas that are so important to New Zealand\u2019s growth. The one thing that Mr Ardern did point out quite correctly was that all the efforts in this country to take us down a path\u2014through some knowledge wave conventions or conferences\u2014leading to some new technology roads have added small amounts to our economy, and small amounts to our exports. But it is our agricultural exports, our fishing exports, and our land-based exports that are still the guts of this economy. While that may not be recognised in some large cities around the country, it is recognised by anybody who knows anything at all about the New Zealand economy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000173\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003E I cannot sit down without saying that all these industries rely on something that is unquestionably under the control of the Minister of Finance\u2014in many cases, people say it is not, but in New Zealand First we believe it is\u2014and that is a low exchange rate for the dollar relative to the currency of our trading partners. New Zealand First believes that the Government should remain active in that area. We encourage, and have supported, Dr Cullen when he has made noises to bring the dollar down in order to help our farmers, and I cannot sit down without saying that that is a huge part of this industry. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000174\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003EI would like to lend my voice to that of Clayton Cosgrove in urging the National Party\u2014in fact, begging the National Party, and saying we will make every endeavour to help the National Party\u2014to promote Shane Ardern, not only to the front bench but to the chairmanship of the Primary Production Committee. That is not to take anything away from David Carter\u2014I will not be unkind\u2014because we hope he exists. My leader has an interest in David Carter\u2019s welfare at this point in time, so we want him to continue on. But in New Zealand First we would like to see Shane Ardern promoted and brought into the chairmanship of the select committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022 data-id=\u00222784a71631294563b3b45e31a3a08bd4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000175\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222784a71631294563b3b45e31a3a08bd4\u0022\u003EGERRARD ECKHOFF (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E It is with real pride that I stand in the House, as a genuine farmer\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000176\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002260759dc59d544adc88436d4c3abd8321\u0022\u003ER Doug Woolerton\u003C/span\u003E: Genuine?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000177\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ff71cbc819b54d6a8c100fe818c8f692\u0022\u003EGERRARD ECKHOFF\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, a very genuine one. I think I have removed the manure from under my fingernails! In fact, standing here makes me reflect that I should have brought my Driza-Bone hat to wear. I note that Mr Nandor Tanczos from the Green Party wears his tea cosy in the House, so I cannot see why a genuine farmer cannot do something of a similar nature. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000178\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285712e72-b25f-4850-b4d9-90035064fde3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002242e92a9425874105a1852b04e0f2783e\u0022\u003ENandor Tanczos\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. It is actually a tam, not a tea cosy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000179\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226b0e10fe3c45404a8a55b9a965661c5e\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: I accept what the member says. I point out to Mr Eckhoff that his comment was a personal reflection on the member, under Standing Order 116. He will stand and withdraw. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000180\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022468e180303c54b85a885cd571d5517f3\u0022\u003EGERRARD ECKHOFF\u003C/span\u003E: I am happy to stand and withdraw. I meant no disrespect to the member. It was just an observation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000181\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c9a0bca9d4c54445ac89bdf5209f25b7\u0022\u003EJohn Carter\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Although you have every right to direct, the member himself did not take offence. He made a correction. He had the right to take offence, and ask for a withdrawal, which he did not do. It seems quite odd that the member on his feet should now be directed to withdraw\u2014which he has done\u2014given that the member himself made a correction but did not seem to take offence. It is odd that you intervened. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000182\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285712e72-b25f-4850-b4d9-90035064fde3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e46126e2cba84b018f8582bb06a511b1\u0022\u003ENandor Tanczos\u003C/span\u003E: The honourable member makes a good point, but on reflection it is offensive to liken my head to a teapot, in which case I think a withdrawal is in order. [Interruption] \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000183\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ff385bd02aa84a77a89cad41c2d4e023\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: All right, we have had our fun. I thank all honourable members very much for their contributions, but I do require a withdrawal and apology.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000184\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222c3cbdcfc8154ec29d8aba3efc2e9a7d\u0022\u003EGERRARD ECKHOFF\u003C/span\u003E: I withdraw and apologise. As I mentioned earlier, it is a matter of considerable pride for me to stand and speak on a matter that does concern the wider farming industry. I have to say that the meat industry, despite the very sound rhetoric I have heard so far, is under real threat. One has only to look at the newspapers daily to understand the threat to the industry from the environmental lobby and the cost structures that local government and central government impose on the industry on a regular basis. So there is real concern about the future.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000185\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003EBut when we compare the past with where we are today, we have to say the industry can take great pride in its achievements. I doubt very much whether any other industry in this country has achieved as much as the meat industry has achieved over the last one and a half decades. When we look at the high-tech industry, and at items such as computers, we see there has been a huge fall in those commodity prices. Yet when we look at the commodity price for lamb\u2014a product much maligned for years\u2014we see that it continues on a steady march upwards. The commodity price for lamb has risen dramatically over the last 20 years, and that hugely reflects the ability of the industry, and the fact that it is almost entirely deregulated. It is no longer controlled by Government. We no longer see Budgets where the Minister of Finance stands and announces supplementary minimum prices, or some other kind of incentive to assist the industry. The industry actually works well without Government input. That is something that all other industries and all aspects of our social life could well reflect on. I pick up on a point made earlier by other speakers that is worth reflecting on, and that is that in the past many people regarded the meat and wool industries as sunset industries. I think maybe Jenny Shipley made some reference to that in the past. Nothing could be further from the truth in terms of where our meat industry has been and where it is heading.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000186\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003ESome concerns were expressed by members of the Primary Production Committee, and I am delighted the influence of the centre-right, shall we say\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000187\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f1a84138ac0d44e0830dcdefe59f2ada\u0022\u003ER Doug Woolerton\u003C/span\u003E: Centre-right?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000188\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002222dff926bae8468dab00152b550f6d64\u0022\u003EGERRARD ECKHOFF\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Woolerton takes a jump back in horror at being regarded as part of the centre-right. But the influence of the committee members was quite significant in a number of aspects. The biggest issue for me personally is the quota, which has been alluded to by other speakers. I make the point that the quota is regarded as terribly important, but I am one who does not believe that the quota is owned, or should be controlled, by the Government. As Mr Ardern pointed out, a Government negotiates these things. A former Government negotiated the Closer Economic Relations agreement, for example; does that mean the Government should have some form of influence over somebody\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000189\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022293162c0aeb44a2abba6fc34028afc11\u0022\u003EShane Ardern\u003C/span\u003E: It does on some.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000190\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022702402a3f71e45d8a59189f78b253dce\u0022\u003EGERRARD ECKHOFF\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the member for that point. Should the Government have some sort of influence over the way in which Trade and Enterprise works, and should it have representatives on that board to get some Government point of view across to the industry? I do not think anybody would suggest that is appropriate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000191\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003EAs we go through the Committee stage, it is important to recognise that the majority of farmers did not vote. When the ballot was put before them as to whether the meat and wool industries should be amalgamated and called some sort of pastoral board, the majority did not vote. Of those who did vote, I think 83 percent voted in favour. I repeat that the majority of farmers in this country did not vote for this bill or for the restructuring of the industry. I suggest to members that that is something we\u2014and, indeed, members of the Meat Board\u2014should reflect on. The fact is the majority of farmers in this country do not see boards, or associations, or anything of that nature as relevant to their profession any more. They work alongside their meat company, or their dairy company, or their wool industry representatives. They do not see the relevance of a meat board or a wool board, to a very large degree. So I make that point, which I think is very important, and one that Mr Grant and the Meat Board would do well to reflect on. It is worth noting that a mere handful of farmers actually bothered to turn up at the first annual meeting of Meat and Wool New Zealand\u2014a handful! That, again, reflects the fact that the industry is totally deregulated, and the relevance of a board is brought into question by a lot of industry members.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000192\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003EBut there is no doubt that there is a need to ensure that the quota is fairly and reasonably administered. We have just gone through a major exercise in this Chamber called a scampi inquiry into the allocation of quota. Those in the Labour Government might do well to listen for a moment or two. There is also a case before the Privy Council at this very time on the issue of meat quota, because there are those within the industry who say it was not fairly allocated. I note that a member of the Labour Government agrees with me on the point that an allocation committee should not only be independent but should be seen to be independent. I have grave concerns that there are members of the Meat Industry Association who, although they do not sit on the allocation committee, sit on the full board, which actually talks and discusses these things. I think allocation of quota is probably one of the single most important aspects of this bill. The Government says it is necessary to have two members appointed by the Government to sit on this board. Well, I do not, and I do not believe that National\u2014and possibly New Zealand First\u2014feels that way. But I am not prepared to die in a ditch on this issue. We will see how it will go.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e1b2cb0d8b1d4932bc491b7f80b51895\u0022\u003EBrian Connell\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, why not?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000194\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d920d2ec61294765aed60ab102fad74f\u0022\u003EGERRARD ECKHOFF\u003C/span\u003E: Well, if I die in a ditch it will be alongside a couple of my National Party colleagues as well, no doubt. I am not sure that it is totally necessary, but we have got a couple of representatives, and I hope the Minister will ensure that those appointed have the necessary commercial expertise to assist. I hope he does not put the old Blue Kennedy types on the board, just because the Government can appoint those sorts of people.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000195\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003EAs I said earlier, this industry has an extremely bright future, but its future will be fully exploited only if Government and controls are kept right out of its way into the future.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022 data-id=\u0022b3059822a0744d668cbf22cc75363d05\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000196\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b3059822a0744d668cbf22cc75363d05\u0022\u003ELARRY BALDOCK (United Future):\u003C/span\u003E I rise on behalf of United Future to speak on this second reading of the Meat Board Restructuring Bill. I cannot stand with the same pride that the member before me, a real farmer, stood with, but I do own more cows than anybody else in our caucus. Owning five cows probably does not qualify me as a genuine farmer, but it has given me some appreciation for those who work hard in the primary industry around our country. Taking care of 5 acres is enough for me, and it has given me an appreciation of the hard work and good management required in order to produce the maximum we can from our land in this country.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000197\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003EI share in the comments that have been made by other speakers that we as a nation are very much dependent upon our primary industry. It is always encouraging to see it do better each year as commodity prices continue to rise. It is always a worry when we hear there is a possibility that farmers may be in for a glum time, because we know that will pass on through the rural communities to affect so many other people in our nation. It has been heartening this year to hear that, rather than the predicted doom and gloom, there has been a marvellous upturn in the incomes of farmers in terms of projected payouts. We really welcome that news for the whole of the country.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000198\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003EOur party not having a member on the Primary Production Committee, I want to pay my regards to the members on it, who worked so hard in hearing the submissions. They received eight submissions and they heard four, which is an incredible workload for any committee to have to deal with. I thank the members for diligently working through these issues. The bill returns to the House with some recommendations, and I would like to make a few comments on those before ending our contribution on this second reading, following which we move to the Committee stage.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000199\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003EThe bill is all about enshrining in legislation the necessary provisions that lay the groundwork for best practice and help ensure the ongoing success of New Zealand\u2019s meat industry and its members. It is pleasing to be part of supporting legislation that has been requested by the industry rather than imposed upon it. I take note of the honourable member Clayton Cosgrove\u2019s earlier comments that during my time in this House we have responded to requests from the wool industry, the kiwifruit industry, and here we are dealing with something requested by the meat industry. That is really the role of this House: to hear from the communities that it serves, to design legislation, to hear submissions, and to progress the issues that those who voted us here are interested in our progressing. It is a pleasure to take part in this legislation proceeding through the House so that it can meet the needs of the industry.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000200\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003EThe recommendation to define the term \u201Creserves\u201D in concise language to mean meeting the costs of quota management is a prudent measure to offset litigious opportunism. It will also ensure that the $100 million reserve fund remains the primary means to ensure solvency and the ability of the board to carry out its core quota management functions at all times. It is pleasing to note the importance given to livestock farmer buy-in and participation, which has been recounted in numerous recommendations made by the select committee. Whether it be with regard to consultations over the reserve fund policy or over the validity of reserve management decisions, it is important to ensure that livestock farmers\u2019 wishes are suitably considered.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000201\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003EAlso, clarifying the terms of reference of the board with regard to the power to delegate quota functions and the capacity to contract for services is a necessary tightening-up of its terms of reference to remove confusion within the industry. In fact, many of the committee\u2019s recommended changes are made with the intent to provide more clarity to grey areas in terms of the structure, ownership issues, and effective functioning of the Meat Board. It is sensible to clarify that although the quota markets are there to benefit the industry, ownership of the rights resides firmly with the Crown. United Future supports that principle. Furthermore, the recommendations to minimise the scope of legal disputes by clarifying distinctions between scheduled and unscheduled audits\u2014a bugbear in many industries\u2014is another judicious measure that deserves praise. With any overseeing body whose core role is to benefit its members, an affirmation of its core purpose, tempered with flexibility, is essential to allow for best practice. The recommended changes that provide this necessary flexibility by requiring the industry-good organisation to be owned by a trust whose beneficiaries are all livestock farmers do just that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000202\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003EThe recommended changes to this bill are sensible measures that will help make sure that the Meat Board fulfils its duties effectively and properly, and that the meat industry and its members all benefit from such duties. United Future has pleasure in recommending this bill to the House for the passage of its second reading.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022 data-id=\u0022f30da325069c43279d20dbb47f1d78c2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000203\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f30da325069c43279d20dbb47f1d78c2\u0022\u003EDAVID PARKER (Labour\u2014Otago):\u003C/span\u003E I rise to speak in support of the Meat Board Restructuring Bill, a bill where the Labour-led Government is doing what farmers want.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000204\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ceb3f40141bf431b933b494246668204\u0022\u003EClayton Cosgrove\u003C/span\u003E: He represents a rural constituency.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000205\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225f15fb8e421c4bb3b6e481c6a066f662\u0022\u003EDAVID PARKER\u003C/span\u003E: I represent a rural constituency. There was a day when the National Party represented all the rural constituencies. There was a day when it had all the farmers. Why is that we do what farmers want? Because we have more farmers on this side: Parekura Horomia, Mita Ririnui, Jim Sutton, Damien O\u2019Connor. The farmers are on this side, and that is why the farmers vote for us\u2014[Interruption] In contrast, we have Mr Connell speaking up, the member for Rakaia. He is an East Street farmer. The National Party used to have the occasional Queen Street farmer, but it has lost even them. It is down to East Street farmers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000206\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EIn any event, this is good legislation, in contrast to what the previous National Government used to do. What did it do to the fruit industry? Exactly what the fruit industry did not want it to do, and it ended in tears. The farmers in my area want this legislation. They want the meat industry restructured in the way that we are doing with this bill. I commend this legislation to the House, and I remind those tired members opposite that the reason their former voters voted-in me and this Government was that they knew that this Government would back farmers. Farmers do better under this Government, and that is why I am here.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022 data-id=\u002232ac871f1c6c4f04bb55342bb19a86ad\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000207\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002232ac871f1c6c4f04bb55342bb19a86ad\u0022\u003EPHIL HEATLEY (National\u2014Whangarei):\u003C/span\u003E I rise on behalf of the National Party. There is certainly no shortage of National Party members who could sit on the Primary Production Committee. There is a lot of depth in our party, which comes from people who have a rural background. That is why Shane Ardern is standing in the wings, waiting to replace us at any time, and there are plenty of others in the National Party with a respect for farming who are standing right behind him. We in the National Party certainly support this industry and would like to acknowledge the productivity and the go-forward attitude of the primary sector that has carried this economy for many, many decades, and certainly with no help from this Government for the last 4 years.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000208\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003E National supports this Meat Board Restructuring Bill, with the changes that we have made in the Primary Production Committee. I would like to touch on some of those. We are very comfortable with the merger of Meat New Zealand and the New Zealand Wool Board to create Meat and Wool New Zealand Ltd, a limited-liability company. We on the select committee did have some concerns, particularly with regard to the governance arrangements. For example, members will see in the commentary that some submitters argued that the size of the board was excessive\u2014being a board of 10 or 11 people\u2014and some argued that ministerial appointees were inappropriate. In this case, the legislation states that the Minister would have two appointees. In the select committee that particular clause was referred to as the \u201CJim\u2019s job clause\u201D. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000209\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ee8a01014acd4d08872ea595f4fd827e\u0022\u003EShane Ardern\u003C/span\u003E: His retirement clause.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000210\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229ecaa2dec45c4df5bd1616823bced08d\u0022\u003EPHIL HEATLEY\u003C/span\u003E: \u201CJim\u2019s retirement clause\u201D. There was some cynicism from people in the industry when they came to the select committee about who the Minister, Jim Sutton, would give those two jobs to\u2014whether one would land in his lap, or whether he would give them to other Labour Party lackeys. That concern was put to us. We reflected on that, and with some reluctance the industry\u2014and, I must say, the National Party\u2014will accept having two ministerial appointments. Yes, eyebrows were raised at that possibility, but with some reluctance, \u201CJim\u2019s retirement clause\u201D was passed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000211\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003EInterestingly enough, we were quite interested not only in the number of directors, but also in clause 13(4) of the original bill regarding the management of the board. I think the country will be quite shocked at that clause, particularly with the current climate out there. It stated: \u201CIn appointing directors \u2026, the Minister must have regard to the desirability of\u2014(a) the representation on the Board of women;\u201D. The Minister must consider putting women on the board. How condescending and patronising is that? We have a large number of women involved in the running of \u201CNew Zealand Incorporated\u201D, both at Government level and in the private sector\u2014Telecom and other companies. Clearly, we have a woman Prime Minister\u2014as Don Brash pointed out the other day\u2014we have a female Governor-General, and so on. Women have done very well and are quite capable of getting these appointments on their own merits, but no, the Labour Government felt that for some reason this appointment should be put at their feet, regardless of merit. How condescending and patronising is that? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000212\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003EAnother clause stated that in appointing directors, the Minister must have on the board: \u201C\u2026 persons qualified to represent the views of Maori livestock farming interests.\u201D How condescending and patronising to M\u0101ori is that? As if M\u0101ori, amongst themselves, do not have people who are more than able, on their merits, to sit on this board and to achieve for livestock farmers throughout New Zealand all the things that need to be achieved. How condescending and patronising is it, that the Government would lay out the red carpet for M\u0101ori, regardless of merit, and say that M\u0101ori were in? I can tell members that M\u0101ori in the fishing industry are more than capable of reaching governance levels and jobs like that on merit, without those jobs being passed out to them like a welfare cheque. So we opposed that, and we are delighted to see that those particular clauses that put M\u0101ori and women on the board, without necessarily having merit, have been scrapped. We look forward to seeing M\u0101ori, women, and New Zealanders of other descent on that board because of merit. I recall that when we raised this issue\u2014when we said that women and M\u0101ori would be put on the board as of right\u2014Clayton Cosgrove asked why. Clayton Cosgrove himself said: \u201CWhy?\u201D. He could not understand it, and neither could we, so he scrapped that clause\u2014as did we\u2014and we are pleased about it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000213\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003EThere is another clause that will go through to the Committee stage, and it is about the Crown and its approach to the rights of the quota. Members will be interested that the clause originally said that the Crown\u2014this is what the Labour Government said: \u201C\u2026 owns the rights to secure the economic benefits deriving from quota markets,\u201D. I would have to say that there was a shade of nationalisation of those quota rights in that clause, and we are delighted that it too has been changed to better reflect the Crown\u2019s role in this. The clause now states: \u201CThe Crown owns the rights to secure the economic benefits deriving from quota markets, and those benefits are assigned for the benefit of the meat industry ...\u201D. The quota rights are for the benefit of the meat industry. They are not for the Government, not for the Government\u2019s coffers, and not for the Government to get some benefit that it might redistribute in some way to every New Zealander, but for the benefit of the meat industry alone. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000214\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003EI am also pleased to see that some accountability will be given to this board with regard to fees in relation to quota management, and to the operation of quota management systems. I was somewhat concerned when I saw that the board could recover the costs to it of carrying out its functions in relation to the quota markets, and that the board may set fees payable by meat exporters who are allocated a quota\u2014not that I think the board should not be able to recover those costs through fees, but simply that it would have the ability to set those fees. They would need to be fair and reasonable, and the fees would need to provide the board with adequate funding. My concern was that those fees would be set and that there would be no redress for exporters if the fees were excessive, unfair, or unreasonable. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000215\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003EBut I see now\u2014and it was in the bill\u2014that those fees are to be treated as a regulation for the purposes of the Regulations (Disallowance) Act. In other words, they are to be subject to the Regulations Review Committee, and can be reviewed. I say to exporters that should problems arise in the years to come regarding those fees, they do have access to Parliament through the Regulations Review Committee to see that the fees are reviewed and are set accordingly. So there is a degree of accountability there. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000216\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003ENational certainly supports this bill with those changes. The bill was originally quite condescending, particularly with regard to who owned the quota and who should get the benefit, and to whether M\u0101ori and women should be on the board as of right simply because of their race or gender. I am glad that those clauses have been changed. National supports the bill. We are pleased with the accountability processes, and I commend this bill to the Committee stage.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000217\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003EBill read a second time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000218\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003EName changed to Meat Board Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000219\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002287097aaf7b6c40deb8df8fb55175c1f8\u0022\u003EMeat Board Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000220\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022e1405983d3944da9aacd65debad238fa\u0022\u003EInstruction to Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226de7f1d9-7be9-468a-b27c-06000416b96a\u0022 data-id=\u002214c06e3b894a411783e4fde6bacfbb01\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000221\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226de7f1d9-7be9-468a-b27c-06000416b96a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002214c06e3b894a411783e4fde6bacfbb01\u0022\u003EHon JOHN TAMIHERE (Minister of Youth Affairs):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That it be an instruction to the Committee of the whole House on the Meat Board Bill that it take the bill part by part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000222\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226de7f1d9-7be9-468a-b27c-06000416b96a\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000223\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022c29c772d2abb46a4962acb3a57a6e4ca\u0022\u003EIn Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022 data-id=\u0022093257a8ad034f3d9237fdb7b37edbb1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000224\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022093257a8ad034f3d9237fdb7b37edbb1\u0022\u003EJOHN CARTER (Senior Whip\u2014National):\u003C/span\u003E I have not had the chance to discuss this with any other of the parties but, given that everybody supports this legislation, I wonder whether the House would be inclined to grant leave for one wide-ranging debate over the Committee stage. I seek leave so to do. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000225\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228d518834588d4cddb6bd20edb2d91f58\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection? There is not. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000226\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022fae8b5f196aa46cf8cddb545815e35c7\u0022\u003EClauses 1 to 89, and schedules\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022 data-id=\u0022403cb7497cdf4d87932b2eaa2f7db817\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000227\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022403cb7497cdf4d87932b2eaa2f7db817\u0022\u003ESHANE ARDERN (National\u2014Taranaki - King Country):\u003C/span\u003E As I rise to speak for my second contribution to the bill restructuring the Meat Board, I want to start off by saying \u201CThank you\u201D from all parties to the Primary Production Committee members, who did a fine job on this legislation. The bill had cross-party support, and I acknowledge the work put in by my colleagues Doug Woolerton and Clayton Cosgrove\u2014who, I know, has been a long-time member of that committee\u2014and the work done by the officials and other members of that committee. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000228\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003EI notice with some interest that only the Green Party hung out to the bitter end on the issue of M\u0101ori and women being included as of right when the select committee recommended that they should not be. That says it all, does it not? I wonder\u2014and perhaps some of the M\u0101ori members on the other side of the Chamber will know this figure\u2014what percentage of the meat and wool industry M\u0101ori and M\u0101ori incorporations now actually make up. I suggest that it would be substantial, and potentially as much as a third of the industry. I know that there is a high capability amongst the leadership there, and if those leaders want to be on the board, they will be on the board. I suggest they put their names forward to make sure that they are represented. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000229\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003EAs has already been stated, the bill sets up structures and regimes principally to manage the quota, which is very, very important to this industry. We cannot get access to a large percentage of the international markets we export to without a proper, robust, and well-negotiated quota. I see that the Minister has come back to the chair, and I acknowledge the work he does on behalf of farmers in that regard. That said, I have to say that that is where the philosophical difference lies between us and them\u2014that is, the Labour minority Government, with its new partner the Green Party\u2014for the forthcoming election. That is clearly a recipe for disaster for them. The Green Party does not believe in free trade at all, and it certainly does not believe in trading meat products in countries like the US, which is the largest market, and in a number of other markets where we do that business. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000230\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003ESo in the campaign that is coming around the corner, I look forward to the Minister justifying to New Zealand not only how he is going to win against the 19 other Cabinet Ministers he is carrying on his back\u2014perhaps 25 or so with all the hangers-on outside Cabinet\u2014but also having to carry Ian Ewen-Street, Nandor Tanczos, and one or two others. There is Keith Locke, that champion of free trade around the world! The Minister will have to carry him on his back, as well. It just cannot be done. He might as well give up while he is ahead, because it is not going to happen. The public of New Zealand know it is not going to happen, and they will not vote for it to happen. They will vote for a National Government, and that will be the end of that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000231\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003ENational supports the agricultural industry. It always has, and it always will\u2014110 percent. We are not fair-weather friends like those on the other side of the Chamber. We do not come in and out like them, riding in on a high tide and going out when the tide goes out. We are 110 percent committed and would never make a comment like that of a former Labour Prime Minister, who said that this industry was \u201Ca sunset industry\u201D, and the sooner all the land in the South Island became a national park the better. That is, of course, the approach of this current Government. Something like 40 percent of the South Island land mass is currently in some kind of conservation estate\u201440 percent! This Government now has a proposal on the books to take 600,000 stock units\u2014that is something like 100 productive meat and wool farms\u2014out of production over the next few years. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000232\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003EWhat do members make of that? Here we are today debating a restructuring bill that will allow those industries, the backbone of New Zealand, to get on and produce the very high returns that this Government and the Minister of Finance are benefiting from. At the same time the Government is doing that, it has the Minister of Conservation running around the country trying to take 100 productive meat and wool farms out of production. Where is the logic in that? It is beyond me; maybe the Minister will explain it to me. For that reason, I say that that Government will not be back. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000233\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003EThis meat industry bill has a number of very important roles to play. First of all, as I said, it is being set up to manage the quota. Second, it is being set up to make sure that there is a proper conduit for a levy to be paid for things like research and development. They are so important to this industry, and it is good that the select committee was able to come to that conclusion. When the Minister makes appointments to the board, which he will, he should forget about the old Labour lackeys, because they are history. He should not even consider them for a moment. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022fc82cea8-c84d-4ab7-8597-31916dbedc43\u0022 data-id=\u002260f46cc9f34d4a4d9f990618d7b42da8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000234\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc82cea8-c84d-4ab7-8597-31916dbedc43\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002260f46cc9f34d4a4d9f990618d7b42da8\u0022\u003EEDWIN PERRY (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E New Zealand First will obviously be supporting this Meat Board Bill. A very well-known motivational speaker from America said: \u201CIts time has come.\u201D, and I think the time has come for the Meat Board to be restructured. Of course, this will be music to the ears of the farmers in the Wairarapa, and common sense will prevail. That is not like the National Party, which obviously left the farmers alone in the 1990s and had to reconstruct its efforts to bring them back. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000235\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc82cea8-c84d-4ab7-8597-31916dbedc43\u0022\u003EThe commentary on the bill, under \u201CIntroduction\u201D, states: \u201CThe bill restructures the New Zealand Meat Board and makes management of meat export quota the Board\u2019s primary focus. The bill provides for the meat industry to be the recipient of the benefits of the quota markets.\u201D Just quickly, as we do not have a lot of time, I want to cover one or two very important issues. In relation to the definition of reserves, the Primary Production Committee\u2014on which my colleague Doug Woolerton is very well-known as a farmer, unlike others on that committee who are \u201CQueen Street farmers\u201D; I must mention the name of Mr Gerald Eckhoff, too, and also at this stage Mr Connell\u2014recommends an amendment. It is expressed by clause 4(1): \u201Creserves means all the net assets of the Board other than\u2014(a) fees collected under section 55 to meet the costs of exporter registration: and (b) fees collected under section 36 to meet the costs of quota management, except to the extent that they are collected to fund past payments made by the Board that\u2014(i) were made in relation to quota management; and (ii) were not themselves funded from quota fees set under section 36.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000236\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc82cea8-c84d-4ab7-8597-31916dbedc43\u0022\u003EWe note that Federated Farmers of New Zealand opposes the prioritising of reserves as a backup to the quota system, or the use of reserves to settle liabilities arising from litigation relating to quota allocation. All I want to say to Federated Farmers is that I believe that is a safeguard for the future of the industry. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000237\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc82cea8-c84d-4ab7-8597-31916dbedc43\u0022\u003EOf clause 13, \u201CGovernance\u201D of the board, the committee, in relation to the Minister, appointments, and size of the board, said it did not recommend any changes in the requirements for ministerial appointments that resulted in a board of 10 or 11 people. Some submitters argued that the size of the board was excessive, and some that ministerial appointments were inappropriate. In speaking to Mr Connell this morning, I went along with his view in respect of ministerial appointments, but after reading the bill, I think it is appropriate that directors are appointed. However, there are some key points, which I think the Minister brought up: experience, expertise, and not being a bureaucratic handbrake that will pull us up. I am happy as long as there is no bureaucratic handbrake that prevents the industry from prospering in the future. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000238\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc82cea8-c84d-4ab7-8597-31916dbedc43\u0022\u003EThe other aspect of that is the representation provision of clause 13(4), which I was very interested in. With the exception of the Green member, we did not see the need for clause 13(4), which required the Minister to give consideration to the representation of women and M\u0101ori farmers\u2019 interests on the board when making ministerial appointments. Can I say to the Minister and to this Committee that New Zealand First does not support separate representation, but I do support M\u0101ori farmers. I want the Minister not to ignore the contribution that M\u0101ori make to this industry. I want him to make it quite clear that M\u0101ori farmers and incorporation blocks out there make up a large part of the income of this industry. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000239\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc82cea8-c84d-4ab7-8597-31916dbedc43\u0022\u003EI will just mention one or two figures. The value of M\u0101ori agricultural output is estimated to be approximately $700 million. It cannot be ignored; it represents almost 10 percent of New Zealand\u2019s total agricultural income. Only 15 percent of the population provides $700 million in agricultural income. Considering that their occupation of farming land is very small, I want to applaud those M\u0101ori farmers and incorporations for the direction they have taken. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000240\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc82cea8-c84d-4ab7-8597-31916dbedc43\u0022\u003EI listened to the National Party going on about how this should not happen, and also about the representation of women. Do my colleagues know that today women play a very important role in administering  farming operations?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022 data-id=\u0022eaf4437c05d84cd89f99d51ecbf6b748\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000241\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022eaf4437c05d84cd89f99d51ecbf6b748\u0022\u003EGERRARD ECKHOFF (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E I note that this is a wide-ranging debate, but one of the particular aspects of this bill that concerns me and, I think, many of the farming community\u2014and, hopefully, there will be a few listening in to the debate this morning\u2014is the question of inappropriate behaviour by the meat industry. The industry has just gone through a rather tumultuous period, where one company, PPCS, was vying to take over another very important meat company in the North Island by the name of Richmond. Hopefully, in the interests of the wider industry, that issue will be settled. But my concern is the huge influence that major companies will now have throughout the meat industry. For example, PPCS will be the biggest meat company in New Zealand, and probably one of the biggest companies in New Zealand by half. It will be twice the size of any other company.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000242\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003EWhen I look at the offences, penalties, and proceedings provided for in clauses 66 to 69, I really cannot see anywhere that a significant penalty can be imposed on companies that choose to behave in an inappropriate way. I note that the bill provides for penalties of up to $200,000 for an individual committing an export-related offence, and can suspend for a year that individual\u2019s ability to export meat products. But really the issue is this: if the company is a cooperative, who is hurt? Is it the board? It is certainly not the Meat Board, nor is it the board of that particular company. It is the farmers who own that company who pay the price for the inappropriate behaviour of a director. We have seen comments made by a judge of the High Court, when talking about gross commercial misconduct, about who actually has the ability to sanction directors. I made mention at the Primary Production Committee that I felt that the meat industry and the Meat Board should have some powers to bring those companies into line if, because of their size, their influence and inappropriate behaviour become pervasive. That is something that is not in the bill\u2014and maybe that is right and maybe that is wrong\u2014but I just want to flag that point. I think it is inappropriate that, given the history of the last 5 years and what, I repeat, has been described as gross commercial misconduct, we seem not to be addressing that particular issue, either through this bill or perhaps through one other bill that might appropriately go to the Commerce Committee in the future. That may happen, and I want to flag that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000243\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003EAnother issue that I think is rather important is the use of the very substantial reserves\u2014over $100 million, as I understand it. I think it is entirely appropriate that the reserves should be for a specified use. There is little doubt that in this world of ours today bioterrorism is a huge threat, especially to our agricultural industry. We must have some form of reserves, and probably very substantial reserves, to meet that threat should it ever arise. God forbid that it ever should arise, but if it does, there needs to be reserves to meet that threat. But those reserves should not be frittered away to settle court cases that the board may have to front up to in the future. The money should remain for a specified use, and nothing else. I am quite sure that the meat farmers of this country want those reserves left for a specified purpose. If the board makes inappropriate or illegal decisions, as determined by a court in the future, then the board members should be responsible, and should have some sort of insurance policy, if possible, to cover those costs. But they should not come from the reserves that have been built up over the years.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000244\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003EWe all know that with the increasing numbers of tourists coming to this country\u2014and, indeed, we are encouraging tourism\u2014the likelihood of organisms such as foot-and-mouth disease coming to this country increases. Indeed, the back-up and the financial reserves are an integral and hugely important part of our ensuring that should something of that nature arise in this country, we have the capacity and financial resource to fight that threat.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022 data-id=\u0022b519a6aa77c24d5baf4366920a88d2eb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000245\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b519a6aa77c24d5baf4366920a88d2eb\u0022\u003EBRIAN CONNELL (National\u2014Rakaia):\u003C/span\u003E Can I start by congratulating my friend Edwin Perry on the quality of his speech. Notwithstanding the fact that I think he got it wrong regarding the Government\u2019s patsy appointments to the Meat Board, it is good to hear a member get up and speak with passion about his rural constituents, and I commend him for that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000246\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022\u003EA lot of talk has taken place in this debate regarding Mr Ardern not being on the Primary Production Committee. The simple answer to that is that National has so much depth in terms of its rural portfolios and rural\u2014what is the word\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000247\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022848db69f7dba4c3ebd198ecf8c672827\u0022\u003EHon Member\u003C/span\u003E: Team.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000248\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022944896a5e7204943b3081052660cde7f\u0022\u003EBRIAN CONNELL\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014I thank the member\u2014team\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000249\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e66939e5b4f141d38b19a819bf932f47\u0022\u003EShane Ardern\u003C/span\u003E: The farmers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000250\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022126dd39db0e94550b2f4ba6cb2e32447\u0022\u003EBRIAN CONNELL\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014the farmers\u2014that we were lining up to come down here and take a call. For that same reason, Mr Carter is not here today; we just muscled him out of the way and said: \u201CDavid, it\u2019s not necessary, because we want to go down and take a call.\u201D There are real farmers on this side of the Chamber and on this team. In fact, we have many farmers\u2014[Interruption] I am not certain what one has to be to be a real farmer according to the Government\u2019s definition, but I know that we have Mr Ardern, Mr Carter, Lockwood Smith, and myself. I own 700 acres of prime Canterbury real estate. What does one have to do to be a farmer in this place? I do not know, but I can tell members that we have plenty of them, and we all were keen to come down and take a call. Madam Chair, you could have knocked me down with a purple tea cosy when Mr Parker came down here and took a call. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000251\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227ee269fb41ff41af9700defac6be4cfe\u0022\u003EGovernment Member\u003C/span\u003E: It was a great call.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000252\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002205c8d5d0f6b24d18a973d4be9c9f27fa\u0022\u003EBRIAN CONNELL\u003C/span\u003E: It was good that he did, and I commend him for it, but he suggested that he represents rural constituents in Otago. When I go to Otago and ask who the local member of Parliament is the answer is: \u201CWho? Who? Oh, you mean the \u2018Parker Pimpernel\u2019! We search for him here, we search for him there, and we can\u2019t find him anywhere. He is never here, so I suppose he is in Wellington.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000253\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022\u003EI draw my attention back to this bill, to look at clause 3, \u201CPurpose\u201D. There are a couple of things that do disturb me, notwithstanding the fact that I think, generally, the thrust of this legislation is right. The component under the \u201CIntroduction\u201D heading in the commentary that I want to dwell on disturbs me a little bit. It states: \u201CThe bill requires that the Board manage reserves for: action in relation to a major industry crisis, preserving the integrity of quota management systems, funding specific industry-good activities.\u201D I pose this question to members: do we really want to legislate for this type of thing? Surely, that is a board function. Any worthwhile board would do that as a matter of course. I believe that is a worrying trend. We tend to legislate for anything. It is not just this Government; there has been a propensity over the last 20 years to put in place legislation if anything goes wrong. Someone does something silly somewhere, so we legislate. I hope members will be cognisant of that point.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000254\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022\u003EThe other issue that concerns me is under the heading \u201CDefinition of \u2018reserves\u2019\u2014clause 4\u201D in the commentary: \u201CWe note that Federated Farmers of New Zealand opposes the prioritising of reserves as a back up to the quota system or the use of reserves to settle liabilities arising from any litigation relating to quota allocation.\u201D I have to say I share their concern. I simply say that, surely, no board can operate with a slush fund. A board must manage in an accountable fashion and in accord with its fiduciary accountabilities. Having deep pockets, and pockets that do not belong to it, will send the wrong messages about board responsibility. I take heed of Federated Farmers\u2019 concerns, and I believe that this is something the select committee should have looked at in more detail.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000255\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022\u003EThe one area I want to take some time to talk about is the composition of the board. Certainly, we need a board that is skilled, that has the right people on it, and that has the right expertise. I do not have an argument with that. But, surely, having selected a board with the right skills, we do not then need to have two patsy members\u2014Government appointments\u2014put on that board. Their fingerprints will be all over that board, and will constrain its ability to manage according to its charter. That, I believe, is something we should look at in some detail.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222e7121af-c8f1-4d5c-b1f5-5646e4d9ca70\u0022 data-id=\u00228b44072d69164feb9a554aaede471659\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000256\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222e7121af-c8f1-4d5c-b1f5-5646e4d9ca70\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228b44072d69164feb9a554aaede471659\u0022\u003EHon JIM SUTTON (Minister of Agriculture):\u003C/span\u003E I should respond to that last point, because it was the first point made by any of the members opposite who have spoken on the bill that really had anything to do with the policies covered by it. I explain to him\u2014it was explained to the members of the Primary Production Committee, and that is why they did not propose any change\u2014that the reason for having two ministerial appointees on the Meat Board to manage the quota is that the quota belongs to New Zealand. It does not belong to the board; it belongs to New Zealand. It has to be managed in the interests of New Zealand and with a wider view of New Zealand\u2019s interests than just the interests of this particular industry. I have had experience before of a board that was not acting in a prudent way with all the requirements of quota administration. Those board members endangered the viability of other quota held by New Zealand for the benefit of another industry. So it is essential that there be someone on the board\u2014in fact, two people are better than one, because we all know that one board member can become isolated\u2014to keep an eye on the wider New Zealand interest.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000257\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222e7121af-c8f1-4d5c-b1f5-5646e4d9ca70\u0022\u003EBecause most of the elected board members are mainly involved with delivering and managing industry-good functions that have nothing to do with quota, there is absolutely no reason to believe that the board would have had within its members people with the specialist expertise in international trade negotiations and quota management that is needed to do that specialised job. That is why those people are there. They are there for a particular purpose, and I am sure that the Minister, after consulting with the chairman of the board and, through him, the elected members of the board, will appoint suitable people.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000258\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222e7121af-c8f1-4d5c-b1f5-5646e4d9ca70\u0022\u003EApart from that, most of the discussion was a political rave, and one has to wonder whether, in the end, it is better to have a wide-ranging debate on these matters or to try to get members to concentrate on the subjects in the bill. The ACT member Gerard Eckhoff demonstrated some wide-ranging hostility to cooperatives. He attacked Richmond and PPCS. He does not like cooperatives. He thinks they are a step on the road to the salt mines of Siberia. We have seen that attitude in the right-wing parties in Parliament in the past. At the same time, he wants to tell the board exactly what it should do with the reserves it manages. Those are not his reserves; they are the reserves of the producers of New Zealand. That member wants to tell the board exactly what it should do. He thinks he should define what it spends the reserves on. I am sorry to say he was supported by Brian Connell, the member for Rakaia. I thought that was a bit surprising. It shows how impressionable some of the novice right-wingers are.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000259\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222e7121af-c8f1-4d5c-b1f5-5646e4d9ca70\u0022\u003EThis is a good bill. It provides for the slimmed-down, more-focused producer organisation that producers have been calling for. It will be more accountable in the way that it raises funds and spends them on industry-good activities, and it will be involved in the administration of the quota, in the interests of the industry. I appreciate, particularly, the words of support from Edwin Perry, a New Zealand First member. Indeed, apart from a little action that occurred off the ball in the debate, I thank all the members of the select committee and all the parties that participated, because they have demonstrated bipartisan concentration on the issues of the bill, which speaks well for Parliament on issues concerning our primary industry.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022 data-id=\u0022003d7368a64d48ceb80178bfefbf8647\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000260\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022003d7368a64d48ceb80178bfefbf8647\u0022\u003EBRIAN CONNELL (National\u2014Rakaia):\u003C/span\u003E I want to take a quick call in rebuttal of the retiring member for Aoraki. There are some clear arguments as to why what the Minister of Agriculture said just does not make sense. He said that the composition of the board needs the two Government members because of their expertise. That flies in the face of what other boards do all across New Zealand\u2014in fact, of global practice. What he is saying, if members think about it, is that if a board has a legal requirement on it, it must have a lawyer, and if it has a marketing requirement on it, it must have a marketer. What absolute nonsense! Any board worth its salt goes out and gets that expertise, consults it, takes it into account, then comes back and uses it as part of the decision-making process. But to have two patsy members on the board, with their fingers all over the decision-making process, just to keep the Minister informed does not make sense.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000261\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022\u003EThe Minister in the chair, Jim Sutton, knows that. Federated Farmers raised the point, and it was raised right around the country. When the restructuring initiative was taken around the country, every farmer who was thinking about the issue stood up and said that he or she wanted the best individuals possible on the board, not patsy members appointed by this Government. This is a Government that does not really understand farming practice, so how dare it say what farmers will have. It just does not make sense. This is the same Government that insisted, in the select committee process, that we have M\u0101ori representatives and female representatives on the board, regardless of their merit. My message to the Minister is simply that people should be selected on merit, and we should let the board get on with doing its job.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022 data-id=\u0022dffe8101149443c7b72eb31dbb98a95f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000262\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022dffe8101149443c7b72eb31dbb98a95f\u0022\u003EGERRARD ECKHOFF (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E I too would like to respond to the comments made by Jim Sutton, a man described by many as one who will never make the top 10 but who will have no trouble getting into the bottom three of anything. The Minister seems not to have read the commentary to his own bill when he criticises my attitude to the use of the reserves. I can do no better than to quote from the bill\u2019s commentary: \u201CWe note\u201D\u2014that is, the select committee\u2014\u201Cthat Federated Farmers of New Zealand opposes the prioritising of reserves as a back up to the quota system or the use of reserves to settle liabilities arising from any litigation relating to quota allocation.\u201D That is exactly what I have said, and I make no apology, with the support of the farmer-owned organisation called Federated Farmers, and the Minister stands in the Chamber and criticises me for having done so. Well, I make no apology for that, and the farmers of this community and Federated Farmers can make their own judgment call on the contribution of the Minister. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000263\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003EThe other aspect that he criticises me on is that I am flagging the size and the ability of a very, very large meat company into the future called PPCS in combination with Richmond, and their ability to influence, perhaps, the quota management of the meat industry. It will have two members sitting on the quota allocation committee. The full board, of course, makes the judgment call but there will be two members of the New Zealand Meat Industry Association sitting on that board. Their influence will be huge because they are so big. Now, I do not, and never have, criticised the sense of two big companies, PPCS and Richmond, getting together in terms of the geographical distribution of meat, the timing of the meat kill, etc. It makes enormous common sense, but I will say, as I have done publicly in the past, and I do again today, that it is totally wrong for a company to abuse its size, and, indeed, the goodwill of its shareholders. Indeed the company has been criticised by a High Court judge for gross commercial misconduct. That is something that we cannot take pride in, in this country. It needs to be spoken about so that these companies know that the representatives\u2014and I count myself amongst them\u2014of the farming community have the backbone to stand in Parliament and criticise if they believe it is necessary. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000264\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003EI say to Mr Sutton that if that means I end up in the political salt-mines, I do not care. I am perfectly happy to go to a political salt-mine but I will not compromise my integrity, and what I believe, for the sake of political expediency, although quite clearly the Minister seems to think that that is a necessary part of politics in this country. I say to the Minister that I do not think it is, and that is why I have come to this place to try to change that, in my own way, if it is at all possible. It seems as though the Minister does not agree with me. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000265\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003ESo these are issues that I think are terribly important. I believe that the farming community thinks they are terribly important as well. But there is also one issue that\u2014instead of criticising the Minister on this time\u2014I am delighted to say the Government does understand the significance of\u2014trade. I think the Minister does understand, in a perverse sense, if one likes, given his dedication to the meat industry, that New Zealand will progress only through trade\u2014it is absolutely essential. The Greens, of course, and this has been alluded to here earlier, do not agree that trade is vital to this country. Well the Minister for Trade Negotiations does do a lot of calling around the world, along with members of the meat industry, the Meat Board\u2014the pastoral board, the new Meat and Wool New Zealand. That is an essential part of government, and I understand that. The question of whether in fact the Government owns the quota, I think, is a moot point, but as I said earlier, it is one that I am certainly not going to die in the ditch on, as long as the country and the Minister understand that the real benefit comes from an industry like this one. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000266\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003EThe meat industry has the ability to go out there, service its clients, and service the world, without the constraints, the controls, and the cost structures that are constantly being imposed on us by this Government. But there is no question that I think some members of the Government do understand the absolute necessity to get out there and sell our product and open access to New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000267\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002233a0073b5a7043aca0903d02b53424a7\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, further to the leave granted by the Committee for one wide-ranging debate, is it the wish of the Committee that I put the question as one?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000268\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221190543bb983493f8c74c9714e8d1ae5\u0022\u003EJohn Carter\u003C/span\u003E: Yes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000269\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022edcbf76aae0a4642a2406f0f5c52acd5\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: It is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000270\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003EClauses 1 to 89, and schedules agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000271\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003EBill reported without amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000272\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022e62fce51d57842efa5e3928e05afe594\u0022\u003EThird Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222e7121af-c8f1-4d5c-b1f5-5646e4d9ca70\u0022 data-id=\u0022f71e975c44db49828fdc83610bda2555\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000273\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222e7121af-c8f1-4d5c-b1f5-5646e4d9ca70\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f71e975c44db49828fdc83610bda2555\u0022\u003EHon JIM SUTTON (Minister of Agriculture):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the Meat Board Bill be now read a third time. The meat industry makes an enormous contribution to the New Zealand economy in terms of contributions to New Zealand\u2019s gross domestic product, employment, and export earnings. In the year ended June 2003, $4.2 billion worth of meat products were exported, which accounted for about 15 percent of the total value of merchandise exports from New Zealand. This bill was sought by the meat industry. The concepts it puts into practice were overwhelmingly endorsed by a referendum of producers in August 2003. It makes the provision of the raising of funds and the provision of industry-good services more accountable and more efficient. It retains a wide public overview of the administration of the valuable meat quota. I wish to compliment those in the industry who have fronted on this bill\u2014both to the participants in their own industries and to members of Parliament\u2014notably Jeff Grant and Mike Petersen, because their energy and leadership have served the industry well. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000274\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222e7121af-c8f1-4d5c-b1f5-5646e4d9ca70\u0022\u003EI wish the new Meat Board well in its reduced but more focused role of managing the meat export quota markets and the board\u2019s reserves. I also wish the new combined meat and wool industry-good organisation\u2014Meat and Wool New Zealand Ltd\u2014well in its role of funding and managing industry-good activities under the provisions of the Commodity Levies Act of 1990. Most of all I wish New Zealand\u2019s livestock farmers and the wider industry well, under their new industry structures. I commend the bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022 data-id=\u002270694869b1e24a588e251888126641f7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000275\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002270694869b1e24a588e251888126641f7\u0022\u003ESHANE ARDERN (National\u2014Taranaki - King Country):\u003C/span\u003E Like the Minister, I also recognise the farming folk who have led this industry to where it is at the moment. I congratulate the Minister on his support for them, and on the judicious way this process has gone through the Parliament. I also say \u201CWell done.\u201D to Mike Petersen from Wools of New Zealand, or the former Wool Board, and Jeff Grant, chairman, for the very strong leadership. Once again, an industry that is much maligned by our academic urban colleagues has shown that it can lead, will lead, and, once again, has demonstrated why it is the backbone of New Zealand. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000276\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003ESeventy-six percent of farmers who participated in the vote did support this legislation, or 80.3 percent of those on stock numbers who were represented in the vote, did support this legislation. Can I just say that the work that took place in the select committee, the members on the select committee, and the officials who worked with the select committee, obviously took note of the referendum and what the industry was asking for, and by and large have delivered, without exception, exactly what the industry wanted. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000277\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003EBy way of an example, I shall show what members of the select committee and officials were up against. The industry has never been represented better than in the submission from the Meat and Related Trades Workers Union\u2014the funders of the Labour Party\u2014which stated that it wanted a member on the board as well. When the Minister talks about the necessity to appoint a couple of people, I hope he will condemn that submission to the trash can where it belongs and appoint people on their merit, not because they represent the Meat and Related Trades Workers Union, but on the basis of advice he is given by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000278\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003EIt is interesting to note that the union\u2019s submission supported the general thrust of the bill, but submitted that it needed to have a representative on the board. I thank the select committee for rejecting that notion and also rejecting the notion that a woman, and a M\u0101ori representative, should be appointed. Both those sectors play a very key role in the meat industry, but both of those groups, whether it be by gender or race, should also be able to get a representative elected to the board, and will, I am sure of that. In fact, over the years many good examples of representatives from both those groups have been found. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000279\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003EThe legislation came about as a result of the need to manage the quota structure after the merger of wool and meat. That is the guts of the bill, and it is hugely important to New Zealand. It is always interesting to note that with an industry as large as this\u2014and the Minister said that it was worth $4.2 billion, and although my figure is $6 billion, I will not debate it. The Minister would be right. His figure is probably more accurate, although he has probably left out wool. I suggest that he has left out wool. One could dust off a billion-dollar industry as though it were not significant in New Zealand, and wool has had different fortunes of recent times. Some could easily dismiss the wool industry, being about four times the size of the wine industry and about a hundred times the size of anything Jim Anderton has ever been able to come up with, as insignificant. I suspect that he has left wool out of his figures. Whether the figure be $4.2 billion or $6 billion, I am not absolutely certain, but I suspect that that is what happened. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000280\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003EThe bottom line is that most of that money is managed through quota into international markets, and the ability to be able to manage and negotiate that quota access from a ministerial Government, State-to-State, industry-to-industry point of view is hugely important. In fact, that is the overwhelming and most important factor in anything that the New Zealand Government can do in terms of New Zealand Inc. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000281\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003EDespite this Government having stated many times that it is in favour of growth and is always looking for strong growth, it fails, once again, to acknowledge that the growth this economy has enjoyed\u2014in spite of, not as a result of, the Government I say\u2014has come from industries such as the meat industry. Those industries underpin the strong growth this economy is enjoying at the moment, always has, and always will, as far as I, or anybody else, can see into the future. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000282\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003EThis industry is the backbone of New Zealand. This legislation is one of the most important things that this Parliament will have to do. One would not think so. One would think that, based on what has happened in recent times, with media publicity, the number of members in the House, and the like, things like the civil union legislation are hugely important, but the reality is that this kind of legislation will help the economy go forward and fund the social programmes that this Government is intent on putting in place in health, education, and all the things that every member of Parliament comes to this place to try to represent. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000283\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003EThe only argument, and it is a philosophical one, is whether the State, or farmers, own the quota. Technically, one could argue\u2014and the Minister has\u2014that because the State negotiates the quota, the State owns it. The National Party will never defend or support that notion. Regardless of the amount of official advice, the legal ramifications, and the technical points, the bottom line is that those quotas are negotiated, Minister to Minister, supported by the industries. Contrary to popular belief, the industries drive the quota generally, and not the Minister. The industries generally find the markets, develop them, and then go into negotiation over quota. The Minister seals that deal, and those quotas are negotiated for farmers, on behalf of farmers, for those who produce it. There is a simple question to answer. If it were not for the production of the material that is exported into the quota markets, there would not be a quota. That is simple, and the Minister would not be required to negotiate it. So the quota is owned on behalf of the farmers. The State does not own the quotas, and that is a very, very significant point of difference between National and Labour. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000284\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003EI have no strong opinion on the make-up of the board of 10 to 11 members as stated in the commentary. Providing that the industry itself consults widely enough, it will find the expertise within it. Often it is said that farmers do not have the ability to manage industries such as this. Over and over again, that has been proven wrong. Over and over it has proven to be one of those urban-driven sorts of myths. The bottom line here is that farmers in this industry will, as they always have, find the people who will best represent the views of those whom they are elected to represent. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000285\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003EIn summary, this legislation is a very good step forward. This initiative was started under the former National Government. I would say the evolution\u2014rather than revolution\u2014within our primary industries has been ongoing for a long time. In fact, those regulations were started in 1922, and prior to that I know there were regulations in relation to the export of primary products. It is an evolution, it is not a revolution, and that is a good way to do business. I say well done to those who were involved. The industry is in a good position now to go forward. It should go forward and prove its critics wrong. I know that it will, and I wish it luck in the future.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022 data-id=\u00220f06c09fa51747169c1b19cda894d937\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000286\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220f06c09fa51747169c1b19cda894d937\u0022\u003ER DOUG WOOLERTON (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E The report of the Primary Production Committee was unanimous and this bill will go through with the support of all parties, including New Zealand First. However, New Zealand First has not seen the need to point out its opposition to women directors or M\u0101ori directors. In fact, I quite like the idea of women directors on boards, and would never ever oppose such a move unless there was a higher reason behind that, and of course, the higher reason would be equity. However, I do not want to let this opportunity go by without saying, in particular, that women have made a huge contribution to this industry, and have done so for centuries. I must also mention that approximately 10 percent of the total sheep and beef stock units belong to or are under the control of M\u0101ori interests, and that is significant. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000287\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003EThere was a day\u2014and I hope that people do not take offence at this\u2014when people would drive past unkempt land or land that perhaps was not in pristine condition, and would lament that perhaps it was M\u0101ori land. The implication was that M\u0101ori land was not productive and was not looked after, and the explanation of that was that it was in multi-person ownership. That was all correct, of course, but since those days we have had a marvellous thing called M\u0101ori incorporations come along, and M\u0101ori have found a very good vehicle that takes into account the multiple ownership of land. They can appoint managers, and they have legislation that means they do not have to track down the last M\u0101ori owner, maybe in foreign parts of the world. So M\u0101ori can get on with the business of farming. We now have very, very productive enterprises in the hands of M\u0101ori incorporations. They are a credit to the M\u0101ori people and to the farming industry, and they take their place in the industry with pride and professionalism. I will not name the people who are involved, at the risk of missing somebody out and causing offence, but the people who are involved in the industry are highly qualified, highly motivated, very, very professional people. They do nothing but add to the industry, and we applaud that. I would be concerned if the words from my National Party colleagues were taken as suggesting there was some concern that M\u0101ori were not welcome on these boards or anything else. It is simply the fact that the select committee believed that representation on them should be on the basis of merit, rather than based on race or gender. I just wanted to make that point obvious. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000288\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003EAt this point I want to thank the officials and my colleagues on the select committee. We do work well together. We enjoy each other\u2019s company, dare I say it, and we certainly look forward to the reappearance of Mr Shane Ardern on that committee. I think I can say that we are of one voice on that. So we urge his contemporaries and his leaders to bless us with his presence. It is not often that we get the chance\u2014we do get the chance, but we do not get it often enough\u2014to tell the people of New Zealand via speeches such as this of the talent, integrity, and intelligence of the so-called bureaucrats, or the people who shepherd bills through the House. We are blessed in this Parliament. I know that sometimes debates rage around these matters, but we have a bureaucracy to serve this country and this Parliament that is free of corruption, and that has clear ideals and clear guidelines to work to. Officials give freely of their advice. They work long hours; they do not work normal days and take weekends off. If there is a job to be done, they work after normal working hours and in the weekends. They work hard at it. We are served by them, and we owe them a debt of gratitude. I know that I do not thank them often enough, so I am doing so now and making up for what I have neglected to do previously. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000289\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003EI cannot let this opportunity go by without mentioning the fact that New Zealand First sees a difference between export-led and consumer-driven economic activity. It has been the fashion in the last 15 years or so for people not to differentiate between those things. This bill deals with export-led economic activity, and we support it. Members can see that there is complete unanimity on this bill in the House. Whether economic activity is export led or consumer driven makes a difference to the inflation rate of this country. It makes a difference to where the money first lands, if one likes. It is far better for the economy for the money to come in through export-led activity, go into the hands of people in the provinces in the case of this industry, and then flow through into the cities. The money always ends up in the cities, but it does matter how it gets there. When it goes through the rural economy into the cities everybody gets a drink, if one likes, and shares in the wealth, and the economy is better balanced for that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000290\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003EThis is a huge industry. Mr Ardern has rightly drawn some comparisons, and we tend to forget them. I came up through my farming career in a cooperative structure. It is a structure that I still favour. I believe this industry would have been better served without some of the very well-known names that were involved in the past, like Vestey\u2019s meat companies, and things like that\u2014people who have substantial wealth.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000291\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eb5903169fd142459aa6e2053c9d81c1\u0022\u003EShane Ardern\u003C/span\u003E: Foreign investors!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000292\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229a86fcd7999346e593b7f3f4ba2dbcbf\u0022\u003ER DOUG WOOLERTON\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, we mention the words \u201Cforeign investors\u201D. New Zealand First is well known for talking about that, and I am going back into past history and talking about that now. Sure, those people have contributed to this industry, but they have also taken great wealth off these shores from it. I personally would like to see more cooperative involvement, and I believe if this industry had had that it would be further ahead than it is. It does not surprise me, coming as I do from the dairy industry, that the dairy industry, which played second or third fiddle to this industry, has now surpassed it with a cooperative structure that many people in this industry believed to be inferior in days gone by.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022 data-id=\u00225d0b458d95f44468b883ffefe0fb018f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000293\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225d0b458d95f44468b883ffefe0fb018f\u0022\u003EGERRARD ECKHOFF (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E I would like to make this observation in the third reading of the Meat Board Restructuring Bill. The reason why we are having such a high degree of unanimity in the House, why this bill is going through the House virtually without dissent, and why there is very little acrimony is that we are seeing ACT policy in action.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000294\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229f5478b083ef4855bf0145b65e366f2e\u0022\u003ELarry Baldock\u003C/span\u003E: Ha, ha!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000295\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221ccf9c90ef8446c1ba3e95146a5c5fd3\u0022\u003EGERRARD ECKHOFF\u003C/span\u003E: Larry Baldock laughs! He is the man of high-handed regulation and control. But we do not see in the meat industry, or, indeed, in the primary industries, Government handouts or subsidies. In other words, those industries run themselves. That has to be a prime reason why we are not having arguments over who will get what, and how much more taxation has to go into the primary production sector. I ask Mr Baldock how much the meat industry gets from the Government. It gets nothing! How much does the forestry industry get? It gets nothing! The Government stole from the forestry industry, just recently. That is exactly what the ACT party says. We say that if people take the Government out of their lives they will find that things just happen, because people will get on with it. The Government likes to think that we have to have more control, more regulation, and more acrimony. I do not agree with that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000296\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003EThat is also the reason why by and large the Primary Production Committee gets on extremely well. I have not, perhaps thankfully, sat on very many other select committees, but we do have a reputation on the Primary Production Committee for being very sensible and being able to achieve things that are in the best interests of this country. Why is that? Yet again, it is because the issues that we deal with are\u2014as, indeed, in the case of this bill\u2014about easing the path and making things easier for those industries to get on with the job of wealth creation in this country, for the benefit of the shareholders and owners of those industries, rather than the industries relying on Government handouts time and time again. That is why the meat industry is so good. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000297\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003EThat is very obvious to all those in the primary industries of course, but it is quite remarkable that with the huge reduction in stock numbers, especially in sheep numbers in this country, production is up. Why is that? It is because the farming community has invested its own money. The Minister has been promoting a \u201Cfart tax\u201D just recently so he can hit us again, but the farming industry stood up and said there should be no more taxes. We said we did not need that tax because we were achieving the aims, in terms of the global warming problems that are perceived by some. We are contributing enormously to a greener planet, through our farming processes. We turn water to grass, and then to protein hugely efficiently. There is no other industry in the world that can compete with us, although of course we are blessed in New Zealand with a microclimate that enables us to do that. But we do that with great efficiency. I can only emphasise the point that stock numbers are down, yet production is up. That is hugely reflective of the capability of our pastoral farmers. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000298\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003EBut the Government, as has been pointed out in previous speeches, seems hell-bent on closing down much of the industry. I ask Mr Clayton Cosgrove, in his third reading speech, to tell me how the meat industry will benefit from the number of stock units in the South Island high country being reduced by 600,000. He will have some responsibility for that. Why should that occur, when we have such a successful industry that contributes so much to the wealth of this nation of ours? We are very successful, yet the Government now wants to shut down parts of the industry because the Prime Minister wants to go tramping. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000299\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003EI think it is time for the Labour Government to show some real leadership, and for Mr Sutton and the Prime Minister to stand in this House and thank the primary production industry. I have never, in my 5 years in this House, seen the Prime Minister come to the Chamber to make a speech on a bill like this, and say to the productive sector of this country that she thanks it for what it has done to enable the Government to spend money on other aspects of the country. That has never happened to my certain knowledge, and that is a matter of some considerable regret. It is time that this Government, and indeed the country, understood that wealth creation is not something we should ever apologise for. It has given us a standard of living in this country that enables us to look after the less well off, and a lot of that has come off the backs of sheep, cows, or cattle\u2014whatever animal it may be. Our wealth has come from primary industry, and it has come from the fact that that industry is deregulated and farmers do not rely on Government largesse to help them out when they need it from time to time. That just does not happen any more, and we should be eternally grateful for that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003EThe Minister, Mr Sutton, alluded to the fact that the Government needs to continue to manage and have influence over the quota. I ask this question, and perhaps my colleagues in the National Party may know the answer: does the Government need to have a couple of directors on the board of Fonterra, to manage the cheese or the butter quota? Why is it, then, that we need that in the meat industry? What is the difference between a meat quota and a quota for cheese or butter that comes from, say, Japan? Why is that not being managed by two appointees of the Government on the board of Fonterra, appointed so they can manage that? It is an absolute nonsense; it is not needed. We argued against it, but the Minister insisted that he have some influence. Well, with any sort of luck it is only a matter of time before that influence disappears, or certainly dissipates. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003EI want to make one final reference in my closing moments in this debate. The farming community does not want accountability from its meat and wool board, or the new pastoral board. Instead, it wants performance. Any fool can account for his or her hundred dollars of expenditure, or whatever amount it is. It is not accountability but performance that is wanted. As I alluded to earlier, I went to Whangarei to the first annual meeting. I did not see any Government members there. It was like walking back in time and going back into the 1960s or the 1970s, in terms of what happened there. There were remits, and it was just old hat stuff. The board has to revitalise itself. It has to show the real leadership that farmers are looking for, because in a few years\u2019 time, when the farming community again debates this issue to determine whether it should be levied to keep the board going, unless there is performance I suspect the days of even the Meat Board will be numbered. We have to see performance from the board. We have to be able to benchmark that performance, and the board has to show relevance\u2014more than just being there, going through the motions, and supporting the political party of the day, whichever it may be. That is totally wrong. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000302\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003EThe meat industry knows where it has come from and where it is going. As long as politicians keep out of the industry, other than meeting the vital need I talked about earlier of ensuring that free trade operates throughout the world, then we will progress mightily if we get the opportunity. If we get constraint, cost control, and cost structures being placed on us by this Government, we will not progress. So the choice really belongs to the people of this country. Do they want a Labour Government that will perpetuate cost and control, or do they want a free enterprise, centre-right Government? That is the issue; that is what it comes down to. I can see no finer example of success in industry than our current meat industry.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022 data-id=\u00229942167280234b45ad7d8011ffc54bea\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000303\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229942167280234b45ad7d8011ffc54bea\u0022\u003ELARRY BALDOCK (United Future):\u003C/span\u003E I rise to take a very short call on behalf of United Future as this bill passes through its third reading. The member who spoke before me said in his speech on the second reading that he was a very proud farmer, and in that speech he certainly portrayed himself as a very proud ACT party member, as well. He wondered why I laughed. Well, when we hear some things that are really ridiculous we cannot help ourselves. It is spontaneous. We just had to laugh as he took credit for the fact that there is unity in the House today, saying it is entirely dependent upon ACT party policy. The real reason why there is unity on the passage of this bill today is that ACT, for the first time in a long time, has decided to vote for something, instead of simply opposing everything that is ever brought into this House. We are happy that there has been unity on this legislation, because it is important legislation. It is good for the country. It will be good for the meat industry, for our primary industries, and United Future is very happy to see it pass through its third reading today, to benefit the country.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022 data-id=\u0022544ac6a33e094a09908f21ca2fd7c842\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000304\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022544ac6a33e094a09908f21ca2fd7c842\u0022\u003EBRIAN CONNELL (National\u2014Rakaia):\u003C/span\u003E Madam Speaker\u2014[Interruption] I was going to take a very short call on this bill, but if I keep getting heckled I might take my full 10 minutes. We will see how it rolls.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000305\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022\u003EThere is a lot to commend this bill. A lot of the credit goes to the outstanding work of the Primary Production Committee. There are no finer examples of members of that select committee than Phil Heatley and David Carter. David Carter, in his stewardship of the committee, managed to pull back the more extreme views of some Government members and the Greens. I take my hat off to him. I also acknowledge that the consulting advice provided by Shane Ardern in the corridors has made this bill what it is today. I commend the bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000306\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022\u003EThere is overwhelming support for this legislation from those farmers who did vote. [Interruption] The Clayton\u2019s member for Waimakariri is calling out again. I am not sure what he is saying. I would engage the member in a battle of wits but I never attack an unarmed man, so I will just carry on. There is overwhelming support for this legislation. People see that it is common sense and they support it, and that is pretty much the theme. But common sense and the Labour Government do not necessarily go hand in hand. It was not very long ago that this Government was trying to foist the \u201Cfart tax\u201D on to the agricultural industry. If not for people like Shane Ardern, who had the courage of his convictions to jump on his tractor and drive it up the steps of Parliament, becoming a symbol of defiance for the farming communities, then this Government would be taxing sheep and cattle throughout this country right now. I say to Shane Ardern and the farmers who marched on Parliament: \u201CWell done!\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000307\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022\u003EI noted when I was taking a call during the Committee stage that there is a tendency to over-regulate. I was not pointing the finger at any particular Government, but I did raise the question of whether some of this legislation is necessary. I reiterate that concern, because I think there is a tendency for successive Governments to get involved in legislation that is just not necessary.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000308\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022\u003ELet us also be clear that the Meat Board Bill is in existence only because of the hard work and outstanding contribution that our meat and wool farmers have made thus far. Jeff Grant, a former National Party MP, and Mike Petersen have led that work. They are the types of individuals who have made this legislation what it is today. Now, of course, we have the Minister of Agriculture coming in on their shirt tails and trying to claim some of the glory. But the farming industry does not buy that. That is why there will be a change of Government. That is why that member has already flagged that he will retire; he knows that he will not be re-elected down in Aoraki.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000309\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022\u003ELet us also be clear that we have a meat quota now only because of the outstanding work that our farming community has engaged in. There is a sense within this Government that all farmers are a bunch of hayseeds. Well, let me tell those members something: our farmers are now working in a deregulated, highly technology driven, and highly scientific industry, and they are at the forefront of this industry right across the world. They are not underpinned by subsidies. They do not believe in the types of things this Government is trying to do to the rest of New Zealand\u2014that is, to make people dependent. They know that they can exist on their own merits. So I tell Government members opposite that they should be standing up and applauding the farming industry for what it has done, not sitting in judgment and putting in place things like the \u201Cfart tax\u201D. That is exactly what they tried to do, and, lest we forget, it was not very long ago. We will not forget, and the voting public of this country will not forget either.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000310\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022\u003EWe in the farming industry know that we work in a global market. We select people on merit when we put boards together, so that principle should have been adhered to by this Government in deciding the composition of the board. I have already taken a call to signal my concern about that, but it fell on deaf ears as far as the Minister was concerned. But the National Party and the farming industry believe that one appoints people according to merit. Why would one have a board with highly skilled people, then put in place Government patsies to keep an eye on how they perform? It just does not make sense.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000311\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022\u003EI will leave the House with this view. The members of the farming community are successful business people, with asset backings in most cases of $2 million, $3 million, $5 million, $10 million, $15 million, $20 million, or $30 million. If one took that type of business to the city, people would say: \u201COh, that\u2019s a big business. You are successful. We must learn from you.\u201D But we do not do that. There is some sort of derision of the farming community as a bunch of hayseeds, and it is driven by the Clayton Cosgroves of this world. It might surprise members that he talks about being a rural representative. His office is in Papanui Road in Christchurch. He is so far from the rural communities that he gets out there with a packed lunch only once a month to see what a sheep actually looks like. So people should not listen to what that member has to say; they should listen to what the National members have to say, because we respect farmers, and we understand that they are successful business people, and that is why we have thrown our full support behind this legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000312\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022\u003EBill read a third time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000313\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002289e96a55c69540f49a93bb438e8db054\u0022\u003EVisiting Forces Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000314\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022c468ec14eaab4b68a2c6953634eb61bf\u0022\u003EThird Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221583b5cb-f4e0-4981-97ba-193c338ff404\u0022 data-id=\u0022608abc2235e04796b1b8307e21042e85\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000315\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221583b5cb-f4e0-4981-97ba-193c338ff404\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022608abc2235e04796b1b8307e21042e85\u0022\u003EHon MARIAN HOBBS (Minister for the Environment)\u003C/span\u003E on behalf of the Minister of Defence: I move, That the Visiting Forces Bill be now read a third time. This is an important bill that deals with a complex area of international relations and law. In repealing and replacing the Visiting Forces Act 1939 it will rectify the deficiencies in the present law that are only to be expected in legislation that is over six decades old. It will update and amend the law relating to armed forces visiting New Zealand to reflect established international practice. By providing a clearer and more comprehensive legislative basis for accepting visiting armed forces into New Zealand, it will contribute to the enhancement of New Zealand\u2019s international defence and security relationships. It will minimise the possibility of future difficulties in New Zealand\u2019s relationship with States sending forces to this country, by reducing the prospect of misunderstanding surrounding the status, rights, and obligations of forces visiting New Zealand. Most important, it will permit New Zealand to ratify its status of forces agreement with Australia.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000316\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221583b5cb-f4e0-4981-97ba-193c338ff404\u0022\u003EGiven the complexity of the bill\u2019s subject matter, it is a product of lengthy policy development process and broad consultation. It received careful consideration by the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee after it had been referred to that committee last November. The committee\u2019s unanimous recommendations for amendment\u2014it accepted the only public submission, which was that of the Law Society\u2014are reflected in the bill, which I am pleased to observe all parties in this House agreed to on the second reading.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000317\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221583b5cb-f4e0-4981-97ba-193c338ff404\u0022\u003EIn addition to the advantages I have already mentioned, and as my colleague Mark Burton said on introducing this bill, it is also important for reasons of international reciprocity. New Zealand expects its deployed forces to be afforded the privileges and immunities from local jurisdiction that visiting forces customarily have under international law. Those are among the matters dealt with in the status of forces agreements negotiated with the States to which the New Zealand Defence Force deploys, and with which this country has defence relations. Negotiation of such agreements will be made less difficult by New Zealand\u2019s law allowing for similar privileges and immunities for the forces of such States when they visit New Zealand. In bringing law that has been in place since the outbreak of World War II into line with contemporary international law and practice, this bill will enhance New Zealand\u2019s capacity to act as a valued member of the international community. It will underpin the next stage in New Zealand\u2019s closer defence relations with Australia\u2014the ratification of our status of forces agreement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000318\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221583b5cb-f4e0-4981-97ba-193c338ff404\u0022\u003EI would like to thank the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee for the careful consideration it gave to the bill. I would also like to thank the Parliamentary Counsel Office and the New Zealand Defence Force for the excellent work they have done on the development of this bill. Those officials did an excellent job of updating the existing deficient legislation in line with developments in international law. I commend the Visiting Forces Bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022 data-id=\u002217c91f2f40624ff3a9acdd7cfbaf7197\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000319\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002217c91f2f40624ff3a9acdd7cfbaf7197\u0022\u003EDr the Hon LOCKWOOD SMITH (National\u2014Rodney):\u003C/span\u003E I must say that the National Party supports this Visiting Forces Bill, and is pleased to support its third reading.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000320\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EIt is about time this Labour Government got off its butt and put this legislation through the House, because it has a long history. One of the reasons the legislation is needed is that the old Visiting Forces Act of 1939 does not provide for status of forces agreements. Back in 1998 the previous, National-led Government negotiated a status of forces agreement with Australia. That agreement is very important. There is quite an exchange, obviously, of military personnel between Australia and New Zealand, and we often have Australian servicemen and servicewomen here in New Zealand, so the previous National Government negotiated a modern, up-to-date status of forces agreement. The problem is that this Labour Government did nothing to pass the legislation needed to ratify that agreement. In 1998 we negotiated a status of forces agreement with Australia\u2014our most important ally, the people with whom we most frequently exchange military servicemen and servicewomen\u2014but we had no way of ratifying it. It has taken Labour 5 years\u2014almost 6 years\u2014to get off its backside and pass this legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000321\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EOne of the problems caused by Labour\u2019s inaction over the legislation is that it conveys to Australia, our most important friend and ally, the people we work most closely with on military matters, the feeling that New Zealand does not give much priority to defence and military issues. If our defence relationship with Australia mattered to this Labour Government, surely it would have drafted this legislation, which enables ratification of the status of forces agreement, and passed it through Parliament in less than 5 years. That it did not is an indictment on this Labour Government, and it adds further damage to the already somewhat tarnished relationship that this Labour Government has developed with our important friends and allies. The problem in our relationship with the United States of America is almost legendary now. The problem in our relationship with Australia is perhaps less well known, although it did surface during a recent conference in New Zealand, when the Australian Foreign Minister made some comments that were quite polite and diplomatic but did reveal that there are problems in our relationship. The lack of priority that Labour has given to advancing this legislation just confirms the impression that Australia has, and that is bad for New Zealand. It shows the low priority that the Labour Government attaches to defence matters and to the vitally important issues surrounding our relationship with Australia. All I can say now is thank goodness that, finally, the Government got off its backside and had this legislation drafted and introduced into the House. It has passed through the select committee process, and now is in its third reading. The National Opposition certainly will not be holding it up, because it is needed to ratify that status of forces agreement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000322\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EOne of the slightly interesting issues around this legislation\u2014and the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee did quite good work on this\u2014relates to jurisdictional boundaries when we have visiting forces in New Zealand. Following the work of the select committee, a reasonable solution has been developed in the legislation. Essentially, where a status of forces agreement exists, that resolves the issues of jurisdiction and where primary jurisdiction lies. But what this legislation must also provide for, of course, is situations where we have in New Zealand servicemen and servicewomen visiting from foreign countries with which we do not have a status of forces agreement. What the legislation sets out to do\u2014and it is clause 8, particularly, which covers this\u2014is to state that where an offence is believed to have taken place that involves the property or persons of the visiting force, or involves members of the visiting force carrying out their duties within the range of activity of that visiting force, then the primary jurisdiction lies with the sending nation. That makes sense\u2014that where an offence does not involve New Zealand citizens or New Zealand - owned property, then the matter can be dealt with by the sending nation. Clause 8 as amended makes that clear, and clause 15 as amended makes clear that New Zealand courts cannot then get involved and second-guess the work of the sending State in resolving the issue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EBut a slight complexity enters in terms of how the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act appears to affect this issue of jurisdictional boundary. Clause 18 is inserted in the bill to try to clarify the application of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. In fact, clause 18(2) states: \u201CThis section is for the avoidance of doubt.\u201D So clause 18 was inserted to try to clarify the situation in respect of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. All I can say is that if one reads clause 18(1) one finds it is not exactly clear: \u201CThe New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 applies to acts done in New Zealand at the request or on behalf of a visiting force by a person to whom or body to which section 3 of that Act applies.\u201D\u2014meaning the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. That is a very clumsy construction in my view, given that the clause was inserted to try to avoid doubt. It is not very clear what it means.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000324\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EIf we then go back to the commentary from the select committee to try to make sure we understand exactly what the clause means, we read: \u201CFinally, we note that the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act does not apply to the acts of visiting forces. However, if the visiting force\u2019s jurisdiction is exercised over, or assisted by, a person or body to whom section 3 of that Act applies (ie not a member of the visiting force), then the New Zealand courts would have jurisdiction in respect of that exercise or assistance.\u201D The select committee\u2019s interpretation of the issue of the application of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act, as clarified by clause 18, appears to be that the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act may actually be involved in respect of whether New Zealand courts are to exercise primary jurisdiction. That appears to be what the commentary is saying. It seems to me a little complex, because although clause 8 sets out the primary jurisdictional issues it does not mention the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. It is mentioned in clause 18, and clause 18 appears to add a dimension to clause 8 in respect of the boundaries of primary jurisdiction.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000325\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003ESadly, I do not think I was here when the bill went through its Committee stage. It would have been good to have the chance to question the Minister of Defence more closely over the interrelation of those two clauses, and exactly whether the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act of itself has impact on the jurisdictional boundaries. That appears to be the case, from what the select committee has said.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000326\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EAll I can say is that, essentially, the bill sets out the issue of jurisdictional boundaries\u2014who is responsible for prosecuting offences when we have visiting forces in New Zealand. The only element that, to me, is perhaps not quite as clear as it might be\u2014despite the efforts to make it clear\u2014is the application of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. Given that that was why clause 18 was inserted in the bill, it is a wee bit of a shame that the construction of the language is so clumsy as to leave it not as clear as it might be, in my mind. And it is such an important issue; jurisdictional boundary is important when we have visiting forces in New Zealand. I suppose the one positive thing is that we could say that any doubt around this area would encourage sending States to negotiate a status of forces agreement with New Zealand, because that certainly would clarify the issue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000327\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EDespite that slight concern about jurisdictional boundaries and how the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act affects that issue, overall the bill is a sensible measure to replace the Visiting Forces Act of 1939. It finally enables us to ratify our status of forces agreement with Australia. All I can say is thank goodness the Labour Government has finally got off its lazy backside and put this legislation through the House. It has taken the Government 5 years. It is unfortunate that that sends a negative message to Australia about the priority this Government attaches to our relationship with Australia.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022 data-id=\u00222bfa0896e17340dea62cafaaa41d88d9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000328\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222bfa0896e17340dea62cafaaa41d88d9\u0022\u003EHon PETER DUNNE (Leader\u2014United Future):\u003C/span\u003E Madam Deputy Speaker\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000329\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022353c90de8c454f82ad9b01b99bf37a98\u0022\u003EDail Jones\u003C/span\u003E: No, you cannot do that. That is not the agreement any more. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000330\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222a849ed4-a817-45a7-8b86-dbc9dd210193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a76f0b851f8b4bc69f1ae563fe4526b1\u0022\u003EJill Pettis\u003C/span\u003E: We have given him our call.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000331\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b95cb68a10d64b79898063ab40e7da4e\u0022\u003EDail Jones\u003C/span\u003E: I will let it go, but that is not the agreement that was reached with the Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000332\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d2c0f95f7f2041cea705c61161a26457\u0022\u003EHon PETER DUNNE\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Deputy Speaker, I am taking the call because I understand that there has been an agreement, and that the Government has assigned this call to me, and I am grateful for that opportunity. I will not take long, so the member will get his call, probably shortly after the luncheon adjournment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000333\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003EI want to pick up on the point that the previous speaker finished on. This bill does update legislation that is 65 years old, and it does provide for the incorporation of status of forces agreements into the ambit of this legislation. I think the previous speaker\u2019s concern about jurisdictional boundaries, the application of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act, and the interpretation of section 3 of that Act, are covered by his subsequent comment that the impetus will be for visiting forces to negotiate a status of forces agreement, which will cover that particular situation. We discussed this matter in the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee, and I want to acknowledge, as the chair of the committee, the contribution that all the members made to this matter. Mr Jones, with whom we had a wee contretemps a moment or two ago, and other members\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000334\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002282afa81409b94e9da339d8dbf7379c03\u0022\u003EMadam DEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I am sorry to interrupt the member, but the time for the lunch break has arrived. I want to clarify that what Mr Jones said is absolutely right. I thought there had been agreement, but it is right that the No. 3 slot is not a tradable slot. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000335\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003ESitting suspended from 1 p.m. to 2 p.m.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000336\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a7deff36911443ef98458c0345232795\u0022\u003EHon PETER DUNNE\u003C/span\u003E: When the House adjourned for lunch I was commenting on the remarks of the previous speaker, Dr Lockwood Smith, who had raised some interesting questions regarding the application of clause 18, which applies the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 to the provisions of the Visiting Forces Bill, and in particular his comments relating to section 3 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act, which is a fairly tight definition, and how it might be applied in the case of visiting forces. I was making the observation that, to some extent, he had answered his own question, because he opined at the end of his remarks that maybe this would be a further reason why visiting forces ought to conclude a status of forces agreement in respect of any particular attachment, because that would in effect deal with the issues that are still unclear as a result of clause 18. I think he is absolutely correct. My recollection of the discussion at the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee is that when we dealt with these matters we did delve deeply. We still ended up with a grey area, but we came to a pragmatic conclusion that had two legs to it. Firstly, there was the issue of individual status of forces agreements that might be concluded. Secondly, there was the notion that if we got into a really difficult situation in that regard, the particular person who was the source of the difficulty would probably be whisked away home by his or her superiors at the drop of a hat, anyway.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000337\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003EThe only other observation I will make in respect of this third reading, which has widespread support, is that Dr Lockwood Smith spent some time in the opening part of his speech criticising the Government for the tardiness in the preparation of this legislation, particularly in respect of the inclusion in this legislation of the 1998 status of forces agreement with Australia. He referred to the recent Australia New Zealand Leadership Forum and the remarks made by the Australian Foreign Minister, Mr Downer, which were interpreted as being somewhat critical of New Zealand. I will make a couple of comments in respect of that view.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000338\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003EFirst, with regard to whether the Government has been tardy in the preparation of this bill, others will make that judgment, but I make this comment: if this bill provides for status of forces agreements to be incorporated under the heading of the Visiting Forces Bill, and if, as we have just discussed, at the end of the day in a lot of these matters the primacy will lie with the individual status of forces agreement, it does not matter greatly whether the agreement with Australia was included in this bill at this time or at an earlier date.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000339\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003EThe second point I would make, with regard to Mr Downer\u2019s observations, is that I was one of the few New Zealand politicians who were present at the leadership forum. I do not recall any critical comments about New Zealand being made by Mr Downer in the context of that forum. The only critical comment that I recall Mr Downer making, as I would remind the honourable member Dr Lockwood Smith, was made a few days earlier, when he said, with regard to the nuclear impasse between New Zealand and the United States, that it was a great pity the National Party, which at that point seemed keen on changing the law, had not done so when it was in Government. So I think that for Dr Lockwood Smith to use Mr Downer\u2019s alleged criticisms\u2014and I am no defender of Mr Downer\u2014is somewhat strange, given that the criticisms were actually of his own party and not of any actions taken by the Government we have at present.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000340\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003EThis bill is difficult to find substantive argument with. The select committee spent a lot of time on the jurisdictional issues, and at the earlier stage, in the Committee, I acknowledged the contribution of members such as the select committee\u2019s deputy chairperson, Winnie Laban, Mr Power, and others in that discussion, because it was a constructive process. As a result, we have emerged with legislation that I think every party in Parliament will support, and that our armed forces are keen to see put in place. Given the increasing role of New Zealand in terms of both our detachments overseas\u2014the 14 or so deployments we have at the moment\u2014and the two-way traffic that that creates in terms of people coming here, then agreements of this type will be more relevant. The original Visiting Forces Act was written in the context of World War II. There is a vastly different environment today, and this legislation brings us up to speed. I conclude by acknowledging the work of my colleagues on the select committee, congratulating them on their efforts, and making the observation that we have a sound bill that will serve New Zealand well in the future.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022 data-id=\u0022c65d1464774d4f54baeb7f33d162a514\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000341\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c65d1464774d4f54baeb7f33d162a514\u0022\u003EDAIL JONES (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E New Zealand First supports the Visiting Forces Bill. This is legislation that brings up to date and amends the law relating to visiting forces to reflect recognised international practice, and enables New Zealand to give effect to status of forces agreements concluded with other states. It is a straightforward matter and we do not intend to delay it any further. New Zealand First supports the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022 data-id=\u00227f7a140388be4e8f80a6a2e9e16b47ac\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000342\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227f7a140388be4e8f80a6a2e9e16b47ac\u0022\u003EKEITH LOCKE (Green):\u003C/span\u003E I rise on behalf of the Greens to support the third reading of the bill, as we have supported it through its previous stages. I think support for the bill is really a practical matter. We have to allow visiting forces some autonomy in their affairs in this country. That is the nature of armed services; they have their own codes of discipline and ways of operating, and it would be very difficult in a practical sense to have visiting forces here without that provision. But we should have two cautions in relation to that. Firstly, we do not wish the individuals who are part of the visiting force to suffer some injustices in the way they are treated by the command of the visiting force. Secondly, we do not want visiting forces to affect New Zealanders or their property, without obtaining some sanction. I think the bill has been worked out with this in mind. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000343\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThe bill proposes updating the base document for visiting forces, which has been longstanding, to make it more appropriate today. On top of this, for each visiting force a status of forces agreement would be discussed, negotiated, and signed. In one sense this base document grants sovereign immunity to the members of the visiting force, but this does not mean that New Zealand should wash its hands of what happens to its members, or the consequences for New Zealand. There is a bit of a problem if somehow, in the process of justice within the visiting forces, injustices do occur. We can illustrate this by clause 9, which has two parts. Firstly, the \u201Cvisiting force must not impose, or carry out, a sentence of death in New Zealand\u201D. That covers the situation where the visiting force imposes or carries out the death sentence here, but it does not necessarily cover the situation where the alleged offending member of the visiting force is dragged back to his or her home country and then has the death sentence imposed and carried out. Surely we want to guard against that. This does apply here because there is the death penalty in Singapore and China, and we can have visiting forces from those countries. Singaporean troops come here fairly frequently. How would that issue be dealt with? It came out in the Foreign Affairs, Defence, and Trade Committee that it would be handled primarily by negotiation between New Zealand and the Government concerned\u2014say, the Singaporean Government\u2014to make sure that it never eventuates and that an offence committed in New Zealand by the visiting force cannot result in the offender being sent back to his or her home country, being condemned to death, and that sentence being carried out. We would have to be very conscious of pursuing that, in the spirit of the bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000344\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThe second question is due process, and again the justice systems in countries like China and Singapore are not terribly good on due process. We all know about China, I think, and it is much the same in Singapore. In this so-called war on terrorism, one often reads in the newspapers about people being arrested in Singapore as alleged terrorists and put in jail. Then one reads the fine print and finds that not a single one of them has ever been brought to trial. They are all sitting there in jail, on renewable sentences under the Internal Security Act, without any due process whatsoever. We have to guard that members of visiting forces who allegedly commit infractions are treated in a just way. Again, it would be a process of negotiation between the New Zealand Government and the Government of the visiting force to make sure that did happen.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000345\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003E The other part, clause 9(1)(b), states: \u201CThe service authorities of a visiting force must not\u2014(b) do any act in New Zealand that would, if done by a member of the Armed Forces of New Zealand, constitute an offence under the Crimes of Torture Act 1989.\u201D That provision has gained more relevance in recent times, with all the pictures shown around the world of what has been happening under the jurisdiction of the American forces in Abu Ghraib prison and at Guantanamo Bay, etc., and it has relevance here because we have a US visiting force in this country. I do not think it is terribly likely that the current commander of the visiting force at Harewood is torturing American soldiers\u2014I do not think that is terribly likely, at all\u2014but I think it alerts us to the situation that we have to look at how the visiting force treats its prisoners, or even members of its own armed force. It is clear from what has been said in all the Amnesty International reports, and even in American Government reports, that the Americans have treated prisoners in Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib, and in other places in Iraq, in ways that are contrary to the Crimes of Torture Act, in terms of putting hoods on people, putting them in painful positions, threatening them, and doing what amounts to a form of water torture, etc. There is quite a big list of ways in which American forces recently have clearly acted contrary to the Crimes of Torture Act and to the international convention on torture. We would have to keep an eye on that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000346\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThis relates to another point that occurred to me when thinking about this problem. It is not specifically in the bill, but perhaps it should go in the status of forces agreement that would be set up on top of the legislation. This point is about having more transparency in the justice operations of visiting forces when they are in New Zealand. Even if we allow them jurisdiction over how they deal with their own soldiers, there could be some system whereby the nature of the application of that justice, and any questions about the nature of the application of that justice, are made available to the host country\u2014in this case, New Zealand\u2014so that if there are any concerns about torture or anything else, they can be negotiated between the Governments of the two countries. I think that that would be a fit with this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000347\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThe other question is about the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act, which Peter Dunne referred to. I think it is important that the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act applies to any New Zealander who may be working, in one way or another, with the visiting force. I think that in that respect we should never put New Zealanders outside the ambit of New Zealand legislation and of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000348\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThe other question I want to raise relates to civil jurisdiction, beyond criminal jurisdiction. We have a problem here, in a sense, and it can even apply to the history of the US visiting force at Harewood. Various children have been fathered by members of the American visiting force there, and there have been various civil suits relating to paternity, responsibilities, and things like that. I think it is important for the New Zealand Government\u2014although this is not strictly a part of this bill\u2014to be engaged with those issues, and not to say that just because the soldiers have gone back to Milwaukee or somewhere, the effect of the members of that visiting force on New Zealand citizens, such as women who bear children by those soldiers, is of no concern. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000349\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EI think it is important that in negotiating the status of forces agreements, we take a tough line on some Governments\u2014such as the American Government\u2014that may not want to have this transparency and have any interference at all in their activities. The American Government is a bit more open to negotiations now. The other day it had to accommodate a vote at the United Nations Security Council about the application of the International Criminal Court to its soldiers in Iraq. The American Government has not fully accommodated the International Criminal Court, but it has had to start giving ground under pressure from the international community. I think we should approach negotiations with the United States in the confidence that we do have the people of the world behind us in making sure that visiting forces operate correctly. We do not want a situation as, for instance, has occurred in Okinawa. I heard on the radio the other day a woman saying that there have been hundreds of cases of US Army infractions against women in Okinawa, which has caused great hostility amongst the people of Okinawa. We want our relations with visiting forces to take account of the human consequences. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022 data-id=\u00227819a7d96cd04880bf3c06d0a0a502f7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000350\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227819a7d96cd04880bf3c06d0a0a502f7\u0022\u003EHon KEN SHIRLEY (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E The ACT party supports the Visiting Forces Bill. It is clearly necessary legislation. It is clearly overdue legislation. The status of visiting forces is an important issue, and all around the world various jurisdictions have confronted this problem. I note that back in 1998 the New Zealand Government signed an agreement with Australia with the intention of amending the law to bring it into line with international law and practice relating to the status of visiting forces, but that it could never be ratified because of New Zealand legislation dating back to 1939. Our 1939 legislation prohibited us from ratifying the agreement we signed with Australia in 1998. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000351\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022\u003EI guess the issue here is why the Government has taken so long to bring what I regard as important legislation to the House. Admittedly, we are now doing the third reading under urgency, but the Government has been in office for over 4 years, and surely could have brought this matter\u2014which is quite a minor matter in a procedural sense\u2014to a close earlier. The bill clearly has the support of the whole Parliament. It is not a question of battling it through Parliament. I say to the Minister, Mark Burton, that he really has no excuse for not having brought this bill to Parliament at a much earlier date than today. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000352\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022\u003ESuffice to say that the ACT party will support this bill. In so doing, we express our regret that New Zealand is now so far out of the sphere of influence of other forces. New Zealand has become isolationist, and that is of deep regret to the ACT party. We have been cut off here in the South Pacific, and our military people are very concerned that they do not get to exercise enough, and that we do not have sufficient foreign troops exercising in this country. We used to have the Five Power Defence Arrangement, which was very active. I say to the Minister that it still exists in name, but unfortunately there is nothing like the scale of activity that we used to see. I know that New Zealand\u2019s armed forces used to benefit considerably from the activities under that Five Power Defence Arrangement. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000353\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022\u003EBut ACT is happy to see the bill going through the House, and we express regret that this Government has taken so long to bring it here. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002272e48ab0-e7ae-427f-bedc-793b7a91adba\u0022 data-id=\u00228522275a19194a74bf526a2f93f4e8bb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000354\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002272e48ab0-e7ae-427f-bedc-793b7a91adba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228522275a19194a74bf526a2f93f4e8bb\u0022\u003EHon MARK BURTON (Minister of Defence):\u003C/span\u003E I will not take up the House\u2019s time by repeating the comments my colleague Marian Hobbs kindly made on my behalf, but it is important that I add to that my appreciation of the officials and the members of the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee that dealt with this bill. It is a complex piece of work, and it took a considerable amount of development and consultation to get it right. As Mr Shirley quite rightly said, it will now allow the ratification of the status of forces agreement with Australia. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000355\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002272e48ab0-e7ae-427f-bedc-793b7a91adba\u0022\u003EI want to conclude by giving Mr Shirley some good news. He is, clearly, very out of date with his Five Power Defence Arrangement\u2014\u201Carrangement\u201D, in fact, is the name of the arrangement we have. Not only is it in good shape, it is more active than it has ever been. New Zealand is playing a bigger part than it ever has\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000356\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222469aecf1ca141d489df3a6331e53408\u0022\u003EHon Ken Shirley\u003C/span\u003E: Absolute baloney!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000357\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002272e48ab0-e7ae-427f-bedc-793b7a91adba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e20aa9757b5742db8ce7ee9a4fbac354\u0022\u003EHon MARK BURTON\u003C/span\u003E: I can tell the member that I have just returned from the Five Power Defence Arrangement Ministers\u2019 meeting in Singapore, where Ministers agreed to an extension of the arrangement to incorporate the non-conventional threats that increasingly confront the defence forces of the world. Indeed, down the track it is our expectation that the contributing nations are likely to see not only military elements involved in exercises, but, increasingly, non-military agencies, as well. As we all understand, and as it dominated our discussions\u2014as it did at the International Institute for Strategic Studies conference I attended, at which I met with 15 Ministers of Defence, including Secretary Rumsfeld, Adam Ingram from the United Kingdom, my colleague from Australia, and many others\u2014it is the non-conventional threats that are now the biggest issue confronting the security of nations. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000358\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002272e48ab0-e7ae-427f-bedc-793b7a91adba\u0022\u003EIt is in that area that New Zealand is playing an increasingly important part. The strength of our working relationship has never been better. I am happy to give that good news to the ACT party, and to give it an update on what is actually happening in the big world out there. I pass on my congratulations to the House on supporting this good legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000359\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002272e48ab0-e7ae-427f-bedc-793b7a91adba\u0022\u003EBill read a third time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000360\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022c61f05bb6fc74c3e9573513ce5b3204f\u0022\u003ELocal Government Law Reform Bill (No 3)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000361\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022bcfa084b47644b07a301ee88a1187420\u0022\u003ESecond Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022 data-id=\u0022774e0a4df2124a68af2a35e7b471e0de\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000362\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022774e0a4df2124a68af2a35e7b471e0de\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS CARTER (Minister of Local Government):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the Local Government Law Reform Bill (No 3) be now read a second time. The purpose of this bill is to further ensure that the legislative framework in which local government operates is as comprehensive and clear as possible. The bill seeks to clarify and address a range of issues relating to local government legislation that are mostly technical in their nature. The reported-back bill achieves that aim, and deals with several additional issues raised in submissions to the Local Government and Environment Committee. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000363\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003ESince taking office, the Government has introduced a comprehensive package of legislative reforms, to bring New Zealand\u2019s system of local government into the 21st century. We have delivered new local government legislation that is modern, innovative, and flexible. The package has included the Local Government Act 2002, the Local Electoral Act, and the Local Government (Rating) Act. As with any major legislative change, it is not unusual that some minor issues have arisen that need to be addressed. That fine-tuning will provide more certainty and clarity for councils, as they administer and work within the legislation to be amended by this bill. It will also provide communities with greater certainty in their dealings with their local authorities. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000364\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003EI want to take this opportunity to acknowledge the hard work put in by the Local Government and Environment Committee in meeting the tight timetable it had for its consideration of this bill, and to acknowledge my officials who worked so hard on it. The time frame was driven by one provision of the bill: a clarification of the right of a candidate to be able to stand for the positions of both mayor and ward councillor in the same territorial authority election. That right needs to be clarified before 23 July 2004, the opening date for nominations for this October\u2019s local authority elections. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000365\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003EOver 40 submissions were received on the bill. The majority, as expected, came from local government, and I would like to thank the sector for its participation. There was widespread support from the sector for the intent of the bill, and for many of its specific provisions. However, there were some issues that councils raised about the bill\u2019s provisions and some new issues that councils wanted the committee to consider. Recognising the value of the submissions, the select committee has responded by recommending some changes to the original bill. I would like to take this opportunity to outline some of those changes. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000366\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003EIn respect of the Dog Control Act, adjustments are recommended to some of the infringement offences and fees, to provide greater consistency in the level of fees for like offences. Reductions are recommended for some fees in response to submissions that argued that while the fees are intended to give a strong message about the public\u2019s expectations about the control of dogs, in some cases the fees are difficult to use effectively. The committee has also recommended that provision be made for the national dog control database to contain dog control \u2013 related data over and above that which councils are required to provide. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000367\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003EIn respect of the Local Government Act, the committee received a number of submissions on the issue of the removal of the casting vote. The vast majority of those opposed its removal, and strongly urged the reinstatement of that tool for helping to ensure efficient local authority meeting processes. The committee recognised the practical difficulties that might arise from the absence of a casting vote, and recommended its reinstatement in limited circumstances. On further reflection, the Government believes that local authorities should have the discretion to provide in their own standing orders for a casting vote in any circumstances where there is an equality of votes. I will be introducing a Supplementary Order Paper to that effect, and also be including other technical drafting improvements during the Committee stage of this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000368\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003ESubsidiaries of port companies are currently exempt from the definition of a council-controlled organisation. The committee has recommended extending that exemption to companies that are 50 percent or more owned by a port company. Also in respect of the Local Government Act, the committee has recommended a new clause to repeal the current prohibition on the delegation of a council\u2019s power to warrant enforcement officers. That recommendation aims to overcome the practical difficulties being experienced by some councils having to wait up to 6 weeks for meetings, before a warrant can be issued. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000369\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003EIn respect of the Local Government (Rating) Act, the committee has recommended that a new clause be added to make owners\u2019 names and addresses held on a local authority\u2019s rating information database available to the public under certain conditions. In order to protect privacy, a provision is recommended to allow the owner to have his or her name and postal address removed from the copy of the rating information database that is to be made publicly available. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000370\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003ESome councils raised issues that the committee felt were not appropriate for this bill, but would be better considered in the impending review of the new local government legislation. I endorse the committee\u2019s view on those matters. The Local Government Commission is to undertake a review of the Local Government Act and the Local Electoral Act following the local authority elections in 2007. The committee also noted that the commission must report to the Minister of Local Government in July 2005 on any legislative amendments it considers are needed before the 2007 local authority elections. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000371\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003EAs I mentioned earlier, it is highly desirable that this bill be enacted before 23 July, because of the one provision in it that will impact on the forthcoming local authority elections. I hope MPs will keep that in mind in the ensuing debate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022 data-id=\u00220e59e79ff474428aabd34f1479001da0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000372\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220e59e79ff474428aabd34f1479001da0\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH (National\u2014Nelson):\u003C/span\u003E What the Minister did not acknowledge in his second reading speech is that this bill is really the \u201CFix Up the Chris Carter Botch-up Bill\u201D. The provisions in respect of changing the Local Government Act and the Dog Control Act all arise because the Minister rushed through legislation under urgency\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000373\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fbb7e99b83eb4a3f9d2115085344f0fc\u0022\u003EJohn Carter\u003C/span\u003E: He\u2019s doing it again.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000374\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002231eef9d141c04fdd859c1019f371a0e9\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: He is doing it again\u2014and got it wrong, and now Parliament has to fix up his errors. What is particularly frustrating\u2014[Interruption] Well, in the Minister\u2019s case he does not have any to do so\u2014is that the Opposition parties warned the Minister at the time that the legislation was in difficulty. He ignored that advice, and has taken us down this road of now being in urgency and having to pass patch-up legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000375\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EThe first of the provisions is in respect of the Local Government Act and the Local Electoral Act. The botch-up was that the Minister\u2019s legislation inadvertently prevented a councillor from being able to stand both as mayor and as a councillor in a council ward. National was of the view that a councillor should be able to do that, and to let the voters decide. We have always held that view, and our only question is why the Minister got it wrong on the first occasion. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000376\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EThe second thing we wish to make plain is that National firmly opposes Chris Carter\u2019s view that every dog in New Zealand should be microchipped. It was a silly idea that he put in the original dog control legislation. It is still a silly idea and it is sad that the Government has chosen not to revisit it, despite the number of submissions from councils around the country stating that it is a dopey idea. I find it ironic that the Minister stands in the House and says that this legislation is all about councils being allowed to manage themselves, about the legislation not being prescriptive, and about councils having the power of general competence. There is all that sort of rhetoric, but then he says he will prescribe that every dog in New Zealand will be microchipped and, even worse, that we in this Parliament and on the select committee have to prescribe the individual fines for dog owners in respect of individual offences. The Minister is quite correct in saying we did receive submissions that the fines he put in his original legislation did not work. But the question I want to ask the Minister is this: why is he any more confident that we have got it right now? Why does he not trust councils\u2014communities\u2019 own elected representatives\u2014to determine the fines? Is it not more simple for Parliament to say to the councils that they can prescribe a fine up to $1,000, and can sort out the rates of appropriate fines for offences committed at different reserves in their communities. I think that would work far better than what is proposed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000377\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EI also want to tackle the Minister with regard to the way he is wrecking local representation in rural communities. In the Local Government Act 2002, the Minister insisted that there be a narrow plus or minus 10 percent variation in determining the boundaries of wards. The Local Government and Environment Committee received many submissions from people who were concerned that that would not work and would disadvantage communities like the Wairarapa, the Waitaki, Tasman, and the Rangit\u012Bkei. [Interruption] The member for Wairarapa does not even listen to her own constituents. She is so occupied with meeting every politically correct cause that she has forgotten about representing the people of the Wairarapa. I say exactly the same thing about the member for Otago, who ignored the submissions of the Waimate District Council, that that provision in the Act does not work because it cuts across community boundaries. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000378\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EI have visited many councils. I have gone to council after council\u2014[Interruption] Well, the member for Otaki pokes his head up. Has he bothered to listen to the council in his own area, which raised that serious deficiency in the Minister\u2019s legislation with me? The council in that member\u2019s community pleaded with me, when I visited it, to advance changes to that particular provision. But that member is more interested in following the instructions of the Minister than in representing the community on the coast north of Wellington. The provision in the Act is so narrow that it cuts across communities of interest and rural communities.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000379\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222a849ed4-a817-45a7-8b86-dbc9dd210193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ef93d0a7502d42e992873ff5b978a487\u0022\u003EJill Pettis\u003C/span\u003E: He\u2019s the one who beat Roger by 8,000 votes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000380\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022124d239f29194d3a95190848f39b5665\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: What is that screeching from the member for Whanganui?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000381\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222a849ed4-a817-45a7-8b86-dbc9dd210193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002297c0ad0df4c44bbe8094535c12bd543b\u0022\u003EJill Pettis\u003C/span\u003E: I said he\u2019s the one who beat Roger what\u2019s-his-name by 8,000 votes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000382\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bfef3070e3aa4fae8454f4c4dad8d0c9\u0022\u003EGovernment Member\u003C/span\u003E: Sowry.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000383\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b56a5639191b4f7686564068c3b31367\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: But why does he not do his job? That is the point. Why does the member not get on his feet and represent\u2014[Interruption] Well, I have to say this. Roger Sowry supports the changes that his community wants, which are for the ward boundaries\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000384\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223d862f6d5ac24794a9d86835f69e6445\u0022\u003EGovernment Member\u003C/span\u003E: He\u2019s a list MP.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000385\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224a47df99005a47b190dd7c672368eab3\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: The member from the Kapiti coast is such a hopeless member that he ignores the wishes of his own community in respect of wards, so Roger Sowry has to do the job for him. I forget the member\u2019s name, as members hear so little from him. I would like him to get to his feet, defend his own community, and explain why he thinks the ward boundaries of his local council should be cut across, rather than Parliament provide provisions that work for communities. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000386\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EThe reality is that Labour does not give a stuff for rural communities. Those members do not want to see communities in those areas represented around the council table. They are interested only in their party hacks being on councils, so they have ignored the wishes of communities all over New Zealand that want to see those provisions changed. I give notice now to the Minister\u2014and it will be a test of that member, as to whether he will vote for these amendments\u2014that we will be moving amendments to make provision for communities of interest to get greater recognition in respect of the development of ward boundaries. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000387\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EThe last point I want to make is with regard to the issue of rating database information. Again, the Minister messed it up. His legislation in 2002 resulted in all the rating records from around New Zealand suddenly becoming private information. He goofed, he got it wrong, and again, the select committee has had to fix up his mistake. I think the committee has done a good job of finding an appropriate balance between the practical necessity for people to be able to obtain the names of the owners of adjacent properties, while at the same time allowing a limited mechanism for those owners who want privacy. I think we ended up with\u2014this is so typical of this Minister\u2014politically correct legislation overridden by the need for privacy. I have to ask the Minister why we passed a law in his name just 2 years ago, banning citizens from having the right to get rating information on the ownership of properties.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000388\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022285ea82be02f4c21bb50a85073672f11\u0022\u003EHon Chris Carter\u003C/span\u003E: No, not under my name\u2014Sandra Lee\u2019s.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000389\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022091c84093da04c7eb48702fd2288641b\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: The Minister says it was all Sandra Lee\u2019s fault. Well, I looked at the record, and I noticed that National members voted against that measure, and Chris Carter voted for it. So it was all Sandra Lee\u2019s fault! \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000390\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022744a7e9928f34510b1d0da8ed102b334\u0022\u003EDarren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: What did the High Court say about it?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000391\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223b9e90783d594c5bb453c16fdbbf57b0\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: The truth is the Minister got it wrong; he made a mistake. Now the member for Otaki pipes up. He is interested in what the High Court said. Today, the Government\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000392\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022af87f0b6db0b47b495a0ee69da72ee03\u0022\u003EDarren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: What did the High Court say about this matter?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000393\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d5f7ebee001e413ab431e3de74619617\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: It said it was really interesting that every party in this Parliament has signed up to the changes that I advocated within the Family Court. I am very proud of that, and I say to that Government member that I hope he is able to advance some changes, rather than make his smart-arse comments\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000394\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f9e680eb6ae04ef18460ef20a3b479c0\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The member risks having his speech terminated, with a comment like that. He knows that was out of order. He will withdraw and apologise.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000395\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222d06e32841fa4a51b4ae687e335489bb\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: I withdraw and apologise. I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Why is it possible that I can have comments made about my haircut and all sorts of issues raised in interjections that are totally irrelevant to the bill, and you sit there doing nothing, but the moment I respond you pull me up?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000396\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c6c8dd5b49364a9caab7be2e841eef8e\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, I have allowed a certain amount of interjection. The member is prone to interject frequently from his seat. I thought he liked it, and I thought he was scoring quite well. I did not actually think he was losing on the deal. If people interject, they run the risk of being replied to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000397\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eb1bca5469c04a94bc0dd6ef825ecb18\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: This bill, as I have repeatedly stated, is the \u201CFix Up Chris Carter\u2019s Mess Bill\u201D. The Minister passed the Local Government Act under urgency. Large portions of it now have to be amended. The dog control provisions and the rating information provisions have to be rehashed. Also, the local government election provisions have to be rewritten. Members on the Opposition side of the House are getting tired of incompetent Ministers who cannot get their legislation right, and who then expect this Parliament to fix up those messes under urgency. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000398\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EI think it is time we had a change, and had a Minister of Local Government who is up to the job.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223a0e52c8-5bb1-4325-9870-21f4e3eb3702\u0022 data-id=\u00221c6762f84b4d4531af8fcd6597966afd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000399\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223a0e52c8-5bb1-4325-9870-21f4e3eb3702\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221c6762f84b4d4531af8fcd6597966afd\u0022\u003EMARTIN GALLAGHER (Labour\u2014Hamilton West):\u003C/span\u003E What a performance! The less and least said, the better. Unlike the multi-Minister display that there has been in local government over the previous 9 years\u2014and as interesting as that may sound, I did have quite a bit of affection for Mr Banks\u2014this is a very good Minister. I compliment this Minister, and I think this bill has proved that he is listening to local government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000400\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223a0e52c8-5bb1-4325-9870-21f4e3eb3702\u0022\u003EUnder this Government, local government, for the first time in a long time, actually feels listened to. Tick the box for the local government prime ministerial summit that is held during the year. Tick the box for the on-the-record compliments that the president and vice-president of Local Government New Zealand pay this Government. We have a really good local government leader in Basil Morrison\u2014not some way-out left-winger, Dr Smith, but a very sound, excellent mayor from Hauraki. He is quite a conservative fellow, but very complimentary about this Government\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000401\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224b8b91a8200443859661c48605f933c4\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: A good man.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000402\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223a0e52c8-5bb1-4325-9870-21f4e3eb3702\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022106aed09439e43398c30f13ceddaeb60\u0022\u003EMARTIN GALLAGHER\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014and a very good man. He is full of praise for this Government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000403\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223a0e52c8-5bb1-4325-9870-21f4e3eb3702\u0022\u003EThere are two issues I want to deal with quickly in the time available. I look forward to being part of the Local Government and Environment Committee debate around electoral tolerance\u2014the plus or minus 10 percent factor. In simple maths, all that means is that even under the 10 percent some communities can effectively be 20 percent worse off in terms of the vote. One has to work out what a reasonable vote per value in terms of the numbers per ward is, as is done in the general electorates with the plus or minus 5 percent factor. It is hardly rocket science. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000404\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223a0e52c8-5bb1-4325-9870-21f4e3eb3702\u0022\u003EThere are two things. Firstly, I think it is very good that councillors can also stand for mayor and councillor. I think it is very wrong to blame the Minister for that. Quite bluntly, if I were to blame anyone, it would be some officials who perhaps did not do their homework well enough. [Interruption] I am saying that as a member of Parliament, but I was in local government for a number of years before coming here, and I thought it would have been an easy thing to do. But I thank those people who pointed out the error. It was a drafting error, an error by officials. [Interruption] One can hardly blame the Minister for wording like that. It has been fixed up, so tick the box. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000405\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223a0e52c8-5bb1-4325-9870-21f4e3eb3702\u0022\u003ESecondly, the casting vote issue\u2014tick the box on that. Basil Morrison and others spoke to me quite strongly on that issue, and I went to Chris Carter. I found Chris Carter incredibly empathetic and ready to listen. He said: \u201CLet\u2019s listen closely to local government.\u201D A compliment goes to Basil Morrison, Local Government New Zealand, my own council, and others in terms of the casting vote issue. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000406\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223a0e52c8-5bb1-4325-9870-21f4e3eb3702\u0022\u003E Personally, I have always believed that the mayor is a little bit different from other councillors. I commend to all members of the House a paper by former mayor Margaret Evans around the role of mayor, which she wrote for a recent degree thesis. Albeit the mayor is technically first among equals in this country, I do strongly believe that the mayor should have a casting vote. I acknowledge that the mayor has a district-wide or city-wide mandate, and I think the casting vote at least gives effect to that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000407\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223a0e52c8-5bb1-4325-9870-21f4e3eb3702\u0022\u003EWithout further ado, I want to say that this is a good bill, and I look forward to its speedy passage. Again, it is such a pleasure to be part of a wonderful reforming Government that has given us excellent local government legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022 data-id=\u00227d60fe254c7a4e7c86c71fc6875ed0e5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000408\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227d60fe254c7a4e7c86c71fc6875ed0e5\u0022\u003EJIM PETERS (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E What an amazing speech in defence! Just over 2 years ago, local government legislation was passed under urgency and in haste. It was said then that that legislation was not ready for publication, as it were, and the fact that we are back here again today, looking at amendments to that legislation, proves it. The Minister has not had the fortitude to face up to the fact that the local government legislation of 2002 and the amendments to the Resource Management Act passed in 2003 are not yet in harmony, and that any serious attempt to amend the legislation before us now should have been done with far greater care, much more thought, and much more deliberation, rather than his suggesting to us that he will come back at some future date with a long-term look at the legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000409\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003EHaving said that, I commend the Minister for the fact that, at long last, after some days and weeks of thought\u2014I am not sure why it took days and weeks\u2014common sense has prevailed with regard to the casting vote provision. The previous speaker, Mr Gallagher, said the Minister came to that understanding, and he commended him for that. Instead, I say to the Minister that there is something seriously amiss in his department if a casting vote provision introduced on the day that the legislation will be passed is the final answer, given that that was the most common-sense approach right from day one. Whether it shows a certain fortitude on the part of his ministerial officials, in a very correct manner, or whether a single individual decided somewhere in the distant past that there should be wonderful, above-the-clouds consensus at all council meetings, I am not sure, but it is plain stupid that on the last day possible we get a common-sense answer to a straightforward problem. I commend the Minister for finally arriving there. Why it took so long is beyond my understanding. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000410\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003EThe second thing I want to raise is that in the deliberations for the 2002 legislation, I raised the issue of council-owned organisations. Specifically, I mentioned the role of port companies, because many regional councils, in particular, have a role for them. There was no understanding by the Department of Internal Affairs, although, finally, there was a dim understanding that there was an issue there. I am very pleased to say that a company that is run on the basis of, say, Northport, the Northland port corporation, which is a joint venture with the Port of Tauranga, has finally had adequate provision for its reporting requirements accepted in this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000411\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003EThe last issue I want to raise is the database. I am not quite sure why, as the Hon Nick Smith said, it took so long to reach a common understanding. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000412\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003EIn the course of submissions, the Marlborough District Council came to us on behalf of rural councils with issues in relation to lump-sum contributions. I draw members\u2019 attention to my proposed amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 227, and say very quickly that it is highly deserving of attention. The Marlborough District Council came to us with the support of other councils such as the Far North District Council, the Nelson City Council, the Kaikoura District Council, the Whangarei District Council, the Grey District Council\u2014I could go on with a long list. All those councils did so because in the Local Government (Rating) Act of 2002 the rating powers in the 1988 Act were, for some reason, changed, and there seems to be no reason why that was done. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000413\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003EIt has been the common practice of councils in the past\u2014in particular, rural councils\u2014to invite lump sum contributions to fund special, localised infrastructural projects. There is a known community preference for a lump-sum contribution. It is well established and common. Under the provisions of the Rating Powers Act of 1988, councils would have had the option to do that, as they had in the past, and many councils did just that. What did the legislation cover? It covered the regime for allowing it and the potential methods of calculating the contribution as a lump sum, separate rate to finance the loan or fund the work. In other words, it was an elaborate procedure to establish a very fair balance. It provided for those who wanted to pay a lump sum and those who did not wish to take up that option. It was fair and equitable. The Local Government (Rating) Act of 2002 changed that, and caused some councils great concern. Although it was intended to provide more flexible policies for lump-sum contributions, serious issues were left in the residue of the Act that needed to be resolved. Those issues were presented to the committee, and for some strange reason\u2014I apologise to members of the committee, as I was not there that day\u2014they were not accepted. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000414\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003EI raise again the issue of how transparent and clear the system outlined in the Supplementary Order Paper is. It is very clear indeed. It raises the issue of how the contribution is raised and why. The Act sets out a far more deliberate\u2014and, unfortunately, sometimes costly\u2014procedure for consultation. Unlike earlier days when lump-sum contributions might have earned a council resolution, contributions today for a special, localised project, even when small, are the subject of a policy with a significant threshold, and therefore is not likely to take place unless two issues are overcome\u2014firstly, whether it is significant, and secondly, whether it has been transparently explained and understood. The explanatory note covers why this is an issue of choice. It is a choice whether councils exercise it. There is a clear indication in the Act that greater choice is one of the rationales for that Act, and this Supplementary Order Paper fits into that long-term desire of local authorities to do their best for their local communities. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000415\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003EWith regard to the dog legislation, my party supported microchipping, and we earnestly believe it is the way of the future for all stock. I have no doubt that if I were to come back in 10 years time, I would find that it was part of an established system for tracking animals. Today, a bill was passed that dealt with that. For dairy farmers, there is a clear tracking system for the product from the shed to the consumer, and microchipping fits into that system. Dogs fit into that system as well, so I make no apologies for our stance in 2002 and 2003 in relation to that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000416\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003ESecondly, councils do have discretion with regard to dog issues. As councils set their rates, I followed, through the newspapers, the contributions made by locally elected people about how the dog legislation would be administered. When we come to the Committee stage, I will give members an example of an excellent dog policy from the Waitakere area. It is working, and most councils find the legislation agreeable. We support that part of the legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002209278070-a54a-41e9-8a27-45166301277e\u0022 data-id=\u002239f83057908a4805a3a4737f633a096e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000417\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209278070-a54a-41e9-8a27-45166301277e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002239f83057908a4805a3a4737f633a096e\u0022\u003EJEANETTE FITZSIMONS (Co-Leader\u2014Green):\u003C/span\u003E The Local Government Act 2002 is a huge piece of legislation, and it is not surprising that, a year and a bit afterward, there are some technical changes to make. It may seem to those who entered Parliament part-way through the year 2002 that that legislation was being rushed through, and that may be assisted by the fact that it did eventually pass under urgency in an attempt to get the House\u2019s business through before Christmas. In fact, the select committee had been considering that bill for almost a year. There was extensive hearing of submissions, and by the time the election came, we had got a long way through it. We then did our best to help new members catch up, but I acknowledge it was quite a big job for them. However, I really do not think we can say that that Act was rushed through without proper consideration. Actually, Nick Smith was a member of that committee at the time, and, had he picked up any of these technical changes, he would have been quite free to promote them at the select committee at the time. But he did not. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000418\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209278070-a54a-41e9-8a27-45166301277e\u0022\u003EThe bill in front of us now is an omnibus bill that amends seven Acts. The amendments are mostly technical and non-controversial, but there are four issues that I want to raise in the House. The first one is the question of the changes to the infringement offences in the Dog Control Act, which are made in the schedule, and there has been widespread misunderstanding about this. I was quite surprised to be rung by numerous radio stations after this bill was reported back. Obviously the public has a great interest in how much one gets fined if one does not do the right thing with one\u2019s dog. But it was unfortunate that even people like the editor of the Waikato Times saw the lessening of some of these infringement amounts as an indication that Parliament had gone soft on dog control and simply did not understand that an infringement offence applies to the lesser offences and is more in the nature of an instant fine. If one actually endangers the public seriously with one\u2019s dog, or one seriously breaks the law, one is prosecuted and goes to court. The sentences then can be very much more severe, including substantial periods of imprisonment. I think the public did not understand that when we stated in our report back that it is silly to set infringement fines that the public cannot pay, because then the council will have to take them to court anyway. The public did not understand that there is another route open to councils, and that is to take a prosecution in the first place for offences that are more serious. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000419\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209278070-a54a-41e9-8a27-45166301277e\u0022\u003ESecondly, I want to talk about the casting vote. The Greens have believed for a long time that democracy is not well served by the old approach to voting: \u201C51 percent I win; 49 percent you lose; eat that!\u201D. We do not think that leads to good outcomes. We do not think it leads to community acceptance of the outcome. We think it leads to constant policy change and overthrow, as a different lot of people come in and want revenge on the ones who were there beforehand. We believe that striving for a greater degree of support for new ideas is worth doing. Seeking some consensus is never going to be complete\u2014there will always be differences of ideas\u2014but if we cannot actually get more than 51 percent support for something, then it may mean that there is something wrong with it and we ought to discuss it further to see whether a position of agreement can be reached. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000420\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209278070-a54a-41e9-8a27-45166301277e\u0022\u003ESo our intention, when the Act was passed, was that the possibility of mayors having casting votes would be taken away. A loophole in the legislation allowed them to do it if they passed it under their standing orders. The intention of this bill was to close that loophole. We heard numerous submissions from councils saying how important it was to them to have a casting vote, and we found a reasonable and sensible compromise. I shifted my position enough to support the select committee view that if it were the last meeting before a statutory deadline, and there was a fifty-fifty vote in council, that deadlock would have to be resolved, and the casting vote should be available for that. So we were all happy with that outcome. What happens? Local government gets on its horse and it lobbies the Minister, and it lobbies many Ministers. It lobbies the Government, and as a result of that intensive lobbying the Government has rolled over and restored a casting vote for all matters, provided it is put in the standing orders. So I do not think the Minister, or even his colleagues, particularly believed that this casting vote is always better, but they have clearly rolled over to the local government lobby. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000421\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209278070-a54a-41e9-8a27-45166301277e\u0022\u003EI think it is unfortunate that local government cannot see that it will get much better acceptance by the public that it represents if local government goes to a bit more trouble to try to get the support of more than just half of the councillors for an important measure that it is passing. So we will not be supporting the Supplementary Order Paper that the Minister is putting forward. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000422\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209278070-a54a-41e9-8a27-45166301277e\u0022\u003EThe third question I want to raise is the fine line to be drawn between the privacy of the individual and reasonable access to information for the public good. The select committee spent quite a bit of time trying to resolve this one and, I think, as Nick Smith said, we got it right. I think we did a reasonable job. I think what we came up with makes good sense.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000423\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209278070-a54a-41e9-8a27-45166301277e\u0022\u003E On the one hand there are people who are afraid for their safety if the whole world can find out where they live, and they do not want to have their names and addresses on the database for anyone to see. On the other hand there are people who want to be able to contact their neighbours. They may have a combined drain, sewer, or fence about which they may want to come to a cooperative solution. Those people have to be able to contact each other to work that out. So providing an opt-out provision rather than a blanket ban on publishing the information seemed to offer a good way forward. We have taken extra precautions to make sure that the information cannot be made available to people who want to use it for bulk mail-outs and other advertising that is just a nuisance and an annoyance to people. So I think we have made progress on that matter. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000424\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209278070-a54a-41e9-8a27-45166301277e\u0022\u003EThe final issue is the question of what is fair representation in remote and rural areas. It may be that we do need to revisit that one in the future, and I am open to doing that. The question is how we weigh up the principle of one person, one vote, and all votes count equally towards the outcome, against the question of community representation whereby communities that are quite remote and distinct from the rest of the district may have their views completely overruled by larger groupings like cities, and we have to find a way between it. The 10 percent variation in the representation areas is meant to provide that. It is possible that in some areas it may not be enough, but whether it is or it is not, it is too late for this bill to affect the situation at this election. Therefore, it seemed to us to be sensible to allow a bit more time before deciding whether to revisit it. There is a built in review period after the 2007 election, anyway. There is an optional review period after this election. Let us wait and see what sorts of decisions the Local Government Commission makes and what sorts of anomalies might occur, then look again at whether in the light of more experience we can make a better decision. I think that is preferable to jumping in now on the basis of very little evidence and potentially getting it wrong again. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022 data-id=\u0022da4f6a5d8c47481c9c36a6e7f940e5d8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000425\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022da4f6a5d8c47481c9c36a6e7f940e5d8\u0022\u003EHon KEN SHIRLEY (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E While it appears that this bill is quite simple and innocuous, it actually contains a number of elements that are quite serious in terms of local government democracy. To begin with I note that the Minister has backed down on what was a very, very foolish concept of doing away with the casting vote of the chairman or mayor. I do not know what pressures finally prevailed, but the Minister had persisted with this measure against all good advice, right through from the bill\u2019s genesis, right through the select committee process, and here finally today in the report back and second reading he has tabled a Supplementary Order Paper saying that somehow something has prevailed. I think he probably had the cold steel of the local government mayors around the country and he finally buckled. I think that is the most likely explanation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000426\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022\u003EI know that the Greens would have preferred to retain the abolition of a casting vote, and that doubles my conviction that the ACT position of saying there should be a casting vote is the correct one. It is all very well to say that the council may be split, but, good grief, let us think of all the split votes we have in this House. Let us think of all the measures we pass into law on the basis of one, two, or three votes. It is a bit pious to say that it is a terrible breakdown of democracy when councils make decisions on the basis of one or two votes. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000427\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022\u003EA recent vote in the Auckland Regional Council, when it reintroduced a differential in its rating, was passed by only one vote. It was an appalling decision. It would be one of the worst decisions any council has made in a number of years. But, nevertheless, on the basis of one councillor changing his mind, that change did occur. My prediction is that the remedy will be at the ballot box this October.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000428\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002219aba7815f0843aa9e6eb157bd1ee474\u0022\u003EHon Maurice Williamson\u003C/span\u003E: He\u2019ll be gone.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000429\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224b9373bc93bd4f94904e0cc64f3c4156\u0022\u003EHon KEN SHIRLEY\u003C/span\u003E: He will be gone. Maurice Williamson is an Auckland member and he knows the councillor I am talking about. He is a goner. He buckled against all good sense and logic, and he was responsible for reintroducing differential rating in Auckland. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000430\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022\u003ELet us look at it. The regional council bit the bullet last year and it put rates up by 34 percent. It did that a year ago and its justification was that it was doing away with differential rating. The council has just put rates up again, by about 30 percent, and reintroduced differential rating. It cannot have it both ways. There is something seriously wrong there. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000431\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022\u003EThe other aspect I would like to canvass with the Minister\u2014and I am certainly looking at introducing a Supplementary Order Paper in the Committee stage\u2014is that there has been a happy outcome for the port companies. Jim Peters referred to the Northport and the Port of Tauranga situation with the council-controlled organisation and the council organisation. My question to the Minister is: why on earth has he not agreed for Watercare in Auckland to become a council-controlled organisation, rather than a council organisation? He knows that every mayor in metropolitan Auckland wants that. Even his mate Bob Harvey, the \u201Cwestie\u201D, and former president of the Labour Party wants that. They all recognise the huge advantage if Watercare were to become a council-controlled organisation, rather than a council organisation. It would allow Watercare to do many things. For instance, it could pay a dividend, rather than be restricted, as it is now, to giving a rebate. That would be much more sensible. But, oh no, for some reason the Minister will not agree to that. All the advice is that that is what should happen, yet the Minister refuses to agree. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000432\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022\u003EI note that the New Zealand First representative said that New Zealand First agreed with the dog control measures as they relate to microchipping. I put on record that the ACT party is totally opposed to microchipping. We think it is a gross intrusion into dog owners\u2019 rights. Mr Peters said that all stock should be microchipped. Will he say that cats have to be microchipped? Mr Mallard would microchip every goldfish in the country. That is the sort of logic we would get from Mr Mallard if he were in control of local government in this country. Is it not interesting that under the dog control measures there is a national register for all dogs, yet there is not a national register for all convicted paedophiles. What is the biggest danger to society\u2014dogs or convicted paedophiles? Yet we are forcing a national register of dog owners, and that seems a bit foolish to me. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000433\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022\u003EWe have had the rates database issue. I think the select committee made a sensible decision with the opt-out provision. There were genuine concerns. It is a new situation. Councils are just moving to electronic database forms. To make all those addresses and details available to the public on request could be an excessive breach of people\u2019s rights to privacy. Therefore, they will have a right to opt out, and I do support that measure. Overall, I would have to say that there are too many bad features in this legislation. We will be watching it closely as it moves through the Committee stage. Even at this late stage I ask the Minister seriously to consider changing the status of Watercare so that there can be sensible, commercially based operations from that very important utility. The answer is to stop Watercare being a council organisation and make it a council-controlled organisation. It would then have much greater flexibility, and it would mean that water could be delivered in the Auckland region at a more competitive price, at a much cheaper price, and much more efficiently.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022 data-id=\u00227491fc5e21724c5189a4d52cf7f98e1d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000434\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227491fc5e21724c5189a4d52cf7f98e1d\u0022\u003ELARRY BALDOCK (United Future):\u003C/span\u003E I rise on behalf of United Future to speak on the second reading of the Local Government Law Reform Bill (No 3). When we first began to look at this legislation and open it up for submissions to the Local Government and Environment Committee, I was a little apprehensive that all the criticisms of the Local Government Act, which we passed around December 2002, could have opened the floodgates to an avalanche of submissions from people around the country who were upset with that legislation. That was the first legislation I worked on after coming to this House as a new MP, and I share the comments of Jeanette Fitzsimmons that we worked very hard on it, and in no way did we rush it through. There were many criticisms of that legislation and the fact that we received only 41 submissions on this bill, which deals with some of the minor technical issues that need to be looked at, is an indication that the Local Government Act is working reasonably well around the country, and that some of the dire predictions, particularly by National in opposing it so strongly, are not coming to fruition.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000435\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003EAs I said, the select committee received 41 submissions, and we heard 15 of those orally. The submissions were all very sensible and, through this omnibus bill, will enable us to fix up some matters, most of them minor, in a number of Acts, such as the Dog Control Act, the Local Electoral Act, the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act and the Local Government (Rating) Act. Committee members worked well together in order to report this bill back to the House, and I would like to comment on some of the amendments we made.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000436\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003EFirst, as has been mentioned already in respect of the Dog Control Act and its adjustment of infringement offences and fees, I tell members that there is no way we wanted to send a message to the community that we were getting soft, after passing the Dog Control Act only last year with much stricter penalties. However, a number of submissions pointed out that some of the infringement fees were a little over the top. We always need to make sure that the punishment fits the crime and that there will be an effective deterrent, particularly with things like infringement fees that are instant fines.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000437\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003EIn particular, a dog control officer from Tauranga pointed out the difficulty the council was experiencing in having to enforce the infringements but in not having discretion on the fines, and in finding that some people were being landed with rather severe amounts. I remember the case of one solo mother who foolishly denied that she had unregistered dogs. The next day she was found to have them, and she was also guilty of the further infringement of not complying with the dog control officer\u2019s instructions. She ended up with a fine of something like $1,800, which was way over the top. So some adjustments have been made to those figures, and I believe we have come up with a much more sensible list of infringement fees.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000438\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003EThe other problem for dog control officers is that if people have too high a cost with infringement fees, then the offenders simply go to court and are sometimes awarded costs that are less than the infringement fees. So, in fact, that process has been a complete waste of time. Councils have had to go through the process of representing the case in court, only to find that the person has been fined a cost less than the infringement fee. I believe we have made some sensible recommendations in that regard, and as we go through the Committee stage we will see how members address that issue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000439\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003EIt was important to clarify that the requirement for a person to carry a leash when taking out a dog would not affect councils that had already put by-laws in place whereby a person had to have the dog on a leash. It has been a simple matter to clarify that, in order for everyone to understand that a council by-law takes precedence in that regard.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000440\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003EA correction has been made to clarify that a person can have dual candidacy for mayor and councillor, particularly when that person is standing in a ward. Personally, I had some difficulty with that and tried hard to convince other committee members that that provision may have been worth removing from the bill. I believe that people around the country often stand for mayoral candidacy simply so that they can increase the amount of money they can spend on a particular campaign and also so that they can have a higher profile. When a person is standing in a small ward but has the money to fund a citywide campaign, I believe the opportunity is skewed for all candidates to have a fair go. It is not quite so important when candidates are standing at large, which is now occurring in a couple of cities since the Local Government Commission made some determinations after its review. However, the issue is of concern when people are standing in a small ward and then running for mayor, but are not seriously intending to be elected as mayor. However that provision will remain, and I will continue to watch how it develops. I would like to see that the Local Government Commission, in its reviews in 2005 and 2007, includes that issue in its report to the Minister, in order to see whether abuse is occurring on a wide scale.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000441\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003ESome submissions were concerned about the plus or minus 10 percent variation in the ratio of the population per elected member, which was brought in by the 2002 bill. A number of good points were made in that regard, but as a committee we felt that the appropriate time to look at the matter would be at the review of the bill to be undertaken by the Local Government Commission in 2007. If it is causing problems after this year\u2019s elections there is an opportunity for the Local Government Commission to report also to the Minister in 2005, which will be before the next local body elections, and I think that that will be the appropriate time to make any adjustments. In a number of cases around the country it seems that that plus or minus 10 percent variation has become difficult to manage, and it is leaving some communities without the representation they should have. I am very pleased to have convinced the Minister in 2002 to include those reviews in 2005 and 2007, so that we can further address any concerns with this new local government Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003EOn the issue of the casting vote, which has been spoken about already, I am very pleased to see that the Minister and the Labour caucus have had a rethink, and that they are prepared to restore it to what it was in our committee\u2019s report. I had a small paragraph there to mention that United Future was not happy with the very limited allowance of the casting vote, and we certainly do not agree with Green members who would suggest that councils should always sit down in a circle and hold hands until they reach sufficient agreement. Politics does operate sometimes on a one-vote majority, as we are well aware in this House with such things as prostitution law reform going through on an abstention. That is the nature of democracy, and I do not see why local councils should be deprived of that. I see that it is a better outcome for the community to allow the elected mayor or chairperson to have that casting vote than it is to put the vote back to the council and have some kind of horse trading going on, by which one particular councillor might have the ability to get his or her wishes included in some draft by-law or other matter the council was looking at. So we are happy to see that that right of a casting vote will now be restored through the Minister\u2019s Supplementary Order Paper.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000443\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003EWe are happy to see the council-controlled organisation accountability requirements addressed for the Port of Tauranga and for Northport. It was a rather crazy situation before, where there were different rules according to whether a company was 49 percent, 50 percent, or 51 percent owned. I am pleased to see an amendment that was able to satisfy that need.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000444\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003EWe had a lot of discussion about privacy issues, and I think we have come up with something that is reasonable and balanced. People do have the option to opt off rates records so that other people cannot have their personal details, but in most cases I believe people are comfortable with those details being made known to the public. People did not want to see the whole rates records data being given to companies so they could be then deluged with bulk mails, and we have protected them from having that occur.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000445\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003EThe requirements for the microchipping of dogs and the compulsory national database are essential if we are to have that database work. We simply cannot leave it up to councils to decide to opt into the database. We are a very small country, and we need to do some things nationally in order to make them work. It would be ridiculous to have some councils on the database and some councils off, so United Future still holds to the position that a national database should be the case. We look forward to further discussion on these points as we go through the Committee stage of the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022 data-id=\u0022b7a1b7b30b024ff68d4d9e78743bd452\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000446\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b7a1b7b30b024ff68d4d9e78743bd452\u0022\u003EDAVID PARKER (Labour\u2014Otago):\u003C/span\u003E I thank other speakers from the Local Government and Environment Committee who have spoken previously in this second reading. The issues addressed by this bill have been well covered by members. As they have mentioned, the bill tidies up quite a broad range of matters that affect local government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000447\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cd4a88ee474e4d2c88a8fba9e599a7fb\u0022\u003EPhil Heatley\u003C/span\u003E: What a mess!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000448\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bd774b8980a8498e964ea68f892ed524\u0022\u003EDAVID PARKER\u003C/span\u003E: That member could not be more wrong, as evidenced from the fact that after a very broad and detailed amendment of local government legislation in 2002\u2014the Local Government Act is very comprehensive legislation\u2014we had only 14 submissions to this next local government bill to come before Parliament. So it is not a mess; it is actually in very good shape.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000449\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EI want to address a couple of the issues we looked at in some detail in the select committee. The first relates to the casting vote. We heard Mr Shirley of ACT criticise the decision of the Government to support the reintroduction of the casting vote. There was some sort of assertion that it was a giant backdown. I think it is true that all members in this House have changed their minds on the issue of the casting vote, because when the provision for it was taken away from councils in 2002 by the Local Government Act, that change had the unanimous support of every party on the select committee at that time. But after that change concerns were expressed by members of local government and, as the Hon Nick Smith just mentioned, there was a little bit of uncertainty as to whether the casting vote had been completely removed. The advice we had in the committee was that it had been, but it was certainly arguable.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000450\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EThe need for a casting vote in some situations was apparent in the cases where local government has a statutory duty to do something by a certain date. So we would be rather errant if we left local government in the position that it could not make a decision because it did not have a casting vote, yet had an obligation, for example, to strike rates by a certain date. There were then arguments as to whether the casting vote should be limited to those situations where there was a statutory duty. The committee thought about whether that was an appropriate place to draw the line. On further reflection, the Government agrees with National, ACT, United Future, and New Zealand First that that is a pretty fine line, and asks why we should not trust local government to exercise the casting vote in the manner it did, without great problems, in the past.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000451\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EThe next issue I would like to talk about is infringement fees. Under the Dog Control Act, councils have the power to impose fines by way of infringement notices on people who breach the Act. Those fines were a little bit inconsistent, and some of the advice we had from councils\u2014working in the areas that have the most problems with owners who do not keep dogs properly under control\u2014was that they thought the level of fines was so high that in practice the fines were not collectible. Councils thought that a lower level of fines would still act as an appropriate penalty against those who break the law, while at the same time make the fines more likely to be paid and collected. They said a lower level of fine would also mean that dog control officers would see it fair to render an infringement notice and be more likely to exercise their powers. We agreed with those submissions, and as a consequence we have again tried to rationalise those fees. We tried to do it late last year and did not get it quite right, but we hope we have done better this time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000452\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EOn the matter of rating information, I remind members that access to the rates database was cut off in the 2002 Act, because there had been a developing practice whereby marketing companies had wholesale access to the rates records and used that database to market people\u2014to spam them, to use the modern electronic equivalent\u2014with information they did not want to receive. So at that stage access to rates records had been removed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000453\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EThat was a step too far, because it is necessary to have access to such information. For example, people might want to know who else is using a common drain, or who they are dealing with in relation to a planning application. They need to know the postal address at which those people can be contacted. It is, of course, possible to get the name of other owners through other sources of information\u2014for example, by doing a search of the title. That costs a bit of money, and it still does not show people\u2019s addresses.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000454\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003ESo we have reinstated the ability of councils to let people have access to that personal information on rates records. But we have made it clear that they do not have the right to the whole of the records; they have just the right to information on an inquiry-by-inquiry basis. And we have given people on the database the right to opt out from providing personal information. There was a proposal from officials that people had to give their permission to be on the database before they could be included, but we thought that that was making it too difficult for councils and I think we now have a proper and practical outcome. I recommend the legislation to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022 data-id=\u0022667dffcb290148cfb74a4f2809f2ded0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000455\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022667dffcb290148cfb74a4f2809f2ded0\u0022\u003EPHIL HEATLEY (National\u2014Whangarei):\u003C/span\u003E I must say that it is with a sense of frustration that members of the National Party on this side of this House sit here, during urgency, tidying up Chris Carter\u2019s legislation once again. He passed the Local Government Act 2002, and, of course, amendments to the Dog Control Act. He said at the time that he was front-footing the issues. However, because he did not do his homework, here we are, in urgency, spending taxpayers\u2019 money on tidying up a whole lot of loose ends. I wish they were loose ends. Unfortunately, it is a lot more significant than that. We have had to go through sections of the Local Government Act and through the amendments to the Dog Control Act, and make some very serious changes indeed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000456\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003ENational would like to outline the concerns we put to the Local Government and Environment Committee on being faced with having to fix up this bill. Most of our concerns are about the errors the bill contains that drive a wedge of misunderstanding between New Zealand\u2019s rural and provincial districts and its cities in respect of their different needs. Chris Carter comes from Auckland. He can live in his little suburb on his one-eighth of an acre, prune his roses in the weekends, and be oblivious to all those who live more than 20 kilometres away from a motorway. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000457\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003EThe first example of this is the concerns raised in various districts where there is a plus or minus 10 percent variation in determining ward boundaries. For cities, it is pretty easy to calculate how many people within those variations can actually elect a ward member. We just draw a circle around a suburb and say that one councillor can represent them. But when we go to the provinces, to Whangarei, Whakat\u0101ne, Napier, and Hastings, or to the South Island provincial cities, such as Nelson, and all the little satellite towns around them that rely on them, we have a serious problem. This Minister would have us draw a line through the middle of all those little satellite towns surrounding provincial cities like Whangarei, Napier, and Nelson\u2014little satellite towns like Brightwater, in the Nelson province, and Waipu, in Whangarei, which exist right throughout the country\u2014and say: \u201CYou haven\u2019t got enough people. You\u2019re short of 500 people and you cannot have a councillor to represent you. We\u2019ll chuck you in amongst one of the suburbs. You can just sit there and hope that that suburban councillor will represent your interests.\u201D Clearly, they will not represent their interests. We are saying that a problem exists around the 2002 Act passed by the Labour Government because of a lack of interest or a lack of emphasis on communities of interest. That is one of the great misunderstandings about how rural New Zealand, provincial New Zealand, works, compared with metropolitan New Zealand where the Minister comes from. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000458\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003EThe second misunderstanding is about the degree to which rural and provincial councils and their ratepayers can afford compliance costs. We are looking at the issues in this bill that constrain the role of the Audit Office in respect of long-term council community plans. Of course, we know that the costs of compliance will be excessive. There is clarification in clause 51 that refers to this. I can tell the Minister and the Labour Government that they may be able to draw from deep pockets in the big cities, but in the provinces and the rural towns people do not have deep pockets. They do not have the population to support huge compliance costs. They do not live in Wellington, where they can knock on the Government\u2019s door or form a lobby group. They just cannot afford it. When these huge compliance costs are being created, the Minister should remember that rural provincial areas get hit harder for those reasons. It is not just because of socio-economic factors but also because of geography. I put it to the Minister that these are widespread areas and it costs a fortune to travel anywhere quickly, if we can. Often we cannot. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000459\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003EThe third issue that drives a wedge of misunderstanding between rural and city needs is candidates for mayor being able to stand for the mayoralty as well as for council. We cannot understand why the Minister, in 2002, suddenly decided that candidates for the mayoralty could not stand as councillors as well. It is just appalling that he said to all the provinces and to all of rural New Zealand: \u201CListen, your candidate can stand only as mayor, not as a councillor.\u201D I can tell the Minister that the problem is that provincial and rural New Zealand often do not have a large number of people putting up their hands to say they will stand for council. There is a smaller pool of people able to do that work. If they want to run for mayor and councillor, so that if they miss out on the mayoralty they can become councillors, that is OK with us. We want their skills. To close them down, simply because they entered two competitions, I think is appalling and quite short-sighted. I am glad that issue is being fixed in clause 28, and we will be discussing it in more detail when we come to the Committee stage. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000460\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003EWe would also like to put on the record that we do not think every New Zealander should microchip his or her dog. We notice that the Minister thinks that grandma should microchip her poodle, just because some gang has a Rottweiler that it does not keep under control. I cannot understand why the Labour Government would have every single New Zealander microchip his or her puppy, just because it cannot control the gangs. I find that absolutely appalling. I talked to the Minister Trevor Mallard, who said in response to Gerry Eckhoff, that he would see every goldfish in this country microchipped. The Minister told me: \u201CNo, I wouldn\u2019t microchip every goldfish, only the dangerous ones\u2014the ones that, when you walk by the bowl, they jump out and bite you.\u201D That is the attitude from this Government, and it is just pathetic. If it cannot get gangs and crime under control, if it will not approach gang members\u2019 places and tell them to get their Rottweilers and their Dobermans under control, if it is too chicken to do that and would rather have people microchip every little puppy that comes into the world, then I find that short-sighted and absolutely appalling. We will oppose that, just as we oppose the compliance costs in this bill that address that issue. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000461\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003EI would also like to say that we do support the inclusion of a casting vote for mayors. Sometimes there is a deadlock in a city and district, and regional councils and mayors have to show leadership and give a casting vote. Sometimes people do not disagree. The Green Party would have them sitting around, holding hands, and singing \u201CKhumbaya\u201D, in the hope that in some way they would come to some agreement. It will not happen. A mayor has to show leadership and sometimes cast his or her vote, and we are more than happy to give the mayor those powers. With those things in mind, I look forward\u2014as I know members on the other side of the House do\u2014to hearing my arguments during the Committee stage. They wait with bated breath, I know. We commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000462\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003EBill read a second time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000463\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022bb406503449a4a5e8b4e21a0b7285c03\u0022\u003EInstruction to Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022 data-id=\u0022f2305d404b9c42f79c1b280489afab95\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000464\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f2305d404b9c42f79c1b280489afab95\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS CARTER (Minister of Local Government):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That it be an instruction to the Committee of the whole House on the Local Government Law Reform Bill (No 3) that it take the bill part by part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000465\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000466\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002284dab4f6248b47c3919dfe8efe3defbc\u0022\u003EIn Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000467\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022429e5bf7629543bcbc6ccaef061c9820\u0022\u003EPart 1  Chatham Islands Council Act 1995\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022 data-id=\u0022a4e054e0daec4127ab00a8eee3fc7a54\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a4e054e0daec4127ab00a8eee3fc7a54\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH (National\u2014Nelson):\u003C/span\u003E Part 1 deals with the Chatham Islands and has its council take up the functions of a regional council. We heard submissions at the Local Government and Environment Committee, and that seemed to be well supported. But the question I have for the Minister in respect of the Chatham Islands is\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000469\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d0c9b68702c14184b4aae6c71871c770\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Isn\u2019t it There\u2019s Something About Mary? Isn\u2019t that the haircut?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000470\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220463de3b01bb4576ab6be6997a16716c\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: At least I have some hair, which is more than I can say about either of those two Ministers. My question for the balding Minister, seeing there seems to be a focus on hairdos\u2014which is about as sophisticated as the Labour Party gets these days\u2014is: what funding will be provided to the Chatham Islands Council to enable it to pick up the regional council functions? Everybody knows that it has a small ratepayer base. It would be interesting to hear from the member who represents the Chatham Islands, and who has not participated in this debate to date, to tell us how the Government will assist the Chatham Islands Council meet the extra costs associated with dealing with the regional council functions provided for in clauses 3, 4, and 5. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000471\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EMembers on this side of the Committee are concerned about the imposition on ratepayers, which is something that does not seem to be of great concern to the Labour Party, and, noting the huge increase in rates throughout New Zealand under the term of this Minister\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000472\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022461526e7cf314f79b35a0bf80611ab2c\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Ha!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000473\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c92eaa6188de48d2aa5ba7517f18bfdf\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: The Minister objects.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000474\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022db70e2f11b0942fe91edb36aa1146b5b\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: No, no, I don\u2019t believe the member.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000475\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229461ce80f6414fd8b2c17596a5d2e61d\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: He does not believe me?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000476\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002275c29184bd70457989fcc186f2ba839c\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: That the member could do that to his hair!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000477\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022178ce63d583d484ebe3923643482e345\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: The Minister is more interested in hairdos than he is about rates. Well, the vast majority of members are actually quite concerned about their rates bill and the huge increase in rates.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000478\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225acc2ddfbb334dcd82088bd3a8a131e2\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Why has the member got his hands in his pockets?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000479\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002279fc92d85ddf43569ad9a9d0e48952a2\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: The Minister is now all excited about where my hands might be. What a pathetic Minister of Education\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000480\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b2aae31741bd428e9138c339db2f2943\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I am just trying to work out whether the member has pockets.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000481\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d85441bcfa2f43cf92725231b8c57c84\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: Well, actually I do, and I tell Mr Mallard that I think most of us in the Committee have pockets. Does it not say something about the intellectual grunt of the Minister of Education that\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000482\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228a3c07249fc14cdfa717e6466a3a3a17\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: No, he is just bored by a useless, tired, and hopeless Opposition.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000483\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022efe41534118c4ab48f5bd542f7111df1\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: The hopeless Minister of Education is not interested in whether the Chatham Islands Council will get any funding for the extra responsibilities the Minister wants to dump on it. That is a very fair question, and I hope the Minister will take a call and advise the Committee as to how these extra responsibilities will be funded by the very small number of ratepayers. Those ratepayers want to know who will get the bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000484\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EMembers on this side of the Chamber are concerned about rating costs, unlike the Government. They want to know why the ratepayers will have to pick up the extra responsibilities he wants to impose on this council.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022 data-id=\u00229a31ee12e86f4b208358186023efd003\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000485\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229a31ee12e86f4b208358186023efd003\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS CARTER (Minister of Local Government):\u003C/span\u003E The member Nick Smith asked a fair enough question as to how, with the very limited rating base, the Chathams will survive with the regional functions it has to carry out, such as biosecurity, dealing with waste, and the provision of fresh water. The Government recognises very much the challenges that small region of only some 700 people faces, so the Government has provided a one-off payment of $2.5 million to provide for a new fresh water and sewerage system on the Chathams, and will also pay for the development of a new tip on the island. In addition, the Chatham Islands Council has sought an expression of interest from other regional councils, such as the Wellington Regional Council, the Hawke\u2019s Bay Regional Council, and Environment Canterbury, to tender for a collaborative role where the facilities of those larger regional councils will contract out to provide the services to the Chatham Islands that are required from that regional role.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a0c5b3f9f2c44b1dbea148a9b5278e93\u0022\u003EPart 1 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000487\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00223ecb5acd89c2404eac2689636c565769\u0022\u003EPart 2  Dog Control Act 1996\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220ed9ad81-05c1-4171-80c6-24fa02cade42\u0022 data-id=\u0022ff6773a6a65c4308a443fd9db8a547fd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000488\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ed9ad81-05c1-4171-80c6-24fa02cade42\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ff6773a6a65c4308a443fd9db8a547fd\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich)\u003C/span\u003E: The debate is on Part 2, clauses 6 to 20A, including debate on schedule 1AA.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022 data-id=\u0022e0bcfb49c2e844748223639093894166\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000489\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e0bcfb49c2e844748223639093894166\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH (National\u2014Nelson):\u003C/span\u003E These 25 clauses in Part 2 deal with the Dog Control Act, and it is somewhat amazing that only 12 months after the Minister put through changes in the dog control legislation, Parliament is dealing with not one mistake, two mistakes, or three mistakes, but 25 areas in which we are having to rewrite this Minister\u2019s legislation. Earlier in the debate the Minister said: \u201CIt is not my fault. It is all Sandra Lee\u2019s. That is why there was a mess with the local government law.\u201D Well, the Minister cannot pass the buck in respect of the Dog Control Act. It was entirely this Minister\u2019s doing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000490\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b32fb9123055484d9ef6302401b47da4\u0022\u003EHon Chris Carter\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s right.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000491\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c512daed4eee43b1a4be7584dc3caf0d\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: Well, the Minister pleads guilty. I would like to know from the Minister, for legislation that has been in force for only\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000492\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022794379fb940f46a09ee3bc95595caa7c\u0022\u003EGovernment Member\u003C/span\u003E: No, that\u2019s the guilty member\u2014before the court.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000493\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fc1f381c89d640bfb321bce82f19e90b\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: Well, it is the Government\u2019s dirty work, and it wants to relitigate that. It did not have the courage when I offered a by-election in Nelson. It did not want to contest. It was quite happy to have the argument in the High Court, but did not want to have the debate with the people of Nelson. Those are the sorts of wimps on the Government benches. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000494\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EBut this is a Minister who has pleaded guilty to having the\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000495\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022856a5ae65f78443d89a9731a7c57e64b\u0022\u003EGovernment Member\u003C/span\u003E: Who was challenging the decision?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000496\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f068e7bc289342ef91f113fe9c9da49b\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry\u2014what does the Minister want to talk about? Does he want to debate family law? Does the member want to debate family law?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000497\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d4092d5d1b2945b686e481b99734f99a\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Is the member losing his hearing?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000498\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ebf22ffebbf94056ad991dc08b04abb3\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: Does the member want to have a debate about family law? I would be delighted to have a debate about family law, and the huge changes the Government has now conceded should be made in that area, and it is nice to know that one can win an argument. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000499\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EI want to talk about the\u2014[Interruption] What a pathetic bunch on the Government benches. This is a law to do with dog control, and they want to interject about everything else but the legislation. The 25 clauses of this part make a whole series\u2014[Interruption] Do I have to put up with this crap, Mr Chairperson?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000500\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ed9ad81-05c1-4171-80c6-24fa02cade42\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dd845036a1a44641bcbc9096bcf64d38\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich)\u003C/span\u003E: No, the member does not. I am warning those who are interjecting that if they interject again they will be out of this Chamber.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000501\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a7c93ce75bdd41ae9c06a6dd6587a0fa\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: The provisions in these 25 clauses are a patch-up job on the dog control legislation that the Minister advanced, and there are a number of things that National disagrees with. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000502\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EThe first of those is with regard to the compulsory microchipping of dogs. As my colleague Phil Heatley pointed out earlier in the debate, what sort of control freaks are there in the Government that they want to have every single dog in New Zealand microchipped? That is the policy being advanced by Chris Carter. It is a huge expense for the ratepayers and dog owners of New Zealand. It is not a good policy move, and we think the Minister should admit that\u2014as with so many other things he has got wrong\u2014the provision should be changed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EThe second area I want to challenge the Minister on is why, within 12 months of prescribing fines for dog offences, the Government has to change them, and, third, why the Government is not prepared to trust local councils to determine the appropriate fines for dog offences. Why is it necessary for this Parliament to prescribe the fines that should apply in dog-related offences up and down New Zealand? Surely it is enough for Parliament simply to say: \u201CLook, your council can set fines up to 1,000 bucks. You describe the offences. You apply the fines at the level at which you think they are going to be the most effective enforcement tools in your particular area.\u201D, rather than have schedule 4 in this bill, which sets out every individual fine that will be provided. I just think it is so rich for the Government to rave on all the time, particularly this Minister: \u201CWe trust councils. We believe in the power of general competence.\u201D Councils can best judge for their communities. But when it comes to setting fines over something as small as dog control, we say it is unnecessary to have to prescribe that in Parliament. We say it should not be done, and we oppose that provision. The last question I have for the Minister is, do we have any definitive figures yet as to what it will cost the average dog owner with regard to the Minister\u2019s mad plan of microchipping every dog in New Zealand? We were given widely varying figures at the select committee. I think that before Parliament makes a decision, we need to know the cost.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000504\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ed9ad81-05c1-4171-80c6-24fa02cade42\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002208c12ae20e164207a16ca9696b9f92c0\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich)\u003C/span\u003E: Before I go to the next speaker, I have been reflecting and I think that I was a little harsh earlier on. Of course interjections are accepted; they put a bit of life into the Chamber. Certainly, if a speaker says anything that is controversial, then another member is fully entitled to interject, and I expect members to be reasonable.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022 data-id=\u00222be0c44b9dcb4306aecf8626af4f9592\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000505\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222be0c44b9dcb4306aecf8626af4f9592\u0022\u003EJIM PETERS (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E In speaking to Part 2, I reiterate what I said in the debate on the second reading\u2014that New Zealand First supports microchipping. If the members who have spoken so far about microchipping had any understanding of the rural economy and farming, and the way in which these trends are developing in farming, given the legislation that was passed earlier today\u2014tracking, for the dairy farmer, from the shed to the consumer\u2014then they would understand why microchipping will come, in time. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000506\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003ESecondly, in respect of clause 15, the fact is that the bill does not provide for microchipping to take effect from tomorrow. It allows local authorities an adequate time-span to allow for the contracts and for the process to be put in place. It takes into account puppies yet to be born and allows for them to be microchipped in sequence. I am absolutely certain, from the Local Government and Environment Committee\u2019s experience of submissions made last year by such rural councils as the \u014Cp\u014Dtiki District Council, which has worked with this over some years, and from the advice given to the committee by veterinarians and other vet groups, that the process can take place and will be able to be achieved by contract at a reasonable rate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000507\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003EThe issue is really whether those who own a dog realise what it means. In doing some brief calling around and speaking to councils about Part 2, I went to the Waitakere City Council and I saw there a few words in the council\u2019s draft policy statement that I will pass on to the Committee. That draft statement starts with an excellent comment, which puts us into the context of what we are talking about. First of all, it asserts: \u201CIt is a privilege to be able to own a dog. Dog control problems are a symptom of community, social and individual people problems. The impact of a dog on others is determined by the owner of the dog. To be a successful owner, any dog owner must take a daily and active interest in the welfare of the dog with attention given to the physical, emotional, and mental needs of the dog.\u201D, and so on. It is a long, elaborate, and very carefully drawn up policy. The last bullet points of the draft foreword again assert: \u201CIt is in the interests of the community that Council\u2019s Animal Welfare Officers maintain interaction with dog owners.\u201D and \u201CThe ownership of a dog brings with it a twenty four hour a day, seven day per week social responsibility towards other people (including their property and animals) and towards the dog itself.\u201D If one begins with a sound dog policy, as other councils have, and puts the amendments to the Act in this bill in context, it makes sound and reliable sense. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000508\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003ETo come back to the issue of microchipping, it is the way of the future with regard to tracking and identifying animals. The microchipping of dogs is part of the sequence. The whole of our primary produce is dependent upon what overseas markets deem to be so, not necessarily what we would wish to be so, and the rural community understands, more than most, what tracking of animals means in terms of that community\u2019s livelihood. New Zealand First commends this part of the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022 data-id=\u0022e9a7366c13604c2eb3eec007b3ec57da\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000509\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e9a7366c13604c2eb3eec007b3ec57da\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS CARTER (Minister of Local Government):\u003C/span\u003E We heard a lot of rhetoric from Dr Nick Smith, the MP from Nelson\u2014of course, much of it was nonsense and simply distorted the realities of what this legislation stands for and represents. For example, he posed the question\u2014and I guess it must have been rhetorical\u2014about why we should not allow councils to set their own fines. Actually, he should know that the law does not provide the ability to do that, at all. The Ministry of Justice is looking at that process, but at the moment the law as it stands provides for a set fine, a threshold, and that is it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000510\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003EWhen I surveyed local governments in New Zealand a year ago asking them whether they thought that current dog legislation was adequate to deal with public safety, the overwhelming response I got from the 76 councils that deal with this issue was that it was not; that the fines are too low. I listened. I fixed it up. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000511\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003EDr Nick Smith also asked why we have compulsory microchipping. Mr Jim Peters explained it very well. Another thing was revealed when I surveyed councils about what records they kept about dog attacks. What I discovered is that some kept records and some did not. There was no consistent record-keeping anywhere in the country. There was no ability for a council to track a dangerous dog. If somebody from Whangarei has a dangerous dog up there that is a menace and attacks people, and it moves with its owner to Manukau City, or wherever, the local council has no way of tapping in and finding out what the record and history of that dog is. I can hear one or two members in the Opposition sniggering away. Having a child\u0027s face ripped off by a dog in a park is not something to snigger about. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000512\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003EThat has been a very draconian change to the dog legislation in New Zealand to deal with that very issue\u2014the issue of public safety. It was a very comprehensive change; right from the microchipping issue, to entry and seizure provisions, to dealing with fines, to banning certain breeds. It was a very big piece of legislation. There were some technical issues that had to be sorted through\u2014issues that revealed themselves as councils put this law into practice. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000513\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003EThis is a Government that listens. We engage with animal control officers. We engage with local government to see how effective the new law is. There are, indeed, a number of changes that need to be made to the law\u2014most of them very minor, and some of them a little bit more significant. They are all designed to make the law work better in order to keep the public safer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022 data-id=\u00224c6bace22191493c98745c2ffd1737be\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000514\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224c6bace22191493c98745c2ffd1737be\u0022\u003EPHIL HEATLEY (National\u2014Whangarei):\u003C/span\u003E I am pleased the Minister acknowledged that it was somewhat draconian to introduce a dog control law whereby every dog in New Zealand is microchipped, regardless of its owner, regardless of what threat it could be to anyone, regardless of its history\u2014regardless of anything. Because it is draconian, and it just makes me a little sad, I guess, when one considers that grandma cannot now keep a dog as company as, perhaps, some comfort should her husband die. It is sad to me that I cannot now go and buy a little puppy for my 3-year-old and my 4-year-old without them being served with papers to fill in, lots of boxes to tick, and heaps of compliance costs. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000515\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003EI consider that my two little blondies\u2014one aged 3 and one aged 4, gorgeous little kids, more like their mother, granted, than their father\u2014would love to have a little puppy this Christmas. Unfortunately, because of this Minister and of what he acknowledges are his draconian laws, I see in this bill that my little boy will be faced with the following: he will be faced with the power of a dog control officer or dog ranger to feed and shelter his little dog. My little boy will be classified as an owner, and the territorial authority, the district council, may require my little boy to undertake some sort of training. Gee! He just got a puppy for Christmas and he has to undertake some training!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000516\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003EThere will be the obligation on him to dispose of the dog if it is unregistered, and my 4-year-old would be disqualified as an owner. Under clause 11A he now will have to maintain records and provide information that affects the classification of his dog as to whether it is dangerous. The territorial authority, the district council, may visit our place on 26 December, the day after Christmas, and ask for Bryn. The 4-year-old will come to the door and the dog control officer will say: \u201CWe want to classify your dog as menacing. What breed is it? Is it a breed that is menacing? We are deciding.\u201D The dog will have to be registered, of course\u2014we do not oppose that\u2014and my boy will have to supply register information. There will be a national dog control information database that may contain additional information about my son. The microchip transponder must be implanted in my son\u2019s little puppy. And on it goes. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000517\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003EI am just pointing out the absurdity of not targeting dangerous breeds, menacing dogs with a particular history, and dogs that belong to owners like gang members and are trained only to fight, kill, and attack other dogs and, perhaps, other people. Rather, this legislation targets grandma with her poodle and my 4-year-old son with his little Labrador puppy. I point out to the House the absurdity of that. I am sure that when the country faces the fact and wakes up one morning and realises that this law or laws associated with it have come into effect, and that hundreds of thousands of people will have to microchip their dogs, the absurdity of it will not be beyond the comprehension of most sensible New Zealanders. That idea should be challenged.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022 data-id=\u002286b44f824a64405f9a933827447ff1cf\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000518\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002286b44f824a64405f9a933827447ff1cf\u0022\u003EGERRARD ECKHOFF (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E I will take a short call, as I am sitting in for Mr Shirley on this bill. I could not help but be bewildered by the comments of the Minister when he said, as I recall\u2014and I am sure he will correct me if I am wrong\u2014that councils have no records of dog attacks. Why should the Minister be surprised at that? Why should a regional or district council have those sorts of figures\u2014on dog bites, for example? And what is the difference between a dog bite and a dog attack? I have not heard that explained. Let me explain this to the Minister: I have been bitten numerous times by dogs, but I have not been attacked by a dog. If a dog is caught up in a barbed wire fence, for example, and its leg is about to snap, the instinctive reaction is to reach in, grab the dog, and relieve the pressure on that leg. Of course, the dog will fasten its jaws on one\u2019s hand or anything else that it can get at, thinking that that is how the harm is being caused. That is quite a different situation from a dog attack. That is a dog bite as distinct from a dog attack, yet there appears to be little or no understanding of that point by the Minister. I am sure the Minister for ACC could have told the Minister for Local Government\u2014had he spoken to her\u2014as Federated Farmers have told me, that there has been, as I recall, something less than $1,800 paid out in accident compensation for people who have been attacked by a dog. So the real issue is: where is the problem? For the Minister to say that young Carolina\u2019s horrific injuries\u2014and we do not want to minimise that appalling attack in any way\u2014are indicative of every dog bite or attack is quite wrong. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000519\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003EI would also ask the Minister this. Since this legislation has come through and was passed some months ago, to my knowledge at least four children have needed hospitalisation after attacks by dogs, so how has microchipping stopped those dogs attacking children? The reality is that it has not, and it never will. This is just a politically correct piece of nonsense by this Government, to look as though it is doing something about a problem that it really has no intention of addressing. As one of my colleagues in the House said, the issue is about the really dangerous dogs\u2014the pit bull terriers, and so on. If the Government really wants to address that issue, it should ban them. It should send the dog control officers out to shoot every one of those dogs. Let the Government get rid of those breeds if it is actually serious about dog attacks. But the nonsense of having to microchip farm dogs who offer absolutely no threat to the public is just ludicrous. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000520\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003EThat is all I need or wish to say on this particular issue at this time, but I wish that the Minister would understand the extent of the problem before rushing into legislation. That is something we have come to expect from a Government that understands nothing more than political correctness.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000521\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 232 in the name of the Hon Chris Carter to Part 2 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022d2e8e3e872794ad79ad3e9a35fe23b0b\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendments be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 83\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 35\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002224664150fdad421391386b9748b524c2\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That Part 2 as amended be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 110\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 8\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EACT New Zealand 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 2 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000522\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00225ffc5a606c90425d9003276b611cddf2\u0022\u003EPart 3  Local Electoral Act 2001\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022 data-id=\u00221c295548f23f46fd8e533ef153c7b16c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000523\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221c295548f23f46fd8e533ef153c7b16c\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH (National\u2014Nelson):\u003C/span\u003E This part of the bill makes 18 changes to the Local Electoral Act 2001. Again, this is a patch-up job on legislation passed only 3 years ago. The substantive issue dealt with in this part is allowing a council candidate to also stand for the mayoralty. There was a botch-up in the Government\u2019s earlier local government electoral legislation that ended up prohibiting that, and one of the reasons we are in urgency is that the Minister wants to ensure that this provision\u2014this change, or this fix\u2014is in place prior to the local body elections scheduled to take place in 3 months\u2019 time. It certainly is National\u2019s view that a person should be able to stand both for the mayoralty of a district and as a councillor, and we support that provision. But I want to express a concern about the mess we will have, in terms of the local body elections in 3 months\u2019 time, as a consequence of the whole series of amendments and of the mishmash of different electoral systems that will affect voters as they participate in the local government elections in October. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000524\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EIn the election of district health boards, regional councils, mayors, and councillors, we will have an enormous potpourri of different electoral systems used for different votes. It is my view that voters will be quite confused by the different voting methods used for the different local authorities, and it is a direct consequence of Government legislation that we have ended up with this mess. It will result in more voting papers being in error and, as a consequence, being discarded. It will also result in a lower level of participation. I would like to know that the Minister, Chris Carter, will take responsibility for the mess this Government has made of the local government electoral system.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000525\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224029b198-a7b2-4eea-867c-79ef46cafeb9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022624fd9f96f3249c2b5d5dbbb143d3023\u0022\u003EHon Dover Samuels\u003C/span\u003E: Democracy!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000526\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022458a75af83f246c9a9d38036f6782a97\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: The man calls it democracy. Is democracy such a mess that when people go to vote for their district health board, they will use a single transferable vote system, and when they vote for their council and their mayor they are likely to use a first-past-the-post system? They may, under the amendments that the Minister and this Government put through, use an MMP system, whereby some councillors are elected at large and some are elected in specific wards. That sort of a botch-up is the sort of approach that I notice Mr Dover Samuels supports. On the Opposition side of the House, we think it will be a mess. Surely the Government can state what it thinks is the appropriate method by which we in New Zealand should elect our community representatives, without having a different system for every different form of local election, whether it be for a district health board, council, or the like. National thinks this bill is a mess. We think it will cause problems, and we will hold the Minister and this Labour Government responsible for that mess. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000527\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EThe last thing I would note is a quite extraordinary revolution. Today the vast bulk of our local body elections are run by private businesses. The reality is that with the complexity the Government has introduced into the running of our local body elections, that is generally contracted to a Christchurch firm. That firm now has a contract to manage over 50 local authorities\u2019 elections, because the only way we can conduct a local body election under the complexity of the legislation this Government has advanced is to contract it out and have someone else do it by computer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000528\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d209a1f4dedb4a5aa5ebc8f79b614eae\u0022\u003EPhil Heatley\u003C/span\u003E: It has become an industry.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000529\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022466b51b12878428688a3765945a3d9e0\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: It has become a bureaucratic industry, at the expense of the ratepayer. I express some concerns about whether such a degree of complication and cost is really warranted, and ask whether a degree of simplicity in our elections would not make for a better system. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000530\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003ENational does support councillors being able to stand also as mayors, but we are concerned about the degree of complication and complexity within our local body elections. It ends up costing ratepayers and does not help the local government process. We would hope to see some simplification, rather than the complexity that we see in Part 3.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022 data-id=\u0022764daf87c5dc46bfa3bb98a86313e8be\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000531\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022764daf87c5dc46bfa3bb98a86313e8be\u0022\u003EJIM PETERS (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E I comment very quickly that New Zealand First, like other parties, supports this change to the local government legislation. It was needed, particularly for smaller areas. The ability to knock good candidates out because they chose to stand for one office or another would have been a difficulty. On behalf of New Zealand First, I commend the Local Government and Environment Committee for that. Let the democratic choice be made. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000532\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003EWe are concerned, though, that the comments and submissions made with regard to ward requirements for small or rural communities appear to have been disregarded. It may be that those comments were made to the committee against the bruising impact that some people have felt as a result of the recent determinations by the Local Government Commission. Some rural communities felt bruised that the commissioners set varying standards with regard to the decisions, and that smaller communities were forcibly pushed into larger amalgamations against their best wishes, and strongly against their long-term heritage and history of dealing with their own problems. I hope that the review mentioned in the preamble will take place earlier rather than later, because there is a real need to define what communities\u2019 interests are, and a real need to define delegations. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000533\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003EAll of these issues were part, I believe, of the focus of the submissions that came to us, whereby people were increasingly feeling that larger councils effectively disenfranchised them day to day. To that degree, New Zealand First supports the amendments, and I know that some candidates will have a longer life in local government than they would have had if they had to choose one or other of the offices. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022 data-id=\u00222e1f51af1ed04426bc4d6101367908ee\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000534\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222e1f51af1ed04426bc4d6101367908ee\u0022\u003EPHIL HEATLEY (National\u2014Whangarei):\u003C/span\u003E It is disappointing that we have to tidy up the change that the Labour Party put through back in 2002, whereby good members of the community could not stand for both council and the mayoralty. Subsequently, a whole lot of them decided that they would stand just for council, and their skills could not be used as mayors. A whole lot of others decided that they would stand for the mayoralty, and because, of course, only one mayor could be chosen and they could not stand as councillors as well, they were lost to the cities and districts. That was a huge disappointment to areas throughout New Zealand. In the provinces and rural areas, in particular, the pool from which to select good and able people is smaller\u2014not because of ability, but simply because of population issues. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000535\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003EIf people are willing, enthusiastic, and able, and if they can earn an electoral mandate, why should they not stand as representatives on the council? Why can they not put up their hand and say that they could do a good job as mayor, that this is what they stand for, that this is what they stand against, and to vote for them? Unfortunately, in 2002 the Labour Party decided that people could stand only for council or for the mayoralty. We will fix that. The National Party is very proud to vote for this particular clause, which allows any person simply to be a candidate for both positions. A person could be a member in a ward in a council election, or could be a candidate for the mayor of the district council of which that ward forms a part. National will support this bill. I know that in Whangarei, where now we have a four-horse race for the mayoralty\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000536\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ab23b3bc3d9c4fa4b63eca8ab13627d4\u0022\u003EDarren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: Is the member running for the community board?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000537\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002272fe20c2143b43cf94dfe1c8da8ab144\u0022\u003EPHIL HEATLEY\u003C/span\u003E: It is true. The Otaki member is quite right. I have been lobbied by local Whangarei constituents to be mayor as well as MP. But I will not do it. I will not be double-dipping. We have a four-horse race out there, but one particular person who is very able has been holding back because he is concerned that if he puts his hand up for mayor\u2014he is very able\u2014and does not get the nod from the public, he will not be able to sit for council, as well. I will be calling him tonight, if this bill passes, and saying that the National Party fixed it for him and for Whangarei, and we know he will be delighted about that. The member for Otaki might very well\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000538\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224d4607528c5f42a8890c89b71ed94587\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: Who?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000539\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229884ae78b78c4101a7627aba1c0f0040\u0022\u003EPHIL HEATLEY\u003C/span\u003E: I think his name is Darren Hughes. In his electorate he is called \u201CDarren Who\u201D, not Darren Hughes. In Parliament he is called \u201CLittle Red\u201D. I think it is time that Darren Hughes walked out from under the shadow of Judy Keall\u2014I know it is a long crawl to walk out from under the shadow of Judy Keall\u2014and actually stood for something in this Parliament. \u201CLittle Red\u201D should stand for something in this Parliament, and crawl out from the shadow of Judy Keall, regardless of how long that might take because she casts a shadow indeed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000540\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003EWe will support this clause for the reasons I outline. We want good people in the provinces and in rural New Zealand to put up their hands and know they have a good shot either to lead a council as mayor or to be a councillor. We want the pool of skilled people in rural and provincial New Zealand to be large so that electors have a choice. We are not interested in closing down the pool, as the Labour Party would have us do so that only their whipping boys get to stand. We will support this clause and no doubt the Government is pleased about that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022 data-id=\u00220f003ddf4a5f4dc19b9a8a487fd23a78\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000541\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220f003ddf4a5f4dc19b9a8a487fd23a78\u0022\u003ELARRY BALDOCK (United Future):\u003C/span\u003E I will make a brief contribution on the clause we have been discussing, the clause about being able to stand for both council and mayoralty. I appreciate the contribution of the member who spoke before me. I have no doubt whatsoever that he will be on the phone only a few minutes after this bill is passed, taking the credit for having had the amendment passed that clarifies the issue. But the member is somewhat mistaken in his speech when he says that in the past, people have been denied the opportunity to stand for both council and mayoralty. I stood in the 2001 local body elections, and there were a number of people in the Tauranga area who stood for both mayoralty and council. This provision was introduced in the 2002 legislation and it has not yet had an effect upon any local body elections. So the member was slightly awry of the truth in that regard, but we understand what he was talking about. Perhaps they do different things up in the north, and perhaps they did not allow people to stand for both, but people in the rest of the country were able to. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000542\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003EThis clause makes it clear that someone can stand as a candidate for a ward and also for a mayoralty. In our area we have another situation arising, where we have members standing at large. We have seven councillors being elected at large, and three councillors being elected as ward members. That is one per ward as there are three wards in the Tauranga area. I have had a number of submissions from sitting councillors about why they cannot stand for both ward candidate and councillor at large, which is currently prohibited. We have had a number of reasons given to us by officials as to the complications that occur there, but that is a new phenomenon. There are only two councils that I am aware of, after the Local Government Commission\u2019s review, where there will now be members standing at large as well as in wards. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000543\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003ESome of the arguments put forward to me made some sense. It did seem that there was a bias in favour of those who were standing at large\u2014being able to do that and stand for the mayoralty as well. People who wanted to stand at large had no aspirations to be mayor. They wanted to stand for the ward, but were prohibited from doing that. I trust that the Local Government Commission will evaluate how these elections go this year, and see whether some of the arguments that have been raised about that prohibition are in fact valid. Perhaps recommendations need to be made in order to have consistency in this whole area. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000544\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003EI said earlier that I am personally not in favour of people being allowed to stand for both. I believe that if a person is a councillor and wants to have a shot at the mayoralty, then he or she should have a shot. But if the person misses out, then he or she should spend a bit of time out in the real world again, learning what is going on and not clinging to his or her seat as a councillor. The converse argument, of course, is that some good councillors might be lost, but one of the great things about local body politics is that it is a great place for people to step into politics and have an opportunity to get involved in public service. I do not think it is a negative for us to see some people of experience stepping aside for a while and allowing some new blood to come in. Who knows? A person could end up going from there straight to Parliament. It does happen. Those sorts of things occur, and that cannot always be a bad thing. So I hope we might look at reviewing the legislation after a few more local body elections, and seeing whether it is wise to allow dual candidacy. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022 data-id=\u002289114a5f241b4918bb1cd7ab3a55e7b5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000545\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002289114a5f241b4918bb1cd7ab3a55e7b5\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH (National\u2014Nelson):\u003C/span\u003E Clause 26 in Part 3 deals with the issue of fair representation for wards. That was a change made by the Government in the year 2001, which put quite rigid population criteria on the allocation of wards. I, on behalf of the people of Waimate and the people of the Kapiti Coast, want to point out to the Government the errors it has made with that provision. When the communities of New Zealand, and particularly of its rural areas, developed, they did not develop in a nice, neat, systematic way, with the sorts of grid boundaries that would suit our statisticians. The communities built up, and now there are areas that are quite severely disadvantaged by what this Labour Government put into law. The Government, rather than having communities of interest as the primary driver of ward boundaries for councils, introduced a rigid population criterion. Now that might work in a Hamilton, a Christchurch, or an Auckland, where a line can be drawn along particular street boundaries to ensure that each ward has a population approximately the same. But out in rural New Zealand where we have isolated communities, that provision has undermined communities quite badly. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000546\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EI want particularly to refer to a community in my own area. Everybody knows the isolated community of Golden Bay. It currently has two councillors. It is a community that is very clearly defined by the large T\u0101kaka Hill that separates if off from the rest of the Tasman district. Previously its community has been able to have two councillors. There is also the community of Murchison, which is to the south of Nelson. It, too, was able under the old law to have its own separate ward. But because of what the Government did in that 2001 Act\u2014completely ignoring the views of rural New Zealand and putting a rigid population criterion into law\u2014those communities are disenfranchised from having councillors who can truly represent those sorts of areas. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000547\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EI would like to know from Government members whether they are going to revisit and change that. We had submissions at the Local Government and Environment Committee that the law was not working. I actually think there was a pretty strong consensus on the committee that the law was not working. It is true that it is too late to affect the local body elections to be held in October this year, because boundaries have already been formed. So if people are to be disenfranchised in communities like that of Waimate and those on the Kapiti Coast, we at least seek some commitment from the Government that this issue will be fixed for the 2007 local body elections. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000548\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EI give notice right now that National will fix it. It is not fair; it is not working; communities of interest are more important than statistical lines that may be imposed on maps. I was disappointed earlier to hear a Government member vigorously defending the changes, and I wonder whether that member has visited any of those rural communities that are adversely affected by this legislation. So I request members opposite to visit Waimate and the Kapiti Coast, and to visit areas like rural Nelson and rural Bay of Plenty, and to talk to some of the councillors who represent those communities. Those members should talk to some of the people who are affected, and they would realise they have got it wrong. Clause 26 of this part does not fix the problem, and it does need to be revisited. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000549\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EWe have the extraordinary situation where the Government has given the power to the Local Government Commission in Wellington simply to write ward boundaries without any connection to communities, and National says that that is wrong. National wants that provision fixed, and we hope that someone on the Government benches will take a reasoned approach to the issue, so that before the 2007 local body elections we do not have a whole lot more small communities being disenfranchised from their effective ward representations around council tables. I ask again whether some Minister or some member of the Government is prepared to give a commitment to this Committee that that provision will be fixed, because for every moment it is not we see isolated communities disenfranchised from fair representation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000550\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 232 in the name of the Hon Chris Carter to Part 3 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000551\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to, and Part 3 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000552\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00222c147fbd8aff4703b109be0983e8cc6f\u0022\u003EPart 4  Local Government Act 2002\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022 data-id=\u00229bd1f03588d446e6a252b29183fa8bf9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000553\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229bd1f03588d446e6a252b29183fa8bf9\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH (National\u2014Nelson):\u003C/span\u003E When the Government passed the Local Government Act of 2002, it created a bureaucratic nightmare for our home communities in terms of defining what a council organisation and a council-controlled organisation are, and introduced a whole set of performance criteria and special consultative procedures, which those organisations are required to do. What members are being asked to do now with these 20 clauses is patch up the mess for those organisations and make some additional amendments. Members on this side of the Chamber would simply say that the amendments do not resolve the problem, because the problem is the very core of the legislation that was passed by that Minister in December 2002. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000554\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EWhat is particularly ironic in this part is that members will effectively make a special exemption for Northport. We do not have any bugbear with Northport, nor with the fact that it will not be tied up in the bureaucratic provisions in those 20 clauses, but we would ask the Minister how many other examples will come out of the woodwork where his Act will be unworkable, and where the Act that was put through Parliament under urgency\u2014as it is in urgency now\u2014in December 2002 gets itself in trouble. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000555\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EThe costs associated with all those extra bureaucratic requirements fall on ratepayers. Over the last 3 years, there have been rate increases well above the rate of inflation. This Government is passing bureaucratic requirements down from central to local government without the funding, and ratepayers get that bill in their rate demands. There is very little in those 20 clauses that will make any difference to the increasing costs that Labour and Chris Carter are imposing on ratepayers out there in our 84 district and regional councils. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000556\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EI also want to put to the Minister the increasing concern of local authorities about the costs of Audit New Zealand associated with those long-term council community plans. Now, only a Minister such as Chris Carter could come up with a phrase as wonky as \u201Clong-term community plans\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000557\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228bd87534aa624d72aca50cd96f6ef7d8\u0022\u003EHon Chris Carter\u003C/span\u003E: No, council community plans. You must get it right.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000558\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d328fe8ead924c09b62aadd06bad0249\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, I must get it right\u2014long-term community council plans.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000559\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fc87e4ec0e2948be857694185792de88\u0022\u003EHon Chris Carter\u003C/span\u003E: Council community plans. You still haven\u2019t got it right.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000560\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220d02f3c6750343e1b18a1dd9ce8e569c\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: Well, it says something about the bureaucracy this Minister is imposing on the councils of New Zealand that the planning industry is booming out there as it develops those long-term council community plans, and their district plans, and their regional plans. There is an excessive amount of planning requirements on councils that is adding hugely to the rates bills that citizens out there have to pay. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000561\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a5a286e630d6401dbc2138f5abc94a28\u0022\u003EHon Chris Carter\u003C/span\u003E: Not true!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000562\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002299627124725445dc8730c947ab397870\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: The Minister says: \u201CNot true.\u201D Well, looking at the information that is provided by Statistics New Zealand, since this Minister has been in the chair, rate increases have been three times the rate of inflation. Why is that?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000563\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224a4c9a3ddd8e43328860a6e8a57d42c7\u0022\u003EHon Chris Carter\u003C/span\u003E: The member\u2019s made it up.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000564\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002261fbcc6206584ba1bf30a22cbe1d2d7a\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: Well, actually, Statistics New Zealand, for which this Government is responsible, has been the provider of those rates figures, which are well above the rate of inflation for every year that he has been Minister, and he does not give a hoot. At none of the meetings that he participated in has he ever expressed any concern for those average citizens on fixed incomes facing another round of record rate increases. The responsibility for those rate increases falls right back on this Minister, who continues to pass legislation that puts an extra bureaucratic burden on the councils of New Zealand, which is then passed on to ratepayers. The special consultative procedures, long-term council community plans, etc., are just part of that bureaucracy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022 data-id=\u0022bff1826ef0f94cd2a01e809764c7ed8d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000565\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bff1826ef0f94cd2a01e809764c7ed8d\u0022\u003EJIM PETERS (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E In speaking to Part 4, I am very pleased to see that provision was made for Northport, the company that the Hon Dover Samuels had a substantial part in creating and developing in his early years before he came to this Parliament. It is a progressive and inter-regional company, as it now has a joint working arrangement with the Port of Tauranga. By the way, this was something that the Local Government and Environment Committee ought not have had to amend, as that very issue was brought to the mind of the select committee at the time of the first bill. Nevertheless, time passes and the improvement is there. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000566\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003EThe other issue that I want to speak about is that because of some of its parts, New Zealand First did not support the 2002 bill. The issue I particularly want to mention right now is the one just covered by the Hon Dr Nick Smith\u2014the number of plans and processes that that bill required. One does not need to go to Statistics New Zealand; if one did a search of local papers now, as councils are setting rates, one would see the thousands and thousands of dollars\u2014hundreds of thousands of dollars in the case of some councils\u2014that ratepayers are paying for an imposed Wellington process, layer by layer. That is only the beginning, because there is provision in that 2002 Act for the process to be redeveloped at least twice before 2007. I do not think those issues were fully understood by all when, bravely, they set out this whole process. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000567\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003ENew Zealand First is a party that believes in the democratic process, but this planning issue, which had been gone through council by council, will be the most costly impost that any Government has imposed upon local government in our time. I do not think that is reasonable. Even recent Acts, such as the activities that now have to be covered under the Prostitution Reform Act, would not have covered even a tenth of the cost of ratepayers\u2019 involvement in this process. At the end of it all, that process has only marginally, I believe, improved ratepayers\u2019 knowledge of what happens in their councils day-to-day. So with those words, the select committee\u2019s change allowing Northport an understanding that was not there before is finally recognised. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000568\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003EThe cost of the long-term planning and other plans that were a part of the work of the 2002 Act needs to be analysed and measured. Certainly, I know that as some councillors set the rates for 2005-06 and go back to the costs further incurred in this next financial year, they will be surprised at how much this imposed solution to democracy locally has had upon them. To that degree though, we support this part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022 data-id=\u002257318f662dfd4edea2cc19084277cfda\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000569\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002257318f662dfd4edea2cc19084277cfda\u0022\u003ELARRY BALDOCK (United Future):\u003C/span\u003E I just have a couple of comments with regard to the long-term council community plan, and the comments made by the member speaking before me. I just hope that when that analysis of costs is done, it takes a bit of a long view, because I think there will be some initial costs for councils. However, I believe that the real savings of having done a long-term council community plan will be realised as we go through that 10-year period. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003EOne of the things that costs councils a lot of money is the change of direction that occurs every 3 years, when newly elected members come in with their new ideas and projects and old projects are ditched after a lot of work has been done on them. I think the concept of a long-term council community plan is to try to smooth that process out and allow the community to have some certainty about where it is going. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000571\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003EI will make a few comments about the restoration of the casting vote, which I touched on in my second reading speech. It is welcome news that the Minister and the Government have agreed to restore the status quo for councils. After the end of the committee\u2019s deliberations, United Future was really not prepared to accept the limited restoration of the casting vote, and we were working to develop a Supplementary Order Paper to at least expand it to include new bylaws. It is important that after going through the process of a draft bylaw and consultation with the community, councils do not end up in a situation whereby a tied vote means that nothing happens and there is no status quo to fall back on. All that effort would be wasted if there were no opportunity for the mayor or chair to put in a casting vote. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000572\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003EOne of the reasons for the opposition to councils having a casting vote is, of course, that here in the Chamber we do not have a casting vote. It is often said that there should be equity between the two forms of government, but there are clearly differences between local government and central government. I remember that when I was first elected to local government in 2001, I had a concept that the real evil down here in Parliament was party politics, and that we really ought to have 120 independent elected MPs who would make up their minds not on the basis of party policy but on the merits of each case. Given a local council with 14 independently minded councillors, it did not take me very long to realise that such a system would be a nightmare down here. We would go round and round in circles, as some councils tend to do when there is no willingness to get together and form a consensus on various council directions. So some things are different. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000573\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003EThe Government never introduces legislation into this Chamber unless it is fairly sure it has a majority, so it is never left in a situation where it would need to rely on a casting vote\u2014except when we have conscience votes, and then a casting vote exercised by the Speaker would be unfair because every member has an equal right to vote. That is the only time we get anywhere near to what councils go through every time councillors have to vote on issues. It is important that councils can make decisions and move forward the plans they have made for the community. If a vote is tied at council level, it is defeated and then the council has to go through a process before the vote can be brought back. One cannot just nip out to the back room, have a little discussion, and bring it straight back on to the agenda. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000574\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003EWe are very wise to restore the status quo on that issue, and I commend the Minister and the Government for listening to the heavy lobbying from Local Government New Zealand. I do not think there is anything wrong with the fact that that organisation has lobbied hard, because it passionately believes in what it is trying to achieve on behalf of councils. I will be pleased to vote for the amendments the Minister is putting forward in his Supplementary Order Paper.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022 data-id=\u002251d5e502e3c546f1976317cccb10bbc8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000575\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002251d5e502e3c546f1976317cccb10bbc8\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS CARTER (Minister of Local Government):\u003C/span\u003E I thank Mr Baldock from United Future for his comments, which are very helpful and informative. It is astonishing how the whole story of the casting vote and the issues around it have been recast in the Chamber, not least of all by the member for Nelson, Dr Nick Smith. Members may recall that when the Local Government Bill was passed in this House\u2014under urgency, as bills often are\u2014the issue of the casting vote was contained within it. I had been very interested in the issue, because that was legislation I had inherited after being appointed not long before that to the position of Minister of Local Government. There were two issues in the bill that had been quite contentious with Local Government New Zealand: the casting vote, and non-resident franchise. In my travelling around and meeting with mayors and councils I said that I was quite relaxed on both issues, but that the bill was before the Local Government and Environment Committee and I would go with the decision of the select committee. The select committee in its wisdom restored non-resident franchise, and that was fine, but unanimously\u2014from the ACT party to the Green Party\u2014every party in this House voted not to have a casting vote for local government. I accepted that as the decision\u2014not by a majority but unanimously\u2014of every party in this House. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000576\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003ENow, when local government looked at the issue after the passage of the bill, its representatives felt, for some of the very good reasons Mr Baldock and others have explained, that it would make their job harder to do. We listened. I said to them that they would have an opportunity to raise that in the tidy-up legislation, because in any legislation that is the size of the Local Government Act there is some fixing up to do. It is a massive Act, and no one ever gets it 100 percent right, down to the last comma. So I said we would fix up those little bits. Some of them were a bit bigger than others, but there were some bits to fix up. I said that local government had the chance to relitigate the position of the casting vote, that I was prepared to listen again, and that it should make its case. Local government representatives made their case, we have listened to them, we have fixed the legislation up, and I hope they will be happy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022 data-id=\u0022be713a09dc414f02b7f9f83549cd8649\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000577\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022be713a09dc414f02b7f9f83549cd8649\u0022\u003EGERRARD ECKHOFF (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E Unfortunately, I did not sit on the Local Government and Environment Committee. I suppose that might be something of a blessing; I am not too sure about that. As I listen to the debate, I am somewhat stunned at some of the phraseology in Part 4, such as clause 44B, \u201CUse of special consultative procedure in relation to annual plan\u201D and clause 45, \u201CLong-term council community plan\u201D. It is almost as though the Government believes that if one has a plan, that automatically means one will be successful. There is nothing in here that I can see about benchmarking the success of the plans. Plans last for 10 years or thereabouts. Where in the bill does it state that councils will stop at some stage and assess whether the plans are working? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000578\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003EI am absolutely stunned at the level of bureaucracy that this Government is imposing on communities. Whether they be in Auckland or Coal Creek, it does not really matter. The level of control is literally out of control. I had occasion to speak with a Russian doctor recently at my home. He came, enjoyed a wonderful meal, and said he was stunned, on coming back to New Zealand after being educated in Australia, at the level of control that has been applied and the difficulties that people\u2014and, indeed, including himself in the medical profession\u2014were now facing following that gap of 5 or so years. It is all because Governments tend to believe that if they plan people\u2019s lives for them, things will be great. Let me ask the Minister in the chair, Chris Carter, whether anyone planned the city of Paris, or the city of London. Was there a planning department that wrote down how people were going to develop Prague? Some of the great cities in the world did not have planners, I say to the Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000579\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222f221b53b5be45b8a208edafab2d4e37\u0022\u003EHon Member\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, they did!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000580\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022248271ad90f844ad9ab7ec4242627dfb\u0022\u003EGERRARD ECKHOFF\u003C/span\u003E: Not to the same extent as we do now. They probably had someone who said where to site developments, but they did not control and restrict matters to the same degree as we do today. What do we have in Auckland? We have planners, but we do not have anything that actually works. We have gridlocking. We have a thing about getting a plan, and putting it in place, at a cost to the taxpayer and the ratepayer of millions of dollars. Then, when a plan is in place, we get the Department of Conservation in to appeal the plan. It does that on a constant basis, and that has cost this country about half a billion dollars. And then all of a sudden, once we write the plan off, we say everything is going to be sweet. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000581\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003EThat is just not the case. It is a nonsense, and people around the country are waking up to the fact that we cannot have the layers of government in this country planning people\u2019s lives. It is a nonsense, and sooner or later it will have to stop. We just cannot afford the level of \u201Cplanning\u201D that goes on in this country. It is, to me, something of an abomination to see, in Part 4, that we are seeking to impose the will of a handful of people on the constituents who pay their wages. It seems to me that the Government should never forget who actually pays the piper.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000582\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b5b8228cabcc4af68f67a8d1eca3550a\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH (National\u2014Nelson):\u003C/span\u003E I have to respond to the attempt of the Minister in the chair, the Hon Chris Carter, to rewrite history around the issue of the casting vote. In my 14 years in this Parliament, I have seen few occasions when a Minister has so much wanted to distance himself from his own legislation. How often is it that we hear a Minister saying: \u201COh, it wasn\u2019t my fault\u2014it was the select committee. My name is on the front of the bill, but it is the select committee\u2019s fault that the casting vote was removed in that legislation back in 2002.\u201D I say to the Minister that it does not wash. He must take responsibility. He has flip-flopped so many times on this issue that his credibility is really starting to be in question. Is it not interesting how a Government starts to listen when it gets trouble in the polls? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000583\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b3ee6ca2591443bb97731f99a30c0aba\u0022\u003EHon Chris Carter\u003C/span\u003E: Ha, ha!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000584\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a968b4b225a94d78998f22c6bd669f51\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: It is true! For 5 years the Government has said there is no problem with the Resource Management Act, that it is beautifully written and beautifully crafted, and the Government is not going to make any change. The first poll that came out showing Labour was behind and\u2014oops\u2014we are in for a Resource Management Act review. When it came to school closures, the Minister of Education was absolutely stuck on track and was closing schools all around the country, but after one bad poll he did a U-turn. So it is with this Minister, the Hon Chris Carter. The Minister has steadfastly defended the issue relating to the casting vote, as we note from the original bill. If the Minister was so open-minded, such a \u201Clistening, caring, loving\u201D Minister, if he was\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222f53e42c8e3a4dc0a096ffe018222da9\u0022\u003EHon Chris Carter\u003C/span\u003E: Ask Local Government New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000586\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d280426b32234fe490cb09a2618d74de\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: I do, and I have to say they are somewhat critical of the Minister\u2019s capacity to be able to weasel and worm his way out of anything. If the Minister truly believed that a casting vote was fair and proper, why did he not introduce it in the original bill? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000587\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b126fcb290954ae9aa3d14f2242238b8\u0022\u003EHon Chris Carter\u003C/span\u003E: I said, let the select committee decide on the evidence.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000588\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002287037c0c070c42dc81220067722e4dd7\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: The Minister is so lacking in leadership. Most Ministers would give their initial thoughts to a select committee when introducing a bill. Not this Minister. The Minister\u2019s initial thought was that there should be no casting vote\u2014or I assume it was.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000589\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221a59d3ae-788b-4b19-b7dd-7d0e29a626fc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022111ee23473684805ba9adb9777f4885a\u0022\u003EHon Brian Donnelly\u003C/span\u003E: Why is he getting a Minister\u2019s salary?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223e64b89556fc4ca3a369ad2b48a863f6\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: That is a very good question. Here is a man who collects his ministerial salary, gets a ministerial car, and gets all the ministerial perks for his partner\u2014spending a fortune\u2014but when it comes to House matters he says: \u201COh, it is not my responsibility. It is nothing to do with me. The bill might be in my name, but it is just not me.\u201D I say to the Minister that it does not wash. He has done a flip-flop. He has made a U-turn. We are actually pretty comfortable, in relation to what National has consistently said on this issue\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000591\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c139214f360b46e9a1da0b357142e249\u0022\u003EHon Chris Carter\u003C/span\u003E: No, you voted for\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000592\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ecdcff9db48e489b84e0d2691084e7a9\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: The member says \u201CYou\u201D. I did not think that was within the Standing Orders. I was not on the select committee and, what is more, if the Minister goes back and checks the record, and looks at the bill, it is actually unclear whether there is a casting vote. That is what the commentary to the Minister\u2019s bill states. Is the commentary incorrect? The Minister does not want to talk about the commentary\u2019s statement that there is a mess in the Local Government Act 2002, which was in his name, that does not make it plain whether a casting vote is possible. National\u2019s view has been quite consistent, which is that\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000593\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a1d9adc5f3764b558d4ee748065e6ac5\u0022\u003EHon Chris Carter\u003C/span\u003E: Ha, ha!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000594\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224e965b8bec7e48f294f7bbdeade1f2b8\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: The member might want to explain his own position\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000595\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002272e48ab0-e7ae-427f-bedc-793b7a91adba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022523dc72d3d344a0db43218b0fdb2fc5b\u0022\u003EHon Mark Burton\u003C/span\u003E: That is an oxymoron, please!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000596\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228685139928034a5d8d7b08ceac244201\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: The incompetent member for Taupo interjects. The Government passed legislation getting rid of the casting vote in 2002. Mark Burton voted to get rid of the casting vote in 2002. When this bill was introduced last year he voted to reinforce getting rid of the casting vote. The Government has now done a flip-flop and decided that the casting vote is quite appropriate. Well, National\u2019s view is quite straightforward. We say that councils should decide. For all the rhetoric that we get from Government members about trusting local authorities\u2014they want to prescribe them to death\u2014we simply say: \u201CLet the council decide what is best, working within its own standing orders, just as this Parliament determines its own Standing Orders.\u201D We are continuously amazed at the degree to which this Government will do backward flips when the heat comes on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000597\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 232 in the name of the Hon Chris Carter to Part 4 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00227731352321fb464696a65302cbe370e4\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendments be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 109\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 9\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party 9.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to, and Part 4 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000598\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022c128a9ee54f04ca2b591cee1b9014fa1\u0022\u003EPart 4A  Local Government Act 1974\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022 data-id=\u002295c457e75c594ef49133076143ad6ae0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000599\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002295c457e75c594ef49133076143ad6ae0\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH (National\u2014Nelson):\u003C/span\u003E I must use this opportunity in debating Part 4A, which deals with a whole lot of minor amendments in relation to council infrastructure issues, to point out what a growing crisis we have and what an inadequate response we have in this bill to the issue of public infrastructure. There are infrastructure issues whether one lives in the city of Auckland with its huge traffic worries that become worse with every year of this Labour Government, or whether one lives in my own community of Nelson where there is a daily risk between 5 and 7 o\u2019clock each night that the lights will go out because of inadequate infrastructure. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000600\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EThere are some challenges out there in respect of the infrastructure required for drainage and waterworks systems, and we would expect to see some decent legislation from the Minister of Local Government to address those issues. Rather, we are seeing the humbug in Part 4A, which makes some very minor and insignificant changes. The Minister is failing, as this Government is, to provide the sort of legislation that would allow the issues to be dealt with. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000601\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EI also point out the concern raised at the select committee by the Marlborough District Council in respect of the funding of infrastructure. I would like to know from the Minister whether the Government will support amendments that will allow lump-sum payment for infrastructure, as had long been provided before his Local Government Act 2002 effectively abolished it. It meant that if there was to be a new waterworks scheme or some other new infrastructure in a community, a ratepayer had the choice of being able to write out a lump-sum cheque. Let us say it was a waterworks scheme and ratepayers could pay $3,000 rather than having an extra $200 a year on their rates for 25 years, with the council taking out a loan. To me it has been a good mechanism in our local government system that residents have had the option of making a lump-sum payment as an alternative to having to meet an annual extra increase in their rates for that sort of infrastructure. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000602\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EI am not sure whether it was intentional that the Local Government Act 2002 abolished those lump-sum payments, but it was not sensible. It is certainly something that National members would like to see retained. I particularly pay tribute to Lynda Scott, who, as the member for Kaikoura, raised this issue with me on behalf of her good people of Marlborough. They would like to have the option with this sort of infrastructure to be able to make a lump-sum payment to deal with those sorts of costs. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000603\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EMy question for the Minister is whether the Government will entertain an amendment to address that concern from the people of Marlborough; and, if not, why not? Can he also clarify whether they are correct and whether, under the 2002 Act, the ability to make those lump-sum payments was a deliberate or an inadvertent change to prevent local authorities from being able to fund their infrastructure in that way. It may sound like a small point, but it is an important one. Certainly, National comes from the point of view that councils need that flexibility. It would seem entirely inconsistent with the Government\u2019s rhetoric about the power of general competence to take away from councils the capacity to be able to charge lump sums for that sort of infrastructure. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000604\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EI would be very interested in a response from the Minister to the point raised by the Marlborough District Council.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000605\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EPart 4A agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000606\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022624090201ac5495fa4d876ea6a52e510\u0022\u003EPart 5  Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000607\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Jim Peters to clause 59 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000608\u0022\u003Eto omit the words after \u201CSection\u201D and substitute the words \u201C46A(7A) of the principal Act is repealed.\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00221479a078118842f3bdff63345a7719f2\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 70\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to, and Part 5 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000609\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022ba207e7534ec40bea0242656bda5243b\u0022\u003EPart 6  Local Government (Rating) Act 2002\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022 data-id=\u002223a595af1eba41fdac37b726ff9bceae\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000610\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002223a595af1eba41fdac37b726ff9bceae\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: The debate is on Part 6, clauses 61 to 67, including debate on schedule 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022 data-id=\u002246d4dfab3d6c4261b36799cfc09d9d4e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000611\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002246d4dfab3d6c4261b36799cfc09d9d4e\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH (National\u2014Nelson):\u003C/span\u003E This part deals with the issue of rating information. Again, it highlights the problems with legislation that the Government passed in 2002. It has been a long-established custom and practice that when one goes to one\u2019s local council office, one can see a list of properties, their ratings, and the listed owners of each of those properties. That has been really important public information. For instance, if I want to know who my neighbours are so that I can sort out a fencing problem, then I need to know their address, because there may be an issue about sharing the cost of that fence. Or I might want to put a drain through the adjoining property and I need to know who the owner is. It may be that I need to contact my neighbour in respect of changes I might be proposing to make under the Resource Management Act to the use of my own property. There are many quite legitimate reasons why people would want to know the names of the owners of particular properties. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000612\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EIn 2002 the Government, either deliberately or accidentally, removed the capacity for the public to have access to that information. I have to say that it has been something of an over-reaction to issues of privacy, whereby a whole lot of custom and practice that has worked very well for New Zealanders has resulted in all of this secrecy around information as basic as people\u2019s ownership of land. The bill as drafted is intended to address that, and National is supportive of the provisions as they have been rewritten by the Local Government and Environment Committee. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000613\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EI have to say that National has saved the ratepayer a fortune by defeating and changing some of the politically correct and bureaucratic proposals that came from the Government in dealing with that issue. There was going to be an opt-in system whereby every damn ratepayer had to get a letter from the council seeking permission as to whether their land would be allowed on a database. National thought that was foolish. We thought the presumption should be in favour of disclosure and of people knowing that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000614\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EWe think that a very low-level mechanism by which people can remove themselves from the list of ratepayers is the sort of approach we would favour, and we think that the select committee has done a far better job than the Government to provide the proper balance between pragmatic provisions that allow the public to have access to information that is required for them to get on with life. Whereas if, for reasons of domestic violence or for some other quite narrow reason, people want their names removed, they can do so. A person can register his or her property in the name of a trust, company, or some other identity, so I am doubtful that we need to go even as far as this legislation goes, but it is certainly a big step forward from what we have currently in terms of being able to provide this information to the public at large. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000615\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003ESo National would argue that this information should be available. It will be a huge relief to real estate agents and the general public to again be able to go to their council office and see the registered list of landowners in their particular area, and to do so without great expense. I think that is appropriate, and that is why National is supporting Part 6.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022 data-id=\u00228fce2cbad51243af9588704f6b343caf\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000616\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228fce2cbad51243af9588704f6b343caf\u0022\u003EJIM PETERS (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E I want to raise the matter in Part 6 that I mentioned in the second reading debate\u2014namely, that on the Table lies my amendment regarding new clause 63AA, which covers lump-sum contributions. Again, I apologise to the Local Government and Environment Committee for not being there at the time that matter was raised, because the Local Government (Auckland) Amendment Bill was also being debated at the same time, or, rather, was being looked at in another area of the House. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000617\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003EThe issue is one that is well known to rural councils. Although the submission came from the Marlborough District Council, a number of rural councils, all of a like mind, gave support to it. I want to quickly run through them: the Far North District Council, Nelson City Council, Kaikoura District Council, Whangarei District Council, Grey District Council, Thames-Coromandel District Council, Kawerau District Council, Tasman District Council, Selwyn District Council, and Central Hawke\u2019s Bay District Council all supported this change. Because I was not present during the committee discussions, I know no reason why this well-supported submission was not given further understanding, as it ought to have been. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000618\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003EThe Rating Powers Act of 1988 contained a very prescriptive regime that allowed for lump-sum contributions that the council could offer in two ways\u2014namely, for a particular works situation, or towards the capital cost of those works. The other way was to refinance an existing loan. However, the Act of 1988 was largely repealed in 2002, and in the repeal of the Act, although the specific issues of flexibility and lump-sum contributions were part of the select committee discussions, the actual end result was the inability to work through lump sums. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000619\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003EI have a very simple, not very complex amendment for members to look at that meets the need of a number of councils and that historically has been a method that rural councils, in particular, have used to allow lump-sum contributions. The system is calculated to be equitable and is fair on those who pay a lump sum up front and on those who pay charge by charge. Again, because I was not at the select committee I am at some pains to understand why this very sensible amendment was not given further thought. I commend this amendment to the Committee. New Zealand First supports this amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000620\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 227 in the name of Jim Peters to insert new clause 63AA be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022ff88c749b8c646118404b98ab4d3b0c8\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 70\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000621\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 232 in the name of the Hon Chris Carter to Part 6 be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000622\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to, and Part 6 as amended agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000623\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002218e8ed15c3e54d89ba0a546c3d787249\u0022\u003ESchedule 1AA agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000624\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022b2c685a0828f4b68adec32a2febb2dee\u0022\u003ESchedule 1 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000625\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00221dd02ef6ecf042c0a63e94c727d46576\u0022\u003ESchedule 1A agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022b9e8ae3d1cb44e84ab081806a121bcf1\u0022\u003EClause 1 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000627\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002214541e954a9649c780b8394f69579907\u0022\u003EClause 2  Commencement \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000628\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 232 in the name of the Hon Chris Carter to clause 2 be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000629\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to, and clause 2 as amended agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000630\u0022\u003EThe Committee divided the bill into the Chatham Islands Council Amendment Bill (No 2), the Dog Control Amendment Bill (No 2), the Local Electoral Amendment Bill (No 2), the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill, the Local Government Act 1974 Amendment Bill, the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Amendment Bill (No 2), and the Local Government (Rating) Amendment Bill (No 2), pursuant to Supplementary Order Paper 234.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000631\u0022\u003EBill reported with amendment.\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000632\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002224e24e0c8d404049a84d4ef98ac02c5b\u0022\u003EThird Readings\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000634\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002236c0662626034349a7d422986b842a89\u0022\u003EThird Readings\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022 data-id=\u002230d9100f6c554eddba679a5dce79bb7b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000633\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002230d9100f6c554eddba679a5dce79bb7b\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Before I call the third reading, I want to advise members that I will put each bill separately at the end of the debate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022 data-id=\u0022db9b27a75f61401286c4c11763520bc4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000635\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022db9b27a75f61401286c4c11763520bc4\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS CARTER (Minister of Local Government):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the Chatham Islands Council Amendment Bill (No 2), the Dog Control Amendment Bill (No 2), the Local Electoral Amendment Bill (No 2), the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill, the Local Government Act 1974 Amendment Bill, the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Amendment Bill (No 2), and the Local Government (Rating) Amendment Bill (No 2) be now read a third time. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000636\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003EThe purpose of the Local Government Law Reform Bill (No 3) was to further ensure that the legislative framework in which local government operates is as comprehensive and clear as possible. These bills achieve the same. Collectively, they will provide more certainty for councils as they administer, and work within, the existing legislation. They will also provide communities with greater certainty in their dealings with their local authority. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000637\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d4506109-be18-4b9d-9a79-1e15e2e2cd41\u0022\u003EThese bills are part of the Government\u2019s ongoing commitment to bringing New Zealand\u2019s local government legislation into the 21st century. They address some minor, largely technical issues that have arisen in the larger legislative changes of recent years. The bills, and the changes that have been made to them throughout the parliamentary process, are further evidence of the cooperation between local and central government that has taken place for the last 5 years. As Minister of Local Government, I am confident that this cooperation and sense of partnership will remain strong and continue to serve us in our communities into the future.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022 data-id=\u0022d5a4376a650d4efcad4c6e6744813e5c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000638\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d5a4376a650d4efcad4c6e6744813e5c\u0022\u003EPHIL HEATLEY (National\u2014Whangarei):\u003C/span\u003E The National Party outlined earlier that it would support the passage of this bill, but we tempered that with concerns about why we are here at all. Members will recall that we outlined the fact that the Local Government Act 2002 was rushed through this House in that particular year. Lots of mistakes were made, and we are here sweeping up that mess now, and that is unfortunate. Amendments were also made to the Dog Control Act by this Government. We are here now, of course, to tidy up the mess made there, and it is of concern to us. Although we are disappointed, we are more than willing to fix those particular problems. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000639\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003EIt is of interest to us in particular to see the Chatham Islands representatives take up the role of having the delegated authorities associated with regional councils. They will be involved in environmental management, coastal management, coastal plans, and all the types of things that would normally go to regional councils and were previously under the auspices of another regional council. They can now dictate their own terms, and that is a good thing. Already, the Chatham Islands District Council carries out territorial authority responsibilities. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000640\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003EWe are a little concerned about the small ratepayer base on the Chatham Islands. There are only 700 people there, most of them kids, and we are concerned that they will be subject to extra costs. I do not know whether the Chatham Islands will be able to deal with that without some sort of Government assistance. I hope that this Government will smile upon the Chatham Islands, having presented them with greater ability to govern their own affairs, but also with more bureaucracy. That has to be supported either out of the rate base, or out of some generous gift from a Government that is keen to throw lollies about. I am pleased to hear that $2.5 million will be going towards a sewage scheme there. We hope the Government will support the Chatham Islands practically as well as legislatively in this legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000641\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003EThere are also other issues of concern to us, and we outlined those. One was the fact that the Labour Government had taken away the right of candidates in provincial and rural New Zealand to stand for both council and the mayoralty. Unfortunately, the pool of good candidates in New Zealand is small. Those people could stand only for mayoralty or council, and were concerned that if they ran for the mayoralty and did not get in, under the Government\u2019s laws, they would not have a place on the council. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000642\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003ENational has changed that. We are delighted to be able to go to rural and provincial New Zealand and say: \u201CLook, if you\u2019re good and the people back you, and you\u2019re credible and able, and if you win on election day, you might be the mayor. But if you miss out you, can still be a councillor, because we recognise that you\u2019ve got something to contribute. You\u2019ve got the skills.\u201D National does want good people on local government. We do not necessarily want hand-picked people from the Labour Government who will promote all sorts of liberal agendas. We want the people to be able to choose who is their mayor, who are their councillors, and give those people the opportunity to both stand and win and represent good New Zealanders. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000643\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003EWe have also outlined concerns about ward boundaries, and the plus or minus 10 percent variation to the population base in governing how many councillors there can be and what wards they represent. We were concerned that satellite towns in rural and provincial New Zealand would simply be cut in half by ward boundaries, and that there would be no representation for communities and interests, particularly in those satellite towns. We think that issue should have been addressed by this legislation, and we are disappointed that the Government has not fronted on that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000644\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003EWe are pleased that the casting vote for mayors has been returned to them. We know that mayors shoulder some responsibility, certainly in the public\u2019s perception. They do not often have to throw those authorities around, but when it comes to a split vote, we see no reason why an elected representative of the whole district, who has a mandate from the people, cannot make a decision based on the facts and his or her knowledge of the town. So we are pleased to see the casting vote returned to mayors\u2014not just when it comes to providing a vote or an outcome so that statutory duties can be met, but also over a wider range of council issues. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000645\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003ELastly, I would like to mention once again that National certainly opposes the Government\u2019s idea of putting a microchip into every puppydog in this country, regardless of the breed of the dog, regardless of the dog\u2019s history of behaviour, and regardless of who is the owner of the dog. We find it absurd that many families in New Zealand\u2014young families with kids who want pets, older families where elderly people want companionship from a well-behaved animal\u2014 should in some way have to face compliance costs and the hassle of microchipping their dogs. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000646\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003EIf we need to microchip dangerous dogs, so be it. We need to microchip dogs that belong to irresponsible gang members, which this Government seems to be too afraid to confront. So be it, but the National Party cannot see why every dog owner in this country\u2014rural, provincial, or in the city areas\u2014should have to have his or her little puppy microchipped. It is absolutely absurd. It will create all sorts of compliance costs\u2014an industry of its own. With the rest of New Zealand, we just shake our heads in disgust at that. However, we have put our minority view forward, and it can be seen in the commentary on the bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000647\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003EClearly, Mr Speaker, you will have listened to all the speeches\u2014certainly to mine\u2014with some intent. We appreciate that. We have fought the good fight, and we have made some very positive changes. There is no doubt that we would have gone further, but we commend this bill, and we will support its passing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022 data-id=\u00227015a77809174ba3868ee1d459a03a91\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000648\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227015a77809174ba3868ee1d459a03a91\u0022\u003EJIM PETERS (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E The remarks of the last speaker reminded me of the Waitaki River catchment legislation. When that bill came to the House and was passed, virtually every member of the Local Government and Environment Committee took personal praise for the outstanding parts of the bill. But when Project Aqua was abandoned, there was a quick change of mind. It is rather strange that one member claims that the National Party was responsible for that, when any sane and sound approach would have come up with the same result. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000649\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003EI refer first of all to the amendments to the Chatham Islands Council Act. I do not see that as a lolly, by the way, to the Chatham Islands. Over the years the Chatham Islands have had their natural wealth denuded and taken away, year by year, with millions of dollars of catches being sent to mainland New Zealand. The fact that the present Government has finally recognised that $2.5 million is needed\u2014in order to put the Chatham Islands Council into the unitary authority regime and enable it to do things there\u2014is only a just recognition of the wealth of those islands, which was shared not by their residents but mostly by mainlanders over decade after decade. I think it is highly appropriate that that has been recognised\u2014not as a lolly, as was said by the last speaker, but as a fair contribution to that council, in endeavouring to bring itself up to the requirements of the Resource Management Act with regard to regional planning, district planning in its district, and particularly with regard to the coastline\u2014the purity of waters and the enhancement of the natural environment. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000650\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003ESecondly, with regard to the Dog Control Act, interesting comments have been made about microchipping. The comments about these minor amendments to the Act do not illustrate the fact that the Act has worked. I understand that today the Timaru District Council is rethinking its whole stance. In past years about 600 dogs were known to have remained unregistered as at 1 August. Last year, that number dropped to 120. It then dropped to probably about 40. That is quite a remarkable achievement for a small district, and it shows how the Act and the large infringement fees have worked. I could go through what has occurred at Auckland City Council and other councils, as well. In other words, the intention of the Act to emphasise far greater regulation, and to place far greater onus upon irresponsible dog owners, is working and will continue to work. Therefore, microchipping is a natural outcome\u2014not this year but in the year set in the Act\u2014starting with puppies. I feel sorry for Mr Heatley\u2019s little boy, who is 4. I know, of course, that all the stories he told us about his son were really, as a responsible parent, upon his shoulders and affected his pocket. Nevertheless, it was an illustration of how things have changed, not least in our rural economy. That Act is one that, in the country districts, is probably more appreciated with regard to what it is doing and will do than in any other part of the country. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000651\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003EIt is just unfortunate that I was a bit distracted in the course of the Committee stage, because I want to leave one issue with the House. New Zealand First does not believe that in the amendments to the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act clarity has necessarily been achieved on what was a difficult issue\u2014the issue of the reconfiguration of new business in councils, and so on. In passing I say that I am not entirely satisfied that the amendments, which were meant to rectify that situation, have clarified it. But I will wait and see whether that is so. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000652\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003EWith regard to the amendments to the Local Government (Rating) Act, it seems that I may have to bring that matter back in a member\u2019s bill. The council that came to us with a submission, and the councils that supported it, have come with a righteous cause. The Local Government (Rating) Act of 2002 did change, and although it was not intentional, the actual ability to do a proper lump-sum scheme is no longer there in the way that those councils believe it is. I will need to get back to those councils in order to check that matter further. I hope to see whether the issue can be revisited in the House by bringing it back in a member\u2019s bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000653\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003EBroadly speaking, New Zealand First is satisfied with what is before the House. What we are not satisfied with is that one would have expected the known industry knowledge that the Local Government Act 2002 and the Resource Management Act are not in harmony to be the first subject of any review. That was not promised by the Minister. There are issues there that were not addressed in 2002, that are known in the industry to be still there, and that will probably have to be the subject of legislative change or court action in order to resolve them. The time was ripe, 2 years after 2002, not to give us a piecemeal reform bill but to come back to the House with something that addressed the problems created by the haste\u2014and it was indecent haste\u2014of the late days of 2002, in passing that Act. The haste was so indecent, I remind members, that the councils that were most affected had no opportunity to see the finished form, the language and the narrative of the legislation, at all. That was a mistake then. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000654\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003EWe are again sitting under urgency, as has already been mentioned, and looking at a considered review of a number of Acts, but not at the core fact that the Local Government Act 2002 is not in harmony with the Resource Management Act. Whether that will be a further task of the Minister in charge of the Resource Management Act, I do not know. But I do know\u2014and I will say this because it is germane to this issue\u2014that there are issues before councils now, particularly as a result of the decision with regard to Genesis Power, that are urgent, that need to be addressed, and that should have been part of the thinking in this supposedly short-term reform.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000655\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003E New Zealand First supports the passage of these bills. We hope that they clarify things. We particularly support the casting vote as it was. We believe as a party that it could have been much more than it is. Personally, I would have favoured exactly what the Hon Nick Smith stated: that councils should be given the power to themselves adopt under their Standing Orders what is reasonable in current practice. The fact that they were not given that power illustrates to me there are still some obstacles somewhere in the chain of development. Again, it was an obvious oversight that someone could not stand for the mayoralty or the chairmanship of a council, and also be a member of it. That has now been overcome. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000656\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003EBut I come back to the last matter that was mentioned in the Committee. The fact that there is to be a reform or a review of the Local Government Commission does not take away the disquiet, which the Hon Nick Smith has already mentioned, that is there in the distant rural areas with regard to their representation. That is becoming even more so, as we start to see some of the rates demands for this current year\u20142004-05\u2014and analyse where some of those rates are being paid from. We find the burden of rates being paid by the rural part of a district is more often than not far higher than that being paid by the urban part of the district\u2014in one council, it is 67 percent rural and 33 percent urban. It must alarm people in the rural areas that they have seen the Local Government Commission take away some of their voting strength, that the legislation does not recognise a community of interest, and most of all, that they have placed on them a considerable rates impost. That issue needs to be addressed further, and to wait until the 2007 review is really too late. Ratepayers as citizens need to know that they have a democratic right not just to pay the rates but to be heard, and right now there is a feeling in some of our districts, as has already been mentioned in the House, that that has not been so. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000657\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022075eff2f-7904-4500-8339-3972160a627f\u0022\u003EWe hope that this catch-up\u2014the wash-up as it were\u2014will do the job in two areas. I believe that we may need to look at amending the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act again, and also I believe that the amendments to the Local Government (Rating) Act should come back to the House in a different form. We intend to bring that matter back to the House for a further look.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022 data-id=\u0022786cafa4c05f4b41bbe4ec76877a3ba3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000658\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022786cafa4c05f4b41bbe4ec76877a3ba3\u0022\u003ELARRY BALDOCK (United Future):\u003C/span\u003E This is just a brief call on behalf of United Future on the third reading of this legislation. We do not intend to repeat things that have been said already, since they appear in Hansard in sequence when we handle legislation like this. But I will just mention that it was pleasing, during the Committee stage of the bill, to vote for the casting vote to be fully restored to councils. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000659\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003EI want to make a couple of comments regarding the National member Phil Heatley\u2019s concerns about microchipping. He was concerned earlier that he would have to train his son to do all those things with his new puppy. I suggest that in 2 years\u2019 time, when microchipping becomes a requirement, Mr Heatley\u2019s little boy will probably be an expert on technology and will be training his father. He will be wondering why his father did not support the very sensible approach of inserting microchips in dogs across the country, so that we can keep track on them and assist dog control officers in making sure that dogs are registered and appropriately taken care of by their owners. In 2 more years\u2019 time, I believe, technology will assist in many, many areas of society, so microchipping is a sensible approach. United Future is willing to support the national database, which will be of assistance to councils, as well. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000660\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003EI want to thank the officials for their assistance throughout the process with regard to this legislation, and it is now with pleasure that we can commend this legislation to local government. I also commend local government across the country for the very good work it does in administrating many, many issues in our local communities., Councils can now give their best attention to those issues because of the amendments we have provided for in this legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022 data-id=\u00229ae893d740714beb9f4a74f148ef428f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000661\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229ae893d740714beb9f4a74f148ef428f\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH (National\u2014Nelson):\u003C/span\u003E I want to make a few comments in the third reading of this legislation, further to the Committee stage and the debate that has gone before. The first is that this legislation is about fixing up mistakes made in rushed legislation in respect of dog control\u2014legislation that was introduced by Chris Carter. We warned against the rushed process, and now we are having to make over 20 changes in the amendments to the dog control legislation, to try to make it workable. National wishes to state on record its opposition to the compulsory microchipping of all dogs in New Zealand, which is reinforced by these amendments. It is our view that the expense to dog owners and to councils of having to put a microchip in every single dog will not be matched by the benefits provided by the extra control that that makes provision for. We also want to put on record our opposition to the prescriptive fines that are provided for in the amendments to the Dog Control Act. It is our view that councils are quite capable of setting the levels of fines. Parliament should go no further than to set the maximum fines, and should let the councils themselves work out the fines for particular matters. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000662\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EIn respect of the local government electoral provisions, we want to put on record our concern about the pot-pourri of different electoral systems that will be used in the October local body elections this year. It is our view that voters will be confused by the range of single transferable vote, MMP, and first-past-the-post elections that are provided for. While we support the change that will allow council candidates to stand for both the mayoralty and council, it is not our view that these are optimal local government election provisions, and we would want to re-examine that area when we are next in Government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000663\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EWe note that in respect of the local government rating records, we are again fixing an error in the 2002 rating legislation, which prohibited councils from being able to make rating and ownership information about properties available to the public. We support the more common-sense approach that is provided for in this legislation, to fix up that botch. We express concern only about the 2\u00BD years of confusion that has occurred as a consequence of the Government blocking access, by its bungled legislation, to that information since 2002. So yes, this legislation\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000664\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222a849ed4-a817-45a7-8b86-dbc9dd210193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002268b903bd0e184851b351093b9e420047\u0022\u003EJill Pettis\u003C/span\u003E: Keep talking!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000665\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228f83f16ad1814fa1a71cafe1732c3a2b\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: Does the member want me to keep talking, so she can get the Government\u2019s speakers organised? Such is the Government\u2019s legislative programme, and its mess. The Government is in disarray, as illustrated\u2014[Interruption] The Minister notes that this legislation does not provide for any of the innovative policy that is required in local government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000666\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EWe support this legislation, but express concern that rushed legislation has resulted in all these amendments having to be considered.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000667\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f411d51f46d44fc1bc677804bf176de2\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I want to advise members that I will put each bill separately.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000668\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003EChatham Islands Council Amendment Bill (No 2) read a third time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000669\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003EDog Control Amendment Bill (No 2) read a third time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000670\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003ELocal Electoral Amendment Bill (No 2) read a third time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000671\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003ELocal Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill read a third time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000672\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003ELocal Government Act 1974 Amendment Bill read a third time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000673\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003ELocal Government Official Information and Meetings Amendment Bill (No 2) read a third time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000674\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003ELocal Government (Rating) Amendment Bill (No 2) read a third time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000675\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003ESitting suspended from 5.27 to 7.00\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000676\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00224c271e7b3d81496c9a2820514c11e001\u0022\u003EParole (Extended Supervision) and Sentencing Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000677\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00223ad2ce81c6984c44af2f15ccfe16882c\u0022\u003ESecond Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022 data-id=\u00222a89ebbf5bee4e8ab057153867ec5f99\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000678\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222a89ebbf5bee4e8ab057153867ec5f99\u0022\u003EHon RICK BARKER (Associate Minister of Justice),\u003C/span\u003E on behalf of the Minister of Justice: I move, That the Parole (Extended Supervision) and Sentencing Amendment Bill be now read a second time. This bill was introduced in November 2003 to meet two objectives: firstly, the establishment of an active management regime aimed at managing the long-term risks posed by child sex offenders, and, secondly, to make minor amendments to the Sentencing Act and the Parole Act to bring the operation of those aspects of the Acts in line with the policy intentions. The active management regime creates a new legislative regime that will allow extended supervision orders to be imposed on child sex offenders who are assessed as likely to sexually victimise children, once their sentence is finished. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000679\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EAlthough the United Kingdom and Canada have regimes that enable child sex offenders to be actively managed, New Zealand authorities do not yet have such a regime. This bill enables offenders to be monitored for up to 10 years. How long the order is granted will be a decision for the court, taking into account the need to protect the community in light of the offender\u0027s risk and the likely seriousness and duration of any risk. The Justice and Electoral Committee has recommended that the Department of Corrections may apply for an extension to the duration of the extended supervision in situations where the offender has breached the conditions of the order, within the last 12 months. The maximum period of the order will remain at 10 years. However, officials will continue to monitor international regimes and determine whether, at some future time, there may be a need to consider extending the maximum order permissible under the regime, beyond 10 years. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000680\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe select committee has also recommended that an order can be extended, where the offender consents to the Department of Corrections making an application for extension for up to the 10-year maximum, on the offender\u0027s behalf. Some offenders may wish to have the ongoing support that an order provides. The extended supervision regime will be limited in its application. It will apply only to eligible offenders, subject to a finite sentence of imprisonment for a relevant offence. The bill, as introduced, was limited to actual sex offending against children, but the select committee has extended it so that those convicted of an imprisonable child pornography offence, under the Films, Videos, and Publications Classification Act, will also be eligible for extended supervision orders. This amendment reiterates the abhorrence with which the Government and society regard the production, distribution, and possession of child pornography. The regime will apply only to eligible offenders who are assessed by the Department of Corrections as posing a high or medium-high risk of offending sexually against children. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000681\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EWhere a court order is sought and made accepting that assessment, the Parole Board will set conditions for supervision and monitoring of the offender. These conditions may include electronic monitoring to deter the offender from breaching any special conditions relating to whereabouts\u2014for example, a condition that a person not approach a school. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000682\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe select committee has examined the appropriate safeguards that should govern the use of electronic monitoring and has recommended some amendments. These safeguards include, firstly, providing an explicit statement that the purpose of electronic monitoring is to deter offenders from breaching the conditions relating to their whereabouts, and to monitor compliance; secondly, limiting what information derived from electronic monitoring may be used. The information may be used to verify compliance or to detect non-compliance with conditions, and to provide evidence of non-compliance with conditions, and the commission of offences. The Department of Corrections will be required to include information on the use of electronic monitoring, in its annual report. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000683\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EI intend to move the adoption of a Supplementary Order Paper in the Committee stage to introduce an amendment to the bill authorising information sharing between specified public sector agencies. This amendment is needed essentially to put beyond doubt that agencies may share information relating to a child sex offender for the purposes of monitoring the offender and reducing the risk of reoffending, and that doing so will not be contrary to the Privacy Act. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000684\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EIssues related to this amendment were considered by the select committee, and such an amendment was thought desirable. However, the committee could not recommend the amendment, because it was considered to be beyond the scope of the bill. A second Supplementary Order Paper will clarify some of the mechanical procedures around enforcement of orders, and also remove the statutory limitation on the use of electronic monitoring for those on parole. The effect of that limitation, as reported, might be viewed as being more restrictive than had been intended. It is therefore preferable, in the Government\u0027s view, to remove it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000685\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EPart 2 contains a number of amendments to the Sentencing Act and Parole Act to deal with minor matters. The amendments are either of a technical nature to fix up drafting errors, or to bring the operation of particular provisions of the Act more closely into line with the Government\u0027s original policy intent. They include amendments to the provisions relating to home detention, deferral of sentences, and minimum terms of imprisonment. The committee\u0027s consideration of Part 2 did not result in many changes to the bill, but the changes that have been recommended have further improved the drafting of some clauses. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000686\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe committee has also taken the opportunity to address other minor matters that came to light after the introduction of the bill, and made some necessary consequential amendments to the various prescribed forms. The Government has been concerned that deferred sentence start-dates were being granted too often, in circumstances that did not meet the original policy expectation of being truly \u201Cout of the ordinary\u201D. There was also concern that the bail conditions should be imposed where deferral was given, to ensure that some degree of control was retained over the offender between sentencing and the commencement of the sentence. The select committee gave careful consideration to the change of the test for deferring the start-date of prison sentences, from \u201Cspecial reasons\u201D to \u201Cexceptional circumstances\u201D. The commentary on the bill sets out examples that illustrate the policy intention underlying the deferral provision in cases where an offender\u2019s employment may be lost. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000687\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EChanges are also being made to the granting of leave to apply for front-end home detention. The Government has been concerned about the number of cases being granted leave to apply for home detention, and subsequently being declined home detention by the Parole Board because the offender was clearly unsuitable. That raised the question about whether an appropriate degree of discretion was being exercised at that first hurdle. The amendments to which no changes were recommended, clarify and emphasise that the court has the primary role of determining whether wider sentencing considerations make home detention inappropriate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000688\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EI thank the members of the Justice and Electoral Committee for their work on this bill. The committee addressed significant issues and had a positive influence on the shape of the bill as reported back. The Parole (Extended Supervision) and Sentencing Amendment Bill will provide a means for the supervision of high-risk child sex offenders in the community, beyond the term that is currently possible. Children are amongst the most vulnerable in our society, and the predatory and habitual nature of offending against them justifies the establishment of a special regime to help protect them. I look forward to the passage of this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022 data-id=\u00223eebf1a025f545948136c71496dc58ee\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000689\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223eebf1a025f545948136c71496dc58ee\u0022\u003ERICHARD WORTH (National\u2014Epsom):\u003C/span\u003E Would it not be great if we introduced a rule against the reading of speeches. The previous speaker read the speech well, but in the reading of speeches I think we lose so much of what is an essential aspect of this House\u2014that is, unscripted comment on the merits, or otherwise, of particular pieces of legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000690\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003ENational supports the Parole (Extended Supervision) and Sentencing Amendment Bill, but it is important to say, right from the outset, that there are big differences in the law and order policies of the major parties. That is most vividly demonstrated by the change that Labour has made to the parole legislation. Members of the House will be aware that the position under this Government is that a person who is charged and convicted of rape, and sentenced to a period of 9 years, will be eligible for parole within a period of 3 years. And that surely cannot be right. It is fair to say that National judges Labour to be soft on law and order changes. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000691\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003E The piecemeal law changes of the current Minister of Justice have no strategic context or setting. They are reactive ad hoc measures, and this is one of them. That is not to say that this is a bad measure, but the Government is ignoring significant issues in the parole area and needs to proceed on the basis of a comprehensive and careful look at the laws relating to parole. I do not doubt that other speakers from my side of the House will take this issue further. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000692\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003ENational supports the Parole (Extended Supervision) and Sentencing Amendment Bill, subject to qualifications that I and those National Party speakers who follow me will identify. What we are talking about here is the introduction of a new extended supervision regime that will actively manage the high-risk child sex offender. The concept behind the bill is that those child sex offenders who come within the bill\u2019s definition of \u201Celigible offender\u201D will be assessed by the Department of Corrections to establish whether they are high-risk individuals and should be subject to an extended supervision order. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000693\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003EWhat is really proposed is two separate management regimes. The first one is a standard management regime for medium-high and high-risk offenders, similar to that used for offenders on parole, and the second part of it is an intensive management regime for the highest-risk offenders, which may require the use of home detention - like conditions and electronic monitoring. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000694\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003EI am not sure how it is for other members of the House, but I think it is fair to say that many of us were truly shocked by the revelations of Justice Ellis, who holds a senior position on the Parole Board, when he indicated what one would have to say was an abject lack of knowledge of the way the parole system works. I express the hope that those who follow Justice Ellis in this important position, and the other members of the Parole Board, get to grips with what is a significant problem in the oversight and supervision of those people who have the privilege\u2014and it is a privilege in the context of early release\u2014of parole. It seems to be the case that the oversight and supervision given by the probation service is minimal, and it is fair to say in some cases extremely minimal. The consequence of that, of course, is that the chance of reoffending is incredibly high. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000695\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003EThe New Zealand Government, in what it has done in connection with this bill, is not really breaking new ground. It is in fact taking an approach that has been followed by overseas jurisdictions in respect of child sex offenders. It is the reality that the prevalence and the nature of the offending and reoffending against a particularly vulnerable group in society\u2014children\u2014has led other jurisdictions to put in place similar measures. To prove that point I really need only instance what has gone on in Canada and the UK, because those countries have created legislation to extend supervision regimes for high-risk offenders, including child sex offenders. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000696\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003EIn 1997, for example, the Criminal Code of Canada was amended to allow the court to impose a term of up to 10 years of community supervision following a prison sentence of 2 years or more. In the United Kingdom the relevant statute, which is the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000, allows the court to extend the custodial sentence of eligible offenders by imposing a long-term supervision order of up to 10 years. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000697\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003ESo who are these eligible offenders? One only needs to look through the provisions in the Crimes Act to see that we are talking about a group of offenders who in the worst possible way degrade our children. The relevant offences for an extended supervision order include these sorts of things: indecency with a boy or girl under 12, sexual intercourse and attempted sexual intercourse with a girl under 12, sexual intercourse and indecency with a girl aged 12 to 16, organising and promoting child sex tours, and, where the victim is under the age of 16 years at the time of the offence, there is an extended definition to pick up issues like anal intercourse, incest, sexual violation, and attempt to commit sexual violation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000698\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003EThere is a critical gap in the present legislation, which is the reason National supports this bill, in the ability to manage certain child sex offenders in the community. The gap is that there is currently no ability to monitor or supervise in the community those offenders subject to a finite prison term once they are no longer subject to release conditions or eligible for recall from parole. So it was that the Government decided to introduce an extended supervision regime that would enable the management, and also the monitoring, of child sex offenders in the community beyond the end of their current parole or release conditions. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000699\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003EI would like to say something about child sex offenders, in the short time that remains. First of all, child sex offenders are not a homogenous population. There is considerable diversity in this group in socio-economic background, education, age, ethnicity, the psychosocial and psychosexual background, the sexual interest in children, the relationships with victims, and general criminality. One of the issues that the Justice and Electoral Committee determined after hearing evidence is that it was possible to identify the types of factors that increased the risk of reoffending among child sex offenders. It is a statement of the obvious that what we are on about here is the aspect of reoffending, because\u2014and I am sure this may be developed by later speakers, perhaps by myself as well\u2014we are talking about, on one view of it, a significant infringement of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act, in this legislation. But I am also saying\u2014and others are also, I am sure\u2014that this is one of those cases where it is justifiable to overlook those provisions of that Act, because of greater societal interests. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f9a94bf3-a948-4410-8413-403a7454114b\u0022 data-id=\u0022987d759226a34e06b2263d93c57422be\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000700\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9a94bf3-a948-4410-8413-403a7454114b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022987d759226a34e06b2263d93c57422be\u0022\u003ETIM BARNETT (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central):\u003C/span\u003E I am very pleased to speak briefly in this debate as chair of the Justice and Electoral Committee, which dealt with this bill. The committee\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000701\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022da14d6b4d6a545c1b8f20e84d8cc4d16\u0022\u003EDarren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: A very fine committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000702\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9a94bf3-a948-4410-8413-403a7454114b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022198783e429c34313b33056355f342ddb\u0022\u003ETIM BARNETT\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the member. The much admired select committee\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000703\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226e9d9c5b84a74960b9ee995a49f7d617\u0022\u003ERichard Worth\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019d like to endorse the comments of the junior whip from Labour. It\u2019s a very fine committee and he is a very good chairman. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000704\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9a94bf3-a948-4410-8413-403a7454114b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f8c7a337e50e432e99cda847e087ebd1\u0022\u003ETIM BARNETT\u003C/span\u003E: I stand luxuriating in this, but I shall come back to the topic. The committee had the bill for 6 months and in that time I think we did some quite thorough work on it. I wanted to mention five points very quickly. The first is that electronic monitoring is cutting-edge technology. It obviously raises issues about privacy and about the use of information that may be collected in the course of monitoring, and therefore it was important to examine and amend the legislation with that in mind. Secondly, we had lengthy discussions in the committee about whether what would be applied through electronic monitoring was actually punishment. In my view it certainly is a punishment, but I also accept that for some people it is a sentence of liberation if they are high-risk child sex offenders, because they will know that with their electronic monitoring the State is monitoring what they are doing and they have a very clear regime to follow. They know that if they step outside that regime they will be breaking the bounds and may end up back in prison. The retrospectivity issue relates to that in the sense that, again, it is about balancing rights and possibilities in society. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000705\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9a94bf3-a948-4410-8413-403a7454114b\u0022\u003EThe third issue I want to put on record is that this legislation provides for only a 10-year regime. Certainly, the Justice and Electoral Committee wanted to make it clear that we saw that there would be a need to review its operation after maybe 6 or 7 years, to ensure that if, after 10 years, it was working well, it could be extended beyond that, which would require an amendment to the legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000706\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9a94bf3-a948-4410-8413-403a7454114b\u0022\u003EFourthly, we were particularly keen to ensure that victims\u2019 rights were enhanced through the legislation. Victim participation in a number of aspects of the regime was added in, as detailed in our report on the bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000707\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9a94bf3-a948-4410-8413-403a7454114b\u0022\u003ELastly, as the Minister mentioned, there is a very exciting pilot scheme in Dunedin that involves all the key agencies in managing sex offenders in the community. The problem raised by that scheme was outside the boundaries of this bill, but concerned the exchange of information between those agencies as a Privacy Act issue. The Minister has a Supplementary Order Paper that, thanks to the work between the parties and the committee, I understand will be accepted, even though it is outside the bounds of the bill. On that basis, I would like to thank the committee members, the committee staff, and advisers from the Ministry of Justice and the Department of Corrections for their excellent work on the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022 data-id=\u0022b79aef4ad1c74ad09ee771b557b885bf\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000708\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b79aef4ad1c74ad09ee771b557b885bf\u0022\u003EDAIL JONES (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E When the Parole Act and the Sentencing Act were passed by this House in May 2002, New Zealand First voted against them, as shown in the Hansard of 1 May 2002. These bills are amendments to those Acts, which we opposed. The opposition to those Acts was from New Zealand National, ACT New Zealand, New Zealand First, and United New Zealand. We believe that those Acts are bad. They are weak on criminality and do not deal with the fundamental issues with regard to the imprisonment of criminals\u2014namely, punitive justice at the beginning of a sentence, and some rehabilitation at the end. Those were our comments on the sentencing and parole legislation in May 2002. Sections 84(1) and 84(2) of the Parole Act set out a non-parole period that can be one-third of the length of a sentence. That is extraordinarily short, and is much shorter than it ever was before. Both Acts are bad, and in New Zealand First\u2019s view no amendments can make them better. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000709\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EWhen we come across a painted apple moth, it is something bad that we cannot make better, so we exterminate it. We get rid of it. On looking at these amendments and at the Acts they relate to, we see New Zealand First cannot support these amendments. We will be voting against both bills. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000710\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002296997dea83f54ee1afcd195826356925\u0022\u003EHon Rick Barker\u003C/span\u003E: Oppose, oppose.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000711\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222a06be4f57804091bb74369053409320\u0022\u003EDAIL JONES\u003C/span\u003E: We opposed the legislation in May 2002, and we will oppose it now, because we are not a party that is soft on law and order, unlike the Labour Party, which is trying to make it easier for hardened sex criminals to get out of jail. We do not support that. That is what this legislation is about. In our view, people who have done a horrendous crime should do all the time and not be let out at one-third or two-thirds of the time. Those people should do the time. Towards the end of the time\u2014after getting some punishment, and if there is some evidence of rehabilitation\u2014but only then, should one consider parole. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000712\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EAlthough the measures proposed in this legislation are worthwhile, they should be commenced while people are in prison and continued mandatorily once they are out of prison. The current legislation contains a retrospective aspect. There is no reason why there should not be a retrospective aspect in terms of people currently in prison\u2014or, of course, in relation to the prospect of people being in prison in future\u2014and of them having the type of supervision considered in this legislation after they have done their time. It will not be supervision; it will be a degree of control. That is what we want to see. We want to see high-risk sex offenders controlled. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000713\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003ENew Zealand First\u2019s policy is clear. It was set out at the last election, and we have not changed from it. At the last election we said that we supported the replacement of the Parole Board by a rehabilitation board with a primary object of minimising recidivism. The board would be required to consider the actual duration of imprisonment, and to ensure that a serious, violent offender had demonstrated remorse and a positive attitude to rehabilitation before considering any parole. There would be none of the idea that at one-third of someone\u2019s time maybe he or she can get out of prison by going in front of a Parole Board of the likes of the one we have today. The Parole Board chairman, Justice Tony Ellis, described the board members as risk takers who \u201Clive in hope\u201D that the probation service will properly monitor inmates when it releases them. We cannot have that; it is a disgrace. This Minister should have fired the board. There can hardly be a better indication of the board\u2019s derogation from its duty than that, and if the Minister does not fire the board he ought to resign. I take up Mr Worth\u2019s comments that we should have people on the board who are willing to deal with these people, and who do not take risks. The Parole Act and the Sentencing Act are not there to let people out on parole and to take a risk that the parolees may be all right. That is absolutely ridiculous. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000714\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EAs I said, New Zealand First opposed the two Acts, and we will oppose these amendments. We cannot go against the view of the 92 percent of the public who want tougher sentences than those supported by this Government. High-risk child sex offenders should not be given parole, but should be subject to supervision once their entire sentence is concluded, as this bill to some extent envisages. We do not want a sex offender to be allowed out on supervision undertaken by a probation officer during the term of his or her imprisonment. We know that probation staff do not have the capability to undertake supervision. Supervision should definitely be undertaken only after the term of imprisonment has expired, and by way of retrospective legislation\u2014as contemplated by this legislation\u2014if necessary. These amending bills continue the fundamental flaws of the respective Acts: they were soft on law and order, and the Labour Government failed to take into account the view of the people of New Zealand. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000715\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003ENew Zealand First\u2019s message to sex offenders is that punishment is vital. Somehow, the people who abuse young children\u2014boys and girls\u2014have to learn that a punishment factor will flow from the consequences of their actions once they are caught. Those people are essentially cowards. They have to be cowards to do what they do, and the only way to treat a coward is to point out that the penalty will be severe. Some people may want to go much further than that, but I suppose that in a civilised society we draw the line somewhere. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000716\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224ecbe8d7859a42a0a0157f70fb69bb1f\u0022\u003EDarren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: The member is a softie, after all.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000717\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022720db7465556446bb7d135a1905c1ce4\u0022\u003EDAIL JONES\u003C/span\u003E: It is a cutting point, I know, but we will leave it for another day. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000718\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EThere is no doubt about New Zealand First\u2019s hard line when it comes to law and order. We are being consistent with what we said before the election of 2002. I ask the other parties who took the same line before the last election to perhaps reconsider their situations, and to take the same hard line today\u2014if it is a hard line; I think it is the only line one can take. It is not a hard line but it is a common-sense line. If the high-risk sex offenders envisaged by this legislation\u2014and, of course, other offenders as well, but I am limited to speaking about high-risk sex offenders because that is the tenor of this bill\u2014commit sex offences or other serious offences, they have to realise that a New Zealand First Government will be listening to what the Sensible Sentencing Trust has to say, and to what 92 percent of New Zealanders have made very clear. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000719\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EHome detention is flawed. There has been an example of home detention whereby, while on home detention and with the supervising officer outside the room, a criminal committed another unlawful act inside. What sort of law is it that meant someone could go on supervision in that type of situation and be committing a sex offence inside a room, but the officer would not allow anyone in to stop the person from doing that? It is utterly ridiculous. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000720\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EWe have had a good look at this matter. We believe that our policy is consistent on this issue, and we also opposed the principal Acts in 2002. Although the bill looks quite good on the face of it and is a little tougher than the current legislation, that legislation is inherently soft. We cannot support such soft legislation. We ask other parties to join New Zealand First in rejecting it and going back to the views we had in May 2002, when we rejected the Sentencing Act and the Parole Act. We ask them to join us in coming up with laws that show a real toughness towards all offenders, and in this particular case especially towards high-risk sex offenders, who should be kept in jail right to the end of their time and then have supervision imposed upon them for a long time afterwards. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f0c6f679119348d59baed54fa500a339\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Before I call the next speaker, I wish to advise honourable members that the Green Party has decided to share its time. Therefore, the member will get a bell at 4 minutes, to signify 1 minute of speaking time remains. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002285712e72-b25f-4850-b4d9-90035064fde3\u0022 data-id=\u00224cdaf2cd3efd4a76948e8782dc85e1f6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000722\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285712e72-b25f-4850-b4d9-90035064fde3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224cdaf2cd3efd4a76948e8782dc85e1f6\u0022\u003ENANDOR TANCZOS (Green):\u003C/span\u003E The Green Party will also be seeking leave to split its vote on this bill. That is an indication of how seriously we take the issues raised in it, and how contentious and significant we consider them to be. What we are asked to do here is to balance very carefully the need to protect some important principles of justice with the compelling need to protect children from sexual offenders. That is something we should not take lightly, whatever position we end up taking on the bill. The bill addresses the problem in two ways. First of all, it creates an extended supervision regime for child sex offenders who have reached the end of their finite sentence, and who therefore cannot be subject to any supervision orders or restrictions, but who are assessed as being of high or medium-high risk of reoffending. The other thing the bill does is to put in place a system of electronic monitoring for people released under conditions such as parole or extended supervision. Electronic monitoring is not a new thing in this country. We use it now for home detention, but this bill allows the door to open to an extension of the idea\u2014that is, the use of the Global Positioning System to monitor more closely what people under the regime are doing. The purposes, of course, are to verify compliance with release conditions, detention conditions, or conditions of extended supervision, to detect non-compliance, and to provide evidence of non-compliance so that people can be held to account if they do breach those conditions. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000723\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285712e72-b25f-4850-b4d9-90035064fde3\u0022\u003EI consider that the use of electronic monitoring has the potential for great benefit, if it is used with some clear restrictions and some clear safeguards. It does allow for the proper monitoring of people, and it therefore opens the door to the use of less restrictive conditions, because those conditions can be more closely monitored in a more sophisticated way. So I consider there is a potential that people could be subject to less restrictive conditions as a result of electronic monitoring. But without restrictions on its use, electronic monitoring could lead to a draconian imposition. It could easily become a gateway for the State to impose more restrictions on people in an unjustified way\u2014for example, by restricting political activity in the way that bail conditions are used right now, today, when arresting people who are engaged in protest, in order to clear them away from areas where the police consider they do not want them to be. My colleague Keith Locke will talk more about that when he speaks on this legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000724\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285712e72-b25f-4850-b4d9-90035064fde3\u0022\u003EBut it is important there are some safeguards concerning electronic monitoring, and that is why the Green Party supported the inclusion, at the Justice and Electoral Committee, of some conditions around the use of it. In particular, new section 15A(1), inserted by clause 6A, states that a condition requiring an offender to submit to electronic monitoring \u201Cmay be imposed only on an offender who\u2014(a) is subject to a sentence of preventive detention; or (b) is subject to an extended supervision order; or (c) is or will be on parole, and electronic monitoring \u2026 is necessary in order to provide the supervision required to ensure that the offender does not pose an undue risk to the community \u2026\u201D. The Justice and Electoral Committee came up with that provision because we felt that there should not be open slather, and that there should be some restrictions on the use of that power. We are concerned to hear that the Government seeks to remove that clause in a Supplementary Order Paper, and we will oppose that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000725\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285712e72-b25f-4850-b4d9-90035064fde3\u0022\u003EThe other part of the bill deals with extended supervision, which seeks to address a greater problem and a more serious threat to civil liberties\u2014that is, the people released at the end of a finite sentence who are assessed as being of high or medium-high risk. The law allows no restriction on them, yet we know with certainty that almost half the people assessed as high-risk will reoffend. Should we just wait for them to make new victims, or should we act? That is the issue this Parliament has to address. The bill would allow the chief executive of the Department of Corrections to apply to a court for an extended supervision order of up to 10 years, and that would allow conditions to be imposed, whether intensive or standard. But some supervision would be allowed over those people. As Richard Worth said, that is an infringement of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. We had a big discussion about whether that is punishment. Certainly, I think it is punishment, but I believe it is justifiable if we are to protect the young people of New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022 data-id=\u00221a2b5d4835024458a126bf46f890425c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000726\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221a2b5d4835024458a126bf46f890425c\u0022\u003EKEITH LOCKE (Green):\u003C/span\u003E Four of the Green MPs will be voting against the part of the bill that is to become the Parole (Extended Supervision) Amendment Bill. We do that because of its serious civil liberties implications. The bill was heavily criticised by the Attorney-General, the Law Society, several civil liberties groups, and the Howard League for Penal Reform. A major concern is the new provision for the electronic monitoring of offenders and of those under extended supervision, post-release. The Attorney-General said of the latter category that the provision \u201Cmarks a significant departure from the standards of civil liberties in this country\u201D, and it contravenes the privacy and the search and seizure provisions of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. Other submitters argued it was against article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000727\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThe move to enable the electronic monitoring of some parolees\u2014it could be all parolees if the Minister\u2019s amendment passes\u2014is quite a step towards a surveillance State. It is a big departure from home detention monitoring, which just ensures that a person stays at home. Electronic monitoring will enable the tracking of parolees and of those released under extended supervision everywhere they go, using the Global Positioning System. The monitoring could even be extended later on to more categories of people, including people on bail or people later put on extended supervision for other non-sex crimes. The Auckland Council for Civil Liberties called the bill a Trojan Horse in that respect, pointing out, for example, that the requirement to give blood samples started off as applying to a narrow category but now includes people who are just suspects. It is not dreaming to think that such electronic monitoring, once set in place, could eventually be used against all kinds of offenders, including political protesters, whether they are offenders post-release or on parole, or people on bail, to keep them away from various institutions\u2014be it an institution involved in GE, the American Embassy, a fur shop, etc. Concern about tracking measures is not a new concern for the Green Party and Green MPs. During the debate on the Counter-Terrorism Bill, we warned of the extent of the tracking powers granted to the police. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000728\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThe other provisions in the current bill that came in for serious criticism from the Attorney-General related to the double jeopardy elements involved in extended supervision, which breach section 26(2) of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act\u2014that one cannot be tried or punished again for one offence. That also applies with regard to a similar section, section 14(7), of the international covenant I referred to previously. A second double jeopardy aspect, that the law will retrospectively apply to those currently serving sentences, was also strongly criticised by the Attorney-General, in referring to section 26(2) of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. It also contravenes section 15(1) of the international covenant, which forbids the later imposition of a heavier penalty than the one applying when an offence was committed. The New Zealand Council for Civil Liberties objected to another ramification of that particular double jeopardy situation, saying that it was a change from \u201Ca system based on conviction for past offences beyond reasonable doubt to one based on a form of effective detention, justified by qualitative estimates of future dangerousness. It erects a shadow criminal law.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000729\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003E That does not mean to say we are soft on child sex offenders. But there are ways of dealing with those problems\u2014for example, by taking up the submission of the Safe Network organisation that the Government and non-governmental organisations work much closer together to deal with sex offenders post-release. There is also a serious problem of serious child sex offenders serving their full term in jail and getting out without being monitored as they go into the community. So we are supportive of looking into some of the proposals made by the Law Society that there be a limited parole period built in at the time of sentencing, or some provisions for those currently in jail to make sure that they have a parole period, without the problems that this law imposes. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000730\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThe four of us who will be voting against this legislation have some very serious civil liberty concerns about it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022 data-id=\u00223682e5e93c8343549210b603314ab347\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000731\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223682e5e93c8343549210b603314ab347\u0022\u003ESTEPHEN FRANKS (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E This bill is the first patch-up of the Parole Act and the Sentencing Act that were passed in 2002, and as a patch-up it is appalling. So many problems have been identified with those Acts, and most of them were identified by ACT, National, New Zealand First, and United Future before they were passed, but this bill addresses only a few of them. A great deal of public attention has been placed on the bits that Mr Goff, in his normal vein-popping fashion, has trumpeted\u2014that is, the new provisions to put child sex offenders under up to 10 years of extended supervision. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000732\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EBut those Acts also deal with other things. First, the Parole Act itself has been examined in the course of this bill, and all the Minister has touched on are a few minor\u2014the traditional word is \u201Ctinkering\u201D\u2014matters. For example, Mr Goff has now given himself, his officials, and the Department of Corrections people the power to put ankle bracelets or electronic monitoring on some parole offenders. Why not all? Why not any who deserve it? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000733\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EACT, of course, believes that parole is entirely unjustified. There is no evidence that it does anything that a period of extended supervision at the end of a sentence would not do. But even if we accepted for the moment that there is some point in parole other than to empty jails at least cost, we would find the bracelet restriction bizarre. Why should it not be a matter of prison officer discretion or Department of Corrections discretion? The people out on parole are out on a privilege; they should be in prison. If they are on home detention or under some sort of observation, the conditions applying to them should include electronic monitoring without the need for any legislation. They are out on a privilege, and if the cost of that privilege is to be under electronic monitoring, they have a choice: if they do not like it, they should stay inside, so that is fatuous. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000734\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EI also noticed that this bill touches on cumulative sentencing, but does not, of course, do what New Zealanders want, which is to ensure that there is a price for every crime. Even if it is a small increment, it is at least a price to make sure that crime is not an activity for which one gets a bulk discount, or a write-off above a certain level. No\u2014just to make sure\u2014this bill says that a cumulative sentence cannot be imposed if the person already on sentence has been let out on parole. In other words, that person has been let out on trust and breached the trust, and now this bill takes tender care to say that the court cannot go back and make the sentence cumulative with the earlier one. In other words, it cannot say to the criminal: \u201CYou\u2019ve breached the trust. Now you had better serve the rest of your sentence as well as the new one for the new crime you have committed.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000735\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EOf course, Mr Goff and his colleagues think that would be unfair. Presumably, they think it might make the criminals feel bad about them. It was not explained to us in the Justice and Electoral Committee what the reason for this provision was, but looking at it, it is plain that cumulative sentencing has been made even harder for a court to order. The Government will not take the risk of leaving it to the judges; it does not trust the judges. The real sentencing is carried out by the Parole Board. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000736\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EAs we have seen this week, the Minister has been sprung. It is very obvious that the Parole Board has been doing what the Parole Act tells it to do\u2014that is, ignore all the purposes of sentencing and simply empty prisons as soon as it can persuade itself, on whatever fatuous evidence it has, that a prisoner might not be a risk to the community. Until this week, I could not have said that in such harsh terms, because we did not have the frank admissions from an honest judge at the head of the Parole Board that what it is doing is taking risks and making guesses. That is an interesting point, and members might not have been aware of it, because the Minister made it look as if he were stunned by those admissions from the Parole Board. He made it appear as if he had no idea that it was not keeping a watch on whether parole conditions were being monitored or enforced, or whether it was capable of doing so. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000737\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EI just draw to members\u2019 attention that the report back of this bill was on 11 June. It states: \u201CThe Parole Board still cannot take account, in ordinary cases, of the reasons for a sentence, it has no duty to consider whether the practical enforcement of conditions is likely, \u2026\u201D. Now, I knew that because I had talked to Parole Board members. I do not think the Minister had bothered. I knew that, because victims had said that the Parole Board was completely uninterested in whether the conditions were capable of being enforced. Let me give an example. Anthony Roma\u2019s conditions of parole were that he abstain from alcohol and drugs and live with his family. Victims told the Parole Board that those conditions were incapable of enforcement, and that he would not do it. The Parole Board, with its Lord Nelson policy of \u201Cblind eye to the telescope\u201D, did not want to hear that. It did not pay it any regard and Anthony Roma went out and offended again\u2014as the victims had predicted in writing. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000738\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EYet Mr Goff stands in this House and brings forward a bill like this that does nothing to cure those problems. He has brought in other Supplementary Order Papers, but no Supplementary Order Paper to tell the Parole Board it ought to ask the Department of Corrections how its monitoring is going, or whether it has the capacity to enforce conditions. He could just read the newspapers perhaps, and see that the south Auckland probation officers are totally overloaded and utterly without the ability\u2014as they were in relation to William Bell\u2014to ensure that complicated conditions like abstaining from alcohol and drugs are feasible conditions on which the Parole Board can rely. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000739\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EThis bill compounds this Government\u2019s error. In clause 19, the non-parole period the court can set has now made an enormous concession to the judges. The relevant section, section 86 of the Sentencing Act, was wrong when it was passed. In 2002, ACT New Zealand tried to help the Minister out by providing some amendments, and Minister Goff was saved only by Minister Barker at the last minute to even restore any power for the court to set a non-parole period. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000740\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003ENow the public and the media know that the non-parole period is the sentence. The media know it because that is the way they report it. When the media report on a sentencing, they report on the non-parole period. They know the rest is lies. They know that the parole system makes judges lie every time they give a sentence, because the judges know that the sentence they are giving is not the sentence that will be served. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000741\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EWhat does the new section 86(2) that the Minister has provided do? It says to the judge that he or she can set a non-parole period to make sure that the purposes of sentencing are performed. That is exactly what ACT New Zealand says the Parole Board should be required to do. Why should it not? That is the thing victims are most interested in. Judges go through the charade of listening to victims\u2019 submissions, and victims are allowed to complain about how frightened they are, but the Parole Board is not permitted to have regard to the most simple victim request of all, which is: \u201CCan I please be confident that after parole justice will still have been done?\u201D. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000742\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E Justice Ellis was patently clear about that in his interview with Linda Clark on Monday. He said quite bluntly that punishment was not a consideration for the Parole Board, and it gave little if any weight to victims\u2019 views on whether the sentence should be served in its entirety. He said it looked only\u2014as it is directed by statute\u2014at the safety of the community. It does not know what the victim\u2019s rights are, although the Minister tells us it is the right to be heard. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000743\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EThe Minister is more than misleading in that area. He is trumpeting the Act as having been toughened up when, in fact, he has weakened it. This bill even allows child sex offenders to get out earlier. That was admitted during the select committee process. Previously, they had to serve their sentence until the Parole Board was satisfied they were safe to let out. As it could not be satisfied that most of them were safe to let out, they stayed. This bill provides for them to be let out earlier as long as they are wearing a bracelet. Even the trumpeted purpose of this bill\u2014to toughen up the legislation\u2014is not true. The Minister has been misleading the people of this country.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022 data-id=\u0022360f07ff75a847bfb36b93ae902a3bb5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000744\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022360f07ff75a847bfb36b93ae902a3bb5\u0022\u003EMARC ALEXANDER (United Future):\u003C/span\u003E The Parole (Extended Supervision) and Sentencing Amendment Bill essentially introduces a new, extended supervision regime to manage so-called high-risk sex offenders. Quite frankly, all sex offenders are high risk. It is often said that sex offenders are lower risk than a lot of other offenders, but a 22-year study showed that after that period of time, the recidivism rate went as high as 70 percent, which gives the lie to the fact that sex offenders are a low-risk category of individual. There is no reason to suspect that 10 years is enough, in terms of an extension of supervision of those individuals. I hope that members will look at my Supplementary Order Paper 226. One of the changes I would like to see take place is the extension of that provision until such time as the Parole Board considers the person to be safe. In my opinion, that would be when the person stops breathing. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000745\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022\u003EImplicit in this is a recognition that sentences were inadequate in the first place. What has been done since? I understand that a lot of individuals will come up for this supervision regime fairly soon, which is one of the reasons why there is urgency in getting this legislation through. In fact, one individual comes up next month. I am loath to name him, though in some ways I would like to, because the problem is\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000746\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222b17c17f1d0b44e192dfa5e99e0be515\u0022\u003ERichard Worth\u003C/span\u003E: You must do so. He should be named.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000747\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227d72fa8f8c5744158a7436c5b4a59144\u0022\u003EMARC ALEXANDER\u003C/span\u003E: He should be named. I was advised earlier this evening that if I named him, his counsel might consider that to be prejudicial and force the judge to stop providing the extended supervision that would otherwise ensue because of this legislation. If that is true, the last thing I want is for that to be on my conscience. I will not take the risk. But there are individuals coming up for release very soon, and that is the reason why this bill must be passed, flawed as some of its provisions are. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000748\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022\u003EIt has been estimated that around 60 offenders will come under this regime, and there are about 107 to whom it could possibly apply down the track. Sixty offenders may not sound like a lot, but 60 sex offenders\u2014predators\u2014can manage to run up a large count of victims\u2014families that will be broken and hurt by what they do. The simple fact is that those individuals should never be let out of prison in the first place, and if they are mentally deficient, they should be held in a facility appropriate to their condition for the rest of their lives. They should never be let out to hurt any law-abiding citizen again. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000749\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022\u003EI do not see any instinct on the Minister\u2019s behalf to do anything about the Parole Act and the Sentencing Act to remedy that. If anything, those Acts allow people to come up for parole one-third of the way through their sentences\u2014contrary to the instincts of 92 percent of the population who voted in favour of tougher laws. Why has the Government not heard them? Why has the Government not acceded to the democratic wishes of the people of this country? That I do not understand. The Government will pursue other social engineering policies that are not demanded by 92 percent of the population, but by a very small, narrow margin of the population. Yet 92 percent of the population says something, and this Government listens to them with Van Gogh\u2019s ear. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000750\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022\u003ESome groups have asserted that this legislation proposes retrospectivity and punishment over and above sentencing, and on those grounds they complain about it. In fact, the Attorney-General\u2019s report on the compliance of the bill with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act found that its provisions were inconsistent with the rights and freedoms contained in that Act on a number of counts\u2014there is an unreasonable limit on the right not to be subject to double jeopardy, and unreasonable search and seizure. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000751\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022\u003EThe New Zealand Bill of Rights Act is actually the problem. It is about time we took that legislation apart and introduced a \u201CBill of Responsibility\u201D. That Act, along with the Privacy Act, has been responsible for so much stupidity that it is time that they were taken to task and got rid of. The only rights they protect are the rights of offenders. They do not protect the rights of the law-abiding citizens of this country. I do not understand how a Government claiming to have the better interests of the law-abiding citizens of this country in mind can act against their interests by hiding behind the provisions of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act and the privacy legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000752\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226f6e1ae1-8aa5-4f71-8e73-30bb378026c4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220e994a77a5a945fea09bed2ec165e1d8\u0022\u003EGeorgina Beyer\u003C/span\u003E: There is some humanity amongst us\u2014that\u2019s why.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000753\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223be99458cc2c4424a0efe9441c4624e4\u0022\u003EMARC ALEXANDER\u003C/span\u003E: There is no humanity amongst sex offenders. Excuse me! They have lost their right to any humanity. They have offended against the rights of the innocent, and they must pay the full and ultimate penalty for what they have done. The rights of the innocent should never be put at risk by these predatory offenders. My Supplementary Order Paper proposes to extend, hopefully with the support of the House, the supervision orders beyond the 10-year period. That is what those predators deserve. Anyone who does not support those amendments and who then finds out that those predators have offended again will have that on his or her conscience. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000754\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022\u003EThere are a number of very good things in this bill, particularly with regard to victim participation. There are three things in particular. With the leave of the court, the bill enables victims\u2019 input into hearings about extended supervision orders. It also allows victims to be notified in advance if the Parole Board is considering the imposition of special conditions under Part 1A in clause 10, and permits them to make submissions to the Parole Board about those conditions. I would like to see the victims have the right of appeal if they do not like the provisions set by the Parole Board. It also advises victims of the death of an offender, something I think most victims would be very glad to hear about. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000755\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022\u003EIn coming to my conclusion, I have to say that we feel we have to pass the bill, imperfect as it is, because it goes one step beyond what we are otherwise capable of doing with some of those offenders. The problem is we cannot now turn the clock back for the individuals who are coming up for release over the next month or two and give them the longer sentences they deserve. Failing that, the only argument I can see in favour of this bill is that we must offer some sense of comfort to victims and law-abiding citizens that we will supervise these predatory animals. I would not want it on my conscience if there were any future victims as a result of not passing this bill. Given that, United Future will support it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022 data-id=\u002239157993855c48a7bd3450d72ae6715d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000756\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002239157993855c48a7bd3450d72ae6715d\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL (National\u2014Bay of Plenty):\u003C/span\u003E The National Party has some considerable concerns about this bill, and we simply do not believe that the Government has taken those concerns seriously. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000757\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003EI want to tell the House why this bill has come to Parliament. This bill came to Parliament because Mr Goff, the Minister of Justice, was trying to appear to be doing something about the cases of Barry Allan Ryder and Lloyd Alexander McIntosh, when in fact he had done absolutely nothing. Mr Goff made his reputation on the back of the Barry Allan Ryder case and he said he would never let Barry Allan Ryder be released from jail. He railed against Mrs Shipley, New Zealand\u2019s first woman Prime Minister, and he railed against former Minister of Justice, Douglas Graham. He said that if he were Minister of Justice these people would never be released from prison. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000758\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003EThen we discovered that Barry Allan Ryder, a paedophile who repeatedly sexually abused young children, had been released under Mr Goff\u2019s watch. What did Mr Goff say? He said he did not know about it, yet this is the case that Mr Goff made his reputation on. He said Barry Allan Ryder would never be released. Mr Goff said he would never allow it to happen, but Barry Allan Ryder was released and Mr Goff never ever asked what his parole conditions were. When it was the National Party that revealed the information concerning the release, Mr Goff said he was not going to ask for the parole conditions. He said he could not ask that. It was not until there was pressure from the National Party, New Zealand First, ACT, United Future, and the media that the Parole Board and this Minister of Justice released those parole conditions. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000759\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003EThose conditions showed that this Government could not guarantee the safety of children in Christchurch with Barry Allan Ryder in the community. He abused two young boys in Christchurch, and this Minister said he could do nothing. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000760\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003EThen we discovered the case of Lloyd Alexander McIntosh, another offender whom the Minister expressed considerable concern about when in Opposition. We discovered that Lloyd Alexander McIntosh was being paroled and released into Palmerston North. This Minister and Mr Maharey, only after pressure from the Opposition parties, decided they would say to the people that they would do everything they could to eliminate the risk his behaviour posed to children in Palmerston North. Mr Goff said he would stop the release of this sort of individual, but he did not. Mr Goff looked into the case only when this was raised with him. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000761\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003ESo now we have this bill. Mr Goff promised 24-hour, 7-days-a-week supervision for Lloyd Alexander McIntosh. Well, what happened? Lloyd Alexander McIntosh assaulted a young woman in his home while a security guard, employed by this Government, was outside the door.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c69d4718daa946d08b60472c7f94c7b9\u0022\u003EStephen Franks\u003C/span\u003E: So, they knew where he was?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000763\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002274069eee62324ac98b01518805175b68\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL\u003C/span\u003E: They knew where he was, and that happened. Lloyd Alexander McIntosh told somebody that he had almost raped the girl while the security guard was outside the door. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000764\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003ESo the Government, in its embarrassment, brought forward this bill, saying that paedophiles would be supervised 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, for 10 years. The National Party was able to reveal to the people of New Zealand that the only supervision that this bill provides for, after 1 year, is the attachment of an electronic bracelet\u2014an attachment of an electronic bracelet after 1 year. For the first year, offenders will be subject to home-detention criteria and supposedly to quite intense 24-hour, 7-days-a-week supervision, but after that it boils down to having a home-detention bracelet, but no home detention. So we said to Mr Goff: \u201CHow does a bracelet prevent reoffending?\u201D. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000765\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E We are concerned about this because what the Government has not told New Zealanders is that last year senior officials of the Community Probation Service appearing before the Law and Order Committee told us that no paedophile would be monitored for 10 years. We were further told that in the first few months extended supervision would include two visits a week with a parole officer and, after 2 years, that it would go down to one visit with a parole officer every 3 months. How will an electronic bracelet and a quarterly visit with a parole officer stop the likes of Barry Allan Ryder from abusing young children? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000766\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003EThe proposal in this bill highlights the concern that the Opposition parties have raised time after time in this House, and that is the discredited state of parole in New Zealand. A senior, highly respected judge, respected for his frankness and his directness, Justice Ellis\u2014a fine New Zealander\u2014has commented that he was unaware of how low the level of supervision was of people on parole, and I paraphrase him on that. At the select committee we were told that parole is essentially this: within 3 days of release, inmates must contact their parole officer; there will be contact at least once a week for the first few weeks, then that will very quickly reduce to contact once a month. That is not crime prevention. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000767\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003EThe National Party is also concerned about new section 15A(1)(d) in clause 6A. That provision will provide the Parole Board with reason to release these sorts of offenders from jail earlier than would have been the case if the legislation had not been here.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000768\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002292e6d68e11b24d599aec1ff82bd7defd\u0022\u003EJudith Collins\u003C/span\u003E: Shocking.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000769\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cbe9a4c5b2474e268b2794b07bf7aa58\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL\u003C/span\u003E: It is shocking, and we oppose that. We say that the key issue here is the safety of the public, and that keeping people in jail longer is better for keeping people safe than giving offenders a bracelet and quarterly supervision. I tell the House even further that the planning for the supervision of these people is so woolly that the Department of Corrections has not yet finalised its guidelines for the management of paedophiles on extended supervision. This bill, with a majority vote of this House, could become the law of the land within a few days. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000770\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003EMany, many changes would need to be made to this bill for the National Party to want to support it. We look to the Government and other parties to move amendments to fix this bill, because this bill offers no added security or protection to the young people of New Zealand from these vile offenders. A bracelet and quarterly monitoring are no supervision.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002285712e72-b25f-4850-b4d9-90035064fde3\u0022 data-id=\u002282c2eccea50348eaab84c29362918334\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000771\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285712e72-b25f-4850-b4d9-90035064fde3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002282c2eccea50348eaab84c29362918334\u0022\u003ENANDOR TANCZOS (Green):\u003C/span\u003E I seek leave for the votes cast by the Green Party in party votes on the Parole (Extended Supervision) and Sentencing Amendment Bill to include numbers cast for the Ayes and Noes and to record abstentions, notwithstanding Standing Order 144(1)(b).\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000772\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225feab65dab8a474086d2c457507d64a1\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Is there any objection to that course of action being taken? There appears to be none.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022 data-id=\u002279e7629858e548f7bac6aef9268cd52c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000773\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002279e7629858e548f7bac6aef9268cd52c\u0022\u003EDAIL JONES (Junior Whip\u2014NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I just want to make sure that no one else wants to take a call. I am giving members the chance to go for the call.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221f06d863c18a44609e97b6e276fa8b04\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: That is not a point of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022 data-id=\u00226da2bc80d26f42ccb7fb8184f419bbad\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000775\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226da2bc80d26f42ccb7fb8184f419bbad\u0022\u003EJUDITH COLLINS (National\u2014Clevedon):\u003C/span\u003E As the Hon Tony Ryall has so eloquently stated, this bill is too little, too late. We have a situation in this country where parole is a joke. People know that after this Government amended the parole laws, a person who had been sentenced to 9 years in jail was likely to get out of jail after serving a mere 3 years. Parole is a joke, and this country needs significantly more than the Parole (Extended Supervision) and Sentencing Reform Amendment Bill can ever give it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000776\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EThe legislation was premised on the basis that it would deal with child sex offenders. I do not think that there would be a member in this House, or in any other term in this Parliament, who would not like to see the whole issue of child sex offending done away with forever and ever, and never come back to haunt this country again. Unfortunately, that will not happen\u2014not in my lifetime, and I suggest not in anyone\u2019s lifetime. The reality is that, unfortunately, some people prey on young children. In any right-thinking person\u2019s mind, those people are absolutely depraved, and no matter what we do with them in prison, or anywhere else, they will always be a danger to society. I am not aware of any studies that show, no matter what we do with child sex offenders, that they can ever be trusted in society. Certainly, some of the efforts that the Department of Corrections has made over the years have shown that there has been some improvement, but never such that any one of us in this House would ever trust them with our children or grandchildren; nor should we. \u201COnce bitten, twice shy\u201D, society should say of those people. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000777\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003ESome parts of this bill are an improvement on the current system, but that is not saying much. The current system is so poor and so devoid of any concept of punishment, because punishment in this country seems to be a bad thing when it comes to offenders. Punishment is something reserved for the victims of crime. Unfortunately, this Government is soft on crime. Despite all the Government\u2019s rhetoric when it was in Opposition, despite all the rhetoric from Mr Goff when he was the Opposition spokesperson on justice, this Government has proven itself to be remarkably soft on crime. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000778\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EOne thing it has to deal with is the recidivist culture in the criminal element in New Zealand. Recidivism occurs because we have no concept of deterrents or punishment. We consistently hear comments from the Department of Corrections and its very, very culturally sensitive staff that losing one\u2019s liberty is, itself, the punishment. Some of us on this side of the House do not believe that that is punishment enough. We do believe that deterrents work. We do believe that punishment actually works, too. It is about time that we did. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000779\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EMr Tanczos, who is making comments, obviously feeling that I do not understand concepts of law and order and crime and punishment, should consider that as a parent we are told that when our child is naughty we should explain what has happened, and then have time out as a punishment. We do not have time out as something else; we have it as a punishment. That is because children do not like to be kept away from others. They do not like to be deprived of their toys, or be kept away from something they want, like the television, or friends. In fact, in our prison system, criminals do not have to be kept away from their friends, their toys, or their televisions, because they are all provided. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000780\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EWhat is not being provided is a system that educates people who need to be educated. The system does not provide any sort of deterrents. When sex offenders are jailed with other sex offenders they will be with a group of people who consistently reinforce their own behaviour. We then let them out on society and into our communities. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000781\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EIn my particular electorate of Clevedon one such sex offender was released into the community on bail recently. Before that he was released into the community after having finished his sentence. People in the community were extremely concerned that that man was there. They feared that he was living very close to a school. The next thing that happened was that he was accused of a particular sex offence, yet again, with a boy. He has admitted it and consequently we have yet another victim, and it is only the victim, in that case, who has come forward. How many other victims do not come forward, because somewhere in their minds they have convinced themselves that they are at fault in some way; that they have done something wrong, when that is just the very sick and perverse attitude that those manipulators of children have placed in their minds? Those children, who in many cases have very loving and caring parents, are manipulated by the arch manipulators of the criminal world. That is what we are dealing with, with child sex offenders. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000782\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EI am supportive of the fact that this legislation is at least an attempt by the Government to improve the situation. What I am not supportive of is that it does not go far enough. As decent-minded people with our own political views\u2014and I do not think that Mr Tanczos and I will ever agree on very much, but at least I do acknowledge that he is a decent person with his own views\u2014I do not think that we will ever understand the perverse nature of people who are utterly perverse and evil in their manipulations and what they do. Worse is the fact that so often they place themselves in positions where they have access to children. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000783\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EIt is worse that they put themselves in positions where they have access to mothers of young children, and they target those mothers who often are in positions where they have very little self-esteem. Sex offenders use that position to get access to little children. There is nothing in this bill that will necessarily stop that. As Mr Ryall said: \u201CWhat\u2019s the bracelet going to do?\u201D. Some of us who come, as I do, originally from a farming background, would say that there are places where that bracelet could go, which might do some good, but unfortunately I have been reminded by Mr Jones that we are supposed to live in a civilised society, and I should not be thinking thoughts like that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000784\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EI can imagine that many New Zealanders would think exactly the same as I do, that prison is far too good for those people, and it is about time we faced those facts. Occasionally, I think that there might be some merit in some of the sharia law that some of the Muslim countries use in those issues. I never thought I would say it, but perhaps we could look at that in this particular instance. As Mr Jones said, it would be the unkindest cut of all. I am consistently told that chemical castration will not help those perverts. I notice that every man in the House is suddenly looking a bit worried. However, I do not understand why castration would not help those people, because as far as I am concerned it would certainly help some of the victims of their demented and revolting crimes. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000785\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EMr Ryall has put our position on this very succinctly and very well. We believe that this amendment is simply not good enough. As I said, some parts of the legislation are at least an improvement, but that is all it is. Next year when we are in Government we will have to change this legislation and make it significantly tougher. I am extremely pleased that we will not have to wait very long.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002247f19f060b9140099e6428ccc918515e\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendments recommended by the Justice and Electoral Committee by majority be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 93\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; Green Party 5; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 26\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand First 13; Green Party 4; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EQuestion agreed to\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022dea7f207d3cc49b5973be93cbfe4b500\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the Parole (Extended Supervision) and Sentencing Amendment Bill be now read a second time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 93\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; Green Party 5; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 26\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand First 13; Green Party 4; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill read a second time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000786\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00225009486d1778474daf1dbbc133c7dbc3\u0022\u003EInstruction to Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022 data-id=\u0022dacf99e986d843d392239e0f6c549099\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000787\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022dacf99e986d843d392239e0f6c549099\u0022\u003EHon RICK BARKER (Associate Minister of Justice)\u003C/span\u003E, on behalf of the Minister of Justice: I move, That it be an instruction to the Committee of the whole House on the Parole (Extended Supervision) and Sentencing Amendment Bill that it take the bill part by part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00220277565c834143f98b7aa6045332a922\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the motion be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 97\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 22\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000788\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022b56733d7c782441e801dedf6ebe11492\u0022\u003ESittings of the House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000790\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022f672984e4e7b4afb9c10f9db4374effd\u0022\u003ESittings of the House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002272e48ab0-e7ae-427f-bedc-793b7a91adba\u0022 data-id=\u0022f9ba401cead34bea8e89621baccc35b1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000789\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002272e48ab0-e7ae-427f-bedc-793b7a91adba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f9ba401cead34bea8e89621baccc35b1\u0022\u003EHon MARK BURTON (Deputy Leader of the House):\u003C/span\u003E I understand there have been discussions amongst the whips, and accordingly I seek leave for the House at its rising to adjourn until the ringing of the bell on Tuesday, 27 July 2004. This is in relation to a visiting UK delegation. I believe there has been discussion amongst the whips.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000791\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229c18ac37eb9e422e87c040e74e3f0daa\u0022\u003EHon Tony Ryall\u003C/span\u003E: We\u2019ll do it later.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000792\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002272e48ab0-e7ae-427f-bedc-793b7a91adba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022be14319159e54bc89b8b503933691dff\u0022\u003EHon MARK BURTON\u003C/span\u003E: I am happy to do it later, but perhaps not with the member sitting in the chair. It has to be when the member\u2019s party\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000793\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4b09a29-dfd3-42c0-8585-11463bd6077b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229476022b0251423e8b5af2bee0b1df24\u0022\u003EHon David Carter\u003C/span\u003E: It hasn\u2019t been discussed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000794\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002272e48ab0-e7ae-427f-bedc-793b7a91adba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f7f8314f38b8457786d3549b40186b7f\u0022\u003EHon MARK BURTON\u003C/span\u003E: No, not with the member, but there has been discussion with the whip. I am happy to come back and do it again.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022 data-id=\u0022b9fec59e564646a9be16041c66be1be7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000795\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b9fec59e564646a9be16041c66be1be7\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: It will be done later?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221a24c3d1a23e4a0f9b0106b7d3b1324f\u0022\u003EHon Members\u003C/span\u003E: Yes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022 data-id=\u0022b0de640e15b74efc9f49ac945aa5da80\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000797\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b0de640e15b74efc9f49ac945aa5da80\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: There is agreement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022 data-id=\u002287f7bd18b1bd471087e6c5897e22e511\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000798\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002287f7bd18b1bd471087e6c5897e22e511\u0022\u003EDAIL JONES (Junior Whip\u2014NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I can see no reason why this matter cannot be dealt with now, and I would be happy to seek leave myself for that to happen. As I understand the motion, the House would rise at midnight tonight and\u2014[Interruption] I ask for leave for the Deputy Leader of the House to explain the matter to me more clearly. I would be very happy to come back at the ringing of the bells tomorrow.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022 data-id=\u0022ef39b7b992c845e7ac1d0a18267727c3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000799\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ef39b7b992c845e7ac1d0a18267727c3\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: The House is the master of its own destiny. If the Minister wishes to seek leave\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000800\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002272e48ab0-e7ae-427f-bedc-793b7a91adba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b76fd9ef401649a585d6438fd73391c7\u0022\u003EHon Mark Burton\u003C/span\u003E: I am happy to leave it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000801\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022548bbe3e02e14f8c8a633d487f5e0672\u0022\u003EParole (Extended Supervision) and Sentencing Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000802\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022f0a0353072ad4feeb99e0785e6b225a0\u0022\u003EIn Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000803\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002272104d0e31a74834a2c441460ec2d3dd\u0022\u003EPart 1  Extended supervision orders\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022 data-id=\u00226e19efcac2504e36bed712d2becca637\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000804\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226e19efcac2504e36bed712d2becca637\u0022\u003ERICHARD WORTH (National\u2014Epsom):\u003C/span\u003E At this point National is supporting the Parole (Extended Supervision) and Sentencing Amendment Bill with substantial reservation. I say substantial reservation because the whole patchwork nature of this parole legislation calls for a comprehensive and careful review. National has instanced in earlier speeches tonight its real concern about the situation whereby a person charged with the rape of a child and sentenced to 9 years\u2019 jail can, under the current penal policy of this Government, be eligible for parole after a period of 3 years. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000805\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003EI am glad that Minister Barker is with us tonight in Committee, because there is one issue that troubles National members greatly. In the haste to pass this legislation, changes have been made in relation to electronic monitoring that may be particularly significant. I would like to draw the Minister\u2019s attention to new section 15A, inserted by clause 6A, which deals with electronic monitoring. New section 15A(1) states: \u201CA condition referred to in section 15(3)(f) that requires an offender to submit to electronic monitoring may be imposed only on an offender who \u2026 (c) is or will be on parole, and electronic monitoring of the offender is necessary in order to provide the supervision required to ensure that the offender does not pose an undue risk to the community or any person or class of persons;\u201D. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000806\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003EThe issue that I am seeking that the Minister respond to, after consultation with his officials, is whether this change will have a wider application\u2014given that it is an amendment to the Parole Act\u2014to persons other than in the scope of this intended bill, which is to provide a new extended supervision regime that will actively manage high-risk child sex offenders. Electronic bracelets may be all very well, but people can commit significant society-harming offences whilst wearing electronic bracelets, and certainly members of this Committee who represent the Opposition parties would be extremely concerned if by sleight of hand an unintended consequence of this legislation is to open the floodgates to permit an even greater access to parole. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000807\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003EIt will be obvious from what has been said to this point that National members have real concern about the parole regime. At this point we are supporting this legislation solely on the basis that there is clear merit in introducing a new extended supervision regime that will actively manage high-risk child sex offenders. In this part of the legislation, which is subject to Committee comment, it is relevant to note that the Attorney-General, whose views on the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act are often of concern to members of this House, has found that the provisions of this bill are inconsistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000808\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003E I must say that I quite warm to the comments made by an earlier speaker who said that we should not be so much focused on legislation such as the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act but that we should be seeking to craft a \u201CNew Zealand Bill of Responsibilities\u201D. The point he made, which is a very fair point, is that the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act is substantially concerned with the position of offenders. It is right to say that it is a hallmark of this Government that the legislation that has been passed to date regarding the penal sector is very much about the rights of offenders, and not, as I suggest it should be, about the rights of victims.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022 data-id=\u00226a6b725c92e94b68a776b10c48cf73d1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000809\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226a6b725c92e94b68a776b10c48cf73d1\u0022\u003EHon RICK BARKER (Associate Minister of Justice):\u003C/span\u003E I will make just a few introductory remarks. This part of the bill has been introduced so that the Government can put in place active management of child sex offenders. I make the observation to the member who has just spoken that this is part of a complicated web. The previous legislation has made changes. For example, preventive detention is now available on a first offence, not, as it was previously, on a second offence. The age for preventive detention has been lowered. The third element is that the range of offences for which preventive detention can be imposed has been widened. The current law addresses a number of those concerns. Judges now have the option to impose preventive detention in more circumstances than they did before. So we see that, going forward, we will be incurring fewer concerns. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000810\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EWhat this bill seeks to do, in part, is to address the inadequacy of the sentencing law, historically, where it was left undone. The second point I make in response to the member, who talked about people being eligible for parole at a third of their sentence, is that this is true but there has been eligibility for parole in many, many instances at a third of a sentence, for a long time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000811\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022435b5e92a2f14498a335063cf66d57a9\u0022\u003ERichard Worth\u003C/span\u003E: No, it was a different regime. It wasn\u2019t the Parole Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000812\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224198d24498b747e8933eabee5e47ff01\u0022\u003EHon RICK BARKER\u003C/span\u003E: The member cannot deny it. But what has changed\u2014and the member will not like listening to this\u2014is that under the previous legislation an offender was automatically eligible to get out of prison after serving two-thirds of his or her sentence, regardless of the circumstances. So an offender serves two-thirds of his or her sentence, and then effectively that person is out of prison. The law has been changed now so that offenders are not entitled to automatic parole at two-thirds of a sentence. If the circumstances are such that the offender is not contrite, shows no remorse, or exhibits bad behaviour, he or she can be held in the system for the full extent of his or her sentence. [Interruption] The member says that we could, but everybody knows that there is automatic parole on serving two-thirds of a sentence. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000813\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe other point I want to make is that this is aimed at improving the management of sex offenders in the community. We are modelling this work on what has happened in other countries, such as Britain and Canada where they have seen these provisions put in place. We are looking to be able to have some effective oversight of these offenders for an extra 10 years, beyond the length of their sentence. I stress to the member that we are very concerned to ensure that people do not get the wrong impression. For example, the previous speaker made reference to section 15A, inserted by clause 6A. I say to the member that there is a Supplementary Order Paper to strike that clause out of the bill, because there was a concern that it could have the unintended consequence of letting more people out of prison, thereby weakening the legislation. This section has been drawn out because we do not want that to be the case. We do not want that to be the unintended consequence. I think the member would be very happy to see that his concern is being assuaged somewhat.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000814\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222ec77e7bdf594ce99cefed90963b83fc\u0022\u003EHon Tony Ryall\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s what you call an effective Opposition.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000815\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d2bb4e37a914438f8eb996e38411c8f9\u0022\u003EHon RICK BARKER\u003C/span\u003E: An effective Opposition maybe, but we appreciate all the good advice we can get. Sometimes it is good, and sometimes it is not. There are those elements of it. The overall effect of this is to strengthen the control that the State has on sex offenders, beyond the time they have served their prison sentence. I am sure that all in the community would welcome that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022 data-id=\u00222f6f10e6f7ae42a1aabfb5da720682bd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000816\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222f6f10e6f7ae42a1aabfb5da720682bd\u0022\u003EDAIL JONES (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E Nothing that the Minister has just said will alter New Zealand First\u2019s view on this matter. We do not want sex offenders getting out of jail early. It is as simple as that. The community does not want sex offenders getting out of jail early. It does not want them out of jail after serving one-third of the sentence put up by the judge. Those people should be punished. They should stay in jail until they are at least nearing the very, very last months of a lengthy sentence, and they should be given treatment while they are in jail. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000817\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EThe only valid aspect of this bill, about treatment, extended supervision orders, and the like is that they should continue. They should be put in place after those people have served virtually all of their sentences, and the treatment should be for the 10 years proposed by this bill. That is where we differ. We could go along with an extended supervision order after these people have almost completed their sentence and after they have received treatment in prison. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000818\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EI have appeared for some of these people. I would not want them out of jail, after what they have done. I have been in the No. 1 police cell in Auckland. I did it in the 1970s, the 1980s, and the 1990s. I have acted for some of these people, and they are despicable. To some extent they do need treatment. Lawyers start their plea in mitigation for these people by saying they need treatment. The problem with our system today is that they do not get treatment. They just come out of jail and the same old problem arises again. They should be in jail. They should serve their full sentence, and they should get treatment in jail. Only then, perhaps, they may not reoffend, but one does not hold one\u2019s breath. When these offenders come out of jail they should always, as suggested, spend the next 10 years under supervision. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000819\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003ESection 15A deals with electronic bracelets, and they are an utter waste of time. What use is a bracelet? An offender can be wearing a bracelet and can be anywhere. No one knows quite where these people are, unless there is a proper satellite link and a map of the country, and the type of device that is in some police cars. What use is a bracelet? This point was raised by Ron Mark in the first reading debate, when we somewhat reluctantly agreed to let the bill go to the select committee. New Zealand First does not support this bill, we do not support this section, and we will be voting against Part 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022 data-id=\u002227da50a6efa84e808f711d3c071764ed\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000820\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002227da50a6efa84e808f711d3c071764ed\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL (National\u2014Bay of Plenty):\u003C/span\u003E In dealing with the release of offenders who are subject to automatic release, the likes of McIntosh and Ryder, I wonder whether the Minister would take a call and explain to the Committee why, in the case of sex offenders reaching their statutory release date, the Government has not sought to apply section 105 of the Criminal Justice Act, or whatever is its successor. That is the section that says the Secretary for Justice may apply to the Parole Board before an offender\u2019s final release date, to have that offender not released. That would appear to me to be the means to meet Mr Dail Jones\u2019 concern and the concern of all parties about not using the full power of the law to maintain such people in custody. I wonder whether the Minister would get some advice from his officials and advise the Committee on that question. Can the Minister do that? He could just bend over and ask the question, or otherwise we will just keep taking calls until he does.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000821\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221772e9f5-5379-4bfe-9d9b-eaffb4c61b02\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c414d766592242de857978e7c3bdae99\u0022\u003EHon Harry Duynhoven\u003C/span\u003E: It sounds to me like a threat, actually.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000822\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228e817761720e4484a65bf0b9a61dc9e7\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL\u003C/span\u003E: We are asking a question. We are wondering whether the Minister will ask the officials. Thank you; I appreciate that. It is quite a serious question, and we just want an answer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000823\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221772e9f5-5379-4bfe-9d9b-eaffb4c61b02\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002232250352597d45a4aef7510331b842ff\u0022\u003EHon Harry Duynhoven\u003C/span\u003E: The officials are not quite sure what the member\u2019s about. Would the member like to explain?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000824\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220e82ba4b2e424b77a4d5936ea1dad0cf\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL\u003C/span\u003E: Under the previous regime, when a specified number of offenders meet their statutory release date, at two-thirds of their sentence, there was a provision in the Criminal Justice Act\u2014section 105\u2014that allowed the Secretary for Justice to apply to have those people not enjoy an automatic release but to fulfil the rest of their term. [Interruption] That section still exists. [Interruption] Now it is section 107 of the Parole Act. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000825\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E  Why is that section not capable of being used more frequently for sexual offenders of this nature?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000826\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221772e9f5-5379-4bfe-9d9b-eaffb4c61b02\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e22d9de4380f4696be93dae2c5d284f6\u0022\u003EHon Harry Duynhoven\u003C/span\u003E: I think the member\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000827\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4b09a29-dfd3-42c0-8585-11463bd6077b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002267a563fd6b764a78b1d806f42766e811\u0022\u003EHon David Carter\u003C/span\u003E: Well, the Minister should be aware of the legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000828\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022911ef52dd23f4dd7b507b821640c9959\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL\u003C/span\u003E: I think it is a valid point because the problem with this is that many of this group are reaching their automatic release date under the previous legislation. The secretary can apply to have them do the remaining third of their sentence. Why is that provision not being used as frequently as we would like it to be used in order to maintain custody of those people before they enter the extended supervision period?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022 data-id=\u002201e248de6bbd49c99a3e6bbe6f679c2a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000829\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002201e248de6bbd49c99a3e6bbe6f679c2a\u0022\u003ESTEPHEN FRANKS (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E I rise for the ACT party on the Committee stage of the Parole (Extended Supervision) and Sentencing Amendment Bill. We are discussing Part 1, which is the part that creates the new regime for child sex offenders. Of course they are now the lepers of the criminal community. This provision allows them to be supervised, after their release, for up to 10 years. This is a very sensible set of provisions, and it should be extended across all offenders and not just for 10 years. If every offender served his or her court-given sentence, so that we had truth in sentencing, the offender should then be subject to a period of supervision of the kind contemplated by this bill, but only for sex offenders. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000830\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EWhy this provision is only for sex offenders has not been explained by the Minister. It is a sensible precaution against further offending. Sex offenders, according to the Justice and Electoral Committee\u2019s report and the figures we were given by officials, are less prone to reoffending than most other offenders. The officials would have told the Minister that a typical serious or high-risk offender is likely to reoffend, and cost the community up to $500,000, in the 5 years following release on serving a sentence for other crimes. Many of the offences they might have decided to prevent by electronic monitoring or any other kind of supervision will be at least as bad, from a victim\u2019s perspective, as they are for the victims of child sex offenders. I have no doubt whatsoever that the families of murder victims would be very happy to see the sorts of people who commit murder, rape, robbery, or the sort of thuggery that leaves people injured for life, under some kind of supervision at the end of their sentence that is as effective as is contemplated for child sex offenders. So my first comment is that, although this provision may be sensible, the limitations on it are very telling. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EI also want to mention the amendments I have put forward in Supplementary Order Paper 228 that would fill a gap. There are repeated references to the rights of victims in the Parole Act, but no one seems to know what they are. Minister Goff tells us that the rights of victims are the rights to get information. Well, I have seen the reports that accompany a parole application. The reports that come from the Parole Board have a single page that states the offender has attended a course of X and completed it, or did not complete it; the offender has been in prison for such and such a period, and that is it. The victims thought that they might at least get some sort of comment from the prison authorities or from a prison officer about the behaviour of the offender, whether he or she is showing remorse, the psychological assessment, the predictions, and what the predictions might be based on, as to his or her reoffending risk. But no, they get nothing of that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000832\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EWell, we do have a benefit in this bill. At least now for child sex offenders, new ground has been broken and the Parole Board is allowed to provide the victim with more information if it chooses. The board is allowed to provide victims essentially with whatever it thinks is relevant, subject to a right to withhold things that may unduly breach privacy or the effectiveness of the conditions. I have suggested that this is the opportunity to define what are the interests of victims. My Supplementary Order Paper that I mentioned lists those interests. They are not novel; they are precisely what the Minister has said is the object of sentencing. They are to make sure that parole does not undermine the denunciation that the public can expect, and does not undermine accountability. That is the cute word used by the anointed leaders in the justice area to mean, I think, paying the price\u2014what would more honestly be called retribution, or even utu, if people were ready to acknowledge what is really happening. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000833\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EMy amendment does not break new ground, in the sense that it records the expectation of victims that sentences should deter. I do not remember the number of victims whom I have represented or drafted submissions for\u2014I think it is three. I have been to the Parole Board with two victims. I must have had at least 10 victims tell me that the key thing they really want is to know that the offender cannot do it again, and that other offenders will know that it will not be worth doing. In their own words they are saying that they do not want the deterrent purposes of sentencing to be undermined by parole. So my Supplementary Order Paper suggests that this bill has the definition, which should have been there right at the beginning, that it is the right of victims to have the Parole Board give due weight\u2014the term used in the Parole Act\u2014to their interests. They need reassurance that, so far as sentences may deter, and as we all know there is a great argument about that, the sentence is adequate to cause the offender and potential offenders to feel that it is not worth committing or commissioning similar offences against the victim or others. That is one amendment I will vote for, and it is, in fact, Marc Alexander\u2019s definition. It is a very fine definition, and I will be very happy to vote for it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000834\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EThe way in which I have phrased it in my Supplementary Order Paper is as a reassurance that the sentence actually served will still deter the offender or others from committing the same or a similar offence. We are both aiming at the same thing\u2014filling a gap in the Parole Act, which means that \u201Cthe victims\u2019 rights to be considered by the Parole Board\u201D is an absolute charade. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000835\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EI have also suggested in my Supplementary Order Paper that we show some genuine respect for M\u0101ori concepts of justice. I do not believe they are any different from the concepts of justice that are known all over the world and that every culture upholds\u2014that is, there is a levelling of the scales; there is something in the sentence that tells the victims and their families that justice means equality so that victims are not left feeling that the crime has damaged them and left the offender better off. And many offenders feel that. They see offenders getting something as simple as free dental treatment and free education, which the victim has to pay for. They see them getting tenderly cared for, as it appears to them, and getting counselling, and the victims are left without it. This Government has given $3 million to look after victims and about $500 million to look after the criminogenic needs of offenders. All that my Supplementary Order Paper asks is that the Parole Board takes into account, and gives due weight to, a victim\u2019s expectation that there is a levelling of the scales and that justice is served. Mr. Benson-Pope can bray at us about this. This is what almost every New Zealander would think was the elementary minimum requirement of the justice system. It is only the anointed in the criminal justice establishment who could even be surprised at it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000836\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EMy amendment also puts in other changes to make sure that parole conditions, or release conditions, do not conflict with what the judge said when he sentenced an offender. It should go without saying. But we know that the parole system was set up, in fact, to undermine sentencing. The parole system was deliberately set up so that the court could go through its motions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022 data-id=\u0022115658656ebf417a9b29f401301aec3b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000837\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022115658656ebf417a9b29f401301aec3b\u0022\u003EMARC ALEXANDER (United Future):\u003C/span\u003E I want to make a couple of simple observations. When I look at my Supplementary Order Paper 226 and at clause 4 and compare it with Stephen Frank\u2019s Supplementary Order Paper amendment to clause 4, they have the same intent and feeling. They could  almost have been written by the same person. The concerns that are echoed\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000838\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c31758b052d9479086cdf517d9f4318b\u0022\u003EStephen Franks\u003C/span\u003E: And 92 percent of New Zealanders say it too. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000839\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224cfa0c54c3714812986dba3e147c8a98\u0022\u003EMARC ALEXANDER\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, 92 percent of them. Those amendments go to the heart of the problem\u2014that is, we have a problem with our sentencing laws and we have a problem with our parole laws. These amendments are trying to do the same thing, but we are coming at it from slightly different angles. We are trying to respect the rights of victims, in terms of what the bill is trying to address. We are trying to ensure that the interests of victims and, in a de facto sort of way, the interests of the law-abiding citizens of this country, are being heard and dealt with in a fair and reasonable manner. It seems to me that when we value the interests and rights of people in this country, at some point we have to make the decision that the rights and interests of  law-abiding citizens supersede those of offenders. If we have to balance the scales of justice, then they must nudge in favour of victims and the law abiding, against the interests of offenders. Because they do not always go together. They often contradict each other. In terms of sentencing and in terms of this bill, this is such a case. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000840\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022\u003EOne of the things I would like to see done in clause 4 is to put forward the rights of victims, to give them a sense of satisfaction that justice is being done to the offender in terms of denunciation of the crime, and there is precious little here of that happening. Time and time again, when we are looking at sentences and looking at parole, the overriding consideration seems to be whether the offender, if let out, will pose a risk. That is a concern, and it is part and parcel of what parole provisions should be, if we are to have a parole system, but it should not ever be at the expense of the sentence. Because the sentence is the time at which we give satisfaction to the victim. It is society\u2019s way of saying to the victim: \u201CWe have measured the offence against you; this is the legitimate punishment that we impose.\u201D Why suddenly do offenders get a break? Why do they get a discount at some later point? It is as if to say to the victim: \u201CWe erred on the side of the offender. We erred on the side of the offender in making the legitimate decision to say what the sentence was at the time of sentencing and we are now going to retract the impact that the crime had on you.\u201D That approach cannot be justified. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000841\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022\u003EWe know that 92 percent of the population argued against that approach. This Government has not listened. If the Government wants to impose the failed experiment of parole, the failed experiment of sentencing, on the law-abiding citizens of this country, then it is on its head; it is on its conscience. The responsibility for future victims of crimes committed by offenders let out far too early will rest upon this Government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000842\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022\u003EMy Supplementary Order Paper amends clause 10 by substituting new subsection (b) of section 107A\u2014\u201C(b) provides that an extended supervision order may last for as long as the offender is capable of committing further offences with no time limitations;\u201D. My rationale for doing that is simply that it should have been addressed with the sentencing. These individuals should never be allowed out of incarceration again. But they will be. The least we can do is then to go back and impose a supervision regime to ensure the greatest chance that they will not commit an offence again. I look forward to support for that amendment from other parties in the House. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000843\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022\u003EI turn to Supplementary Order Paper 228 in the name of Stephen Franks. The amendments essentially want the same changes as mine, and who would disagree? An amendment to clause 4, \u201CInterpretation\u201D, inserts a new definition \u201Crights of victims\u201D. The definition includes\u2014satisfaction that the sentence actually served will show denunciation; reassurance that justice has been done; reassurance that the sentence actually serviced will deter the offender. These are all things we cannot possibly disagree with. The intent is that the judgment falls in favour of the victim, and against the offender. The offender had his or her chance. The offender made a conscious decision to cause an offence against an innocent, law-abiding citizen. It is now in the interests of justice to place the interests of the innocent, the victim, ahead of those of the offender. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000844\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022\u003EI note Stephen Franks\u2019 amendment to insert new clause 8A, to direct that home detention will not negate or undermine the purposes of the sentence for the offender. Again, how could one disagree? The point is obvious. This is a matter of saying that the sentence is supposed to deal with society\u2019s punishment of the offender. Over and above that, home detention and other such provisions\u2014supervision, and so on\u2014are about maintaining the ability to ensure that the public is not disadvantaged or put at risk. They are two separate things, and one should not be at the expense of the other. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000845\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022\u003EIn Stephen Franks\u2019 explanatory note of his Supplementary Order Paper he states that the purpose of these amendments is to empower and direct the Parole Board to take account of the judge\u2019s reason for sentencing. In a nutshell he says it, and who could disagree? The judge is in the best possible position to be able to determine the impact of the crime on the victim and to determine the sentence. Why is it that a third of the way into a sentence the Parole Board, in its great wisdom, can turn round and decide to let the offender out of prison? The board does not have the judge\u2019s wisdom; it was not there at the time of the sentencing, but it can decide to reduce a sentence by up to two-thirds. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000846\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022\u003EThe Hon Tony Ryall made a very good point. The offenders who are coming up, who will come under this supervision regime, and about whom we are trying to push this bill through, have the possibility of serving an extra third of their sentence because they come under the previous sentencing provisions. Why on earth are we not enacting that proposal? Why is it that the full measure of the sentence has not been visited upon the offender? If we are so eager to turn back the clock and use a bit of retrospectivity, then why not simply just extend the sentence? Because United Future would back it, I am sure National would back it, I know ACT would back it, and 92 percent of the population in the 1999 referendum showed they would back it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022 data-id=\u0022bc6f06636688414cbbddf2e30bff375d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000847\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bc6f06636688414cbbddf2e30bff375d\u0022\u003EDARREN HUGHES (Junior Whip\u2014Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022 data-id=\u0022880999fc59ec4772a452af241eef0476\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000848\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022880999fc59ec4772a452af241eef0476\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL (National\u2014Bay of Plenty):\u003C/span\u003E I wonder whether I could draw the Minister\u2019s attention to new section 107H in clause 10 of the reported-back bill, \u201CConditions of extended supervision order\u201D. I think this provision gets to the heart of my concerns about this bill. Everybody wants us to have some sort of regime in place for the small group of highly dangerous sex offenders who have come to the end of their sentence. The officials have assured me that they use section 107 of the Parole Act on these people to try to ensure that they serve their whole sentence. So everyone wants a regime for when these people come to the end of their sentence. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000849\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003EI would like the Minister in the chair, the Hon Rick Barker, to take another call and talk a little about the actual nature of the monitoring. Minister Goff said that these people will be subject to 24-hour-a-day, 7-day-a-week monitoring. This bill provides that the parole authorities, in exercising an extended supervision order, can impose special conditions, and those special conditions can include the person living as if he or she were on home detention for a year. Then we get into the ongoing monitoring by the probation service. New section 107I(1A) states that an offender is subject to a special condition that \u201C\u2026 may include a requirement that the offender submit to being accompanied and monitored, for up to 24 hours a day, by an individual who has been approved, by a person authorised by the chief executive, to undertake person-to-person monitoring;\u201D. The concern here is that if the Minister is saying he will give 24-hour-a-day, 7-day-a-week monitoring, why, then, is this a discretionary provision of an extended supervision order? The provision states that if an offender is subject to a special condition referred to in subsection (1)(b), the condition may include the requirement for 24/7 in-person supervision. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000850\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003EThe Minister in the chair has talked about how there would be 24-hour-a-day, 7-day-a-week in-person supervision. The use of the word \u201Cmay\u201D suggests that not everyone will be subject to that level of supervision. I wonder whether the Minister would take a call to explain why that condition is discretionary to the board, rather than a requirement that a person is subject to that 24-hour-a-day, 7-day-a-week monitoring he talked about. He said in the Chamber that eligible offenders would be subject to that monitoring. We all thought that that would be in person\u2014the sort of monitoring that Barry Allan Ryder had for the first part of his sentence before it got too expensive and the authorities cut it back\u2014but it became clear that the Minister was talking only about home detention. If the Government is prepared to put in this provision, why is it discretionary, and why is it not mandatory that anyone on an extended supervision order have that 24/7 supervision in person, which would provide a level of security and safety to the community that traditional home detention would not? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000851\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003EThe problem is that after the 12-month period of home detention conditions for these people we are back to the hopeless level of parole supervision by the probation service. We heard about quarterly contacts, and I do not think that is as good as it could be. This bill is better than nothing, but surely the Government could do better on this. I wonder whether the Minister could explain why the provision for the 24-hour-a-day, 7-day-a-week in-person supervision is discretionary, when the Government is saying that there is this very small cohort that needs to be dealt with firmly by this legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223a0e52c8-5bb1-4325-9870-21f4e3eb3702\u0022 data-id=\u0022021b232ed6a142b28b513fe2b88f1ec5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000852\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223a0e52c8-5bb1-4325-9870-21f4e3eb3702\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022021b232ed6a142b28b513fe2b88f1ec5\u0022\u003EMARTIN GALLAGHER (Labour\u2014Hamilton West):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022 data-id=\u00226ccf20ce82a545ffa56a5c9cc5d0e47e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000853\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226ccf20ce82a545ffa56a5c9cc5d0e47e\u0022\u003EDEBORAH CODDINGTON (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E This morning we passed legislation that allowed for a national register of dogs that are dangerous and might bite people repeatedly. The Minister of Justice this year said that he would support through this Parliament a national register of sex offenders, yet we have seen this Government do whatever it can to knock that legislation, kick it into touch, and get this legislation in instead. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000854\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003EThis legislation will not do anything to protect people from sex offenders. I have just been reading the latest research to come out of Canada. It took 14 years for Canada to introduce a sex offender register, and it was done after an 11-year-old boy was abducted, raped, had his throat slit, and was then left to bleed to death in the woods. This crime was done by one Joseph Fredericks, who was released on parole on mandatory supervision\u2014the same sort of supervision that is being created with this legislation. It was after people saw that the mandatory supervision had failed that Canada decided to go ahead and bring in a sex offender register. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000855\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003EIn the United States the community is trusted also to be involved in community supervision of sex offenders. Americans have access to registers through CD-ROMs and computers. Parents are trusted to do everything they can to keep their children safe. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003EIn this country, parents are not trusted to do that. This could be the safest country in the world; it would not be hard. We are an island where it is easy to protect our borders. We could protect the people within our borders. We could do it right by passing legislation that sends a message to repeat, high-risk, dangerous offenders that they will not get away with their crimes. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000857\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003EWhen I did my sex offender registry, I was contacted by a repeat sex offender in Canada who has written several articles on his rehabilitation, and he admitted that the thing that finally rehabilitated him was the sex offender registry. He realised it was a law that worked and that he lived in fear of, and he was terrified of breaking it because he never wanted to go back to jail again. He could not trust himself to be released. It was not until Ontario introduced a sex offender registry called Christopher\u2019s Law (Sex Offender Registry), 2000 that that man was able to get on with his life. When he was interviewed for a job, he could tell people about his past and that he was a serious sex offender, because he knew he would never get away with it. His exact words were: \u201COnly a public registry will work.\u201D He said it was a law that made him go straight and not reoffend. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000858\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003EMy colleague Stephen Franks has done an excellent minority report in which he states that we go into the dangerous area of double jeopardy, and we do not need to do that. It is just because of our stupid privacy legislation and conventions, which put the so-called rights of the offenders ahead of the rights of victims, that we have to pass laws that breach all conventions of justice. We would not need to do that if we just got tough on crime and kept our word about supporting legislation going through Parliament and supporting each other. I said I would support the Minister\u2019s legislation, because he said he would support mine, and the legislation would go through together. Instead, this Government is keener to pass a law for a national registry of dogs than a national registry of sex offenders. The Government thinks it is funny, but I do not think it is very funny at all. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000859\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003ESeveral years ago, when Peter Liddell was released on parole, I went on the Holmes show. The Parole Board thought that he would not reoffend. Peter Liddell ruined the lives of children, and drove them to suicide and parents to despair. What happened? The Parole Board deemed him ready to be released, and last week he was back in jail.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221a705910-5320-43bf-aa82-027a761519f6\u0022 data-id=\u002285b46df0215342abbfcc0aa95b274613\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000860\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221a705910-5320-43bf-aa82-027a761519f6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002285b46df0215342abbfcc0aa95b274613\u0022\u003ERUSSELL FAIRBROTHER (Labour\u2014Napier):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002285728b2f35dc4ba3a65f7449d34c97cb\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 62\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 57\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000861\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 226 in the name of Marc Alexander to clause 4 be agreed to. \u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002244882b9e15094f6e8c8a5a271cca2b0c\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 43\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 76\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; Progressive 2; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000862\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 228 in the name of Stephen Franks to clause 4 be agreed to. \u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00222fadc2eaee8c45f1a21f2f5bf1d25089\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 57\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 62\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000863\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 228 in the name of Stephen Franks to insert new clause 4A be agreed to. \u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00225f0b299b5fd34686b843dc5e09fcccd0\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 57\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 62\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000864\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 228 in the name of Stephen Franks to clause 6 be agreed to. \u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022fc68b77d90f04c7ebac5f20d4d57429a\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 57\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 62\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000865\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 228 in the name of Stephen Franks to clause 6A be agreed to. \u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00220d7934ec46f2414cbf1659d5bbf97519\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 57\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 62\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000866\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 228 in the name of Stephen Franks to insert new clause 6B be agreed to. \u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002298b83b774aec494e858e626322fb6d61\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 57\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 62\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000867\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 228 in the name of Stephen Franks to insert new clause 8A be agreed to. \u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022a66d4c25095b48539bc389607ce6b902\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 57\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 62\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000868\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 226 in the name of Marc Alexander to section 107A(b) in clause 10 be agreed to. \u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022d6b36e77fe04430587c9a1ab9457a928\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 35\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; United Future 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 84\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; ACT New Zealand 8; Progressive 2; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000869\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 226 in the name of Marc Alexander to add new section 107A(e) in clause 10 be agreed to. \u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00221782c72216d440529020f85b19de7606\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 44\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 75\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000870\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Nandor Tanczos to clause 10 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000871\u0022\u003Eto insert in section 107BA(1) the following new paragraph:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000872\u0022\u003E(aa)\tthat sentence was received prior to the enactment of the Sentencing Act 2002; and.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00229001f3787ce14e2aa75e21840ab79ee3\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 17\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party 9; ACT New Zealand 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 102\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; United Future 8; Progressive 2; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000873\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Tony Ryall to clause 10 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000874\u0022\u003Eto omit from paragraph (a) of section 107I(1A) the word \u201Cmay\u201D and susbtitute the word \u201Cmust\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022133c44c0407a4c17be33772cd1500874\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 44\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 75\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000875\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Tony Ryall to clause 10 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000876\u0022\u003Eto omit from paragraph (b) of section 107I(2) the words \u201Conly within the first 12 months of the term of the order.\u201D and substitute the words \u201Cfor the period of the extended supervision order.\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022f72905c6ad434c8985afa1b0f522134f\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 44\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 75\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000877\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ed9ad81-05c1-4171-80c6-24fa02cade42\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a9f5837502d94420a7b2464a3659f1f4\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich)\u003C/span\u003E: We come now to the Minister\u2019s amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 223 and Supplementary Order Paper 230, and the typescript amendments to clause 6A.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226e7bfee5-ac9c-4ae2-b85d-7d3b7a785561\u0022 data-id=\u00222a6e1f64342246e0b4602ffb6ccf814b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000878\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e7bfee5-ac9c-4ae2-b85d-7d3b7a785561\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222a6e1f64342246e0b4602ffb6ccf814b\u0022\u003EROD DONALD (Musterer\u2014Green):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. Are we doing all the Minister\u2019s amendments as one vote?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000879\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ed9ad81-05c1-4171-80c6-24fa02cade42\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fe3c65deb17647738232a468aefbee34\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich)\u003C/span\u003E: We are doing all the Minister\u2019s amendments as one vote.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022 data-id=\u0022cbb8fffac87b4f0ea423468eadd11edb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000880\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022cbb8fffac87b4f0ea423468eadd11edb\u0022\u003ESTEPHEN FRANKS (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. The ACT party would be happy to vote for one of those amendments, but if they are all put together, we cannot express that. One of them deletes section 15A(1) in clause 6A, which is something we are quite prepared to vote for.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022 data-id=\u0022a9a4d5c1979f45e2ac1602f40464baeb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000881\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a9a4d5c1979f45e2ac1602f40464baeb\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL (National\u2014Bay of Plenty):\u003C/span\u003E I seek leave to vote separately on two amendments on Supplementary Order Paper 230. One is to clause 6A, to delete new section 15A(1), and the other is to clause 20.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226e7bfee5-ac9c-4ae2-b85d-7d3b7a785561\u0022 data-id=\u00220e36956800064fc9b9a07b9a443e79b7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000882\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e7bfee5-ac9c-4ae2-b85d-7d3b7a785561\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220e36956800064fc9b9a07b9a443e79b7\u0022\u003EROD DONALD (Musterer\u2014Green):\u003C/span\u003E I further seek leave, because we have an issue with that seeking of leave. We want the amendment to clause 6A voted on separately, but we would also like the rest of the amendments on Supplementary Order Paper 230 voted on separately from the amendments on Supplementary Order Paper 223.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000883\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ed9ad81-05c1-4171-80c6-24fa02cade42\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d5081775f7074d01b8587be54b6a474a\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich)\u003C/span\u003E: We will deal with the first seeking of leave. Is there any objection to the leave sought by the Hon Tony Ryall? There appears to be none.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226e7bfee5-ac9c-4ae2-b85d-7d3b7a785561\u0022 data-id=\u00229a43340dc695470ea1f5970ca0bd4b48\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000884\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e7bfee5-ac9c-4ae2-b85d-7d3b7a785561\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229a43340dc695470ea1f5970ca0bd4b48\u0022\u003EROD DONALD (Musterer\u2014Green):\u003C/span\u003E Our voting will differ, depending on which Supplementary Order Paper we are dealing with. If we are voting separately on the amendment to clause 6A on Supplementary Order Paper 230, does that mean we will do the rest of the amendments on that Supplementary Order Paper as a block?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000885\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227eb65e07116f48f5976547339c705919\u0022\u003EHon Rick Barker\u003C/span\u003E: Yes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000886\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e7bfee5-ac9c-4ae2-b85d-7d3b7a785561\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022da7b380d396042a98ae4ec6440ab60c7\u0022\u003EROD DONALD\u003C/span\u003E: Then will we do Mr Barker\u2019s amendment as a separate vote, and deal with the amendments on Supplementary Order Paper 223 as a separate vote? Is that correct?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022 data-id=\u00229d6510e3552e4fc59bcc5b71b192de54\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000887\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229d6510e3552e4fc59bcc5b71b192de54\u0022\u003EHon RICK BARKER (Associate Minister of Justice):\u003C/span\u003E At  the moment, as I understand it, we have essentially a vote for all the amendments except the two that have been identified as Mr Ryall\u2019s. So at this stage, there would be three votes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226e7bfee5-ac9c-4ae2-b85d-7d3b7a785561\u0022 data-id=\u00220dbca248c28e4b7fa0e19acbcad78cbc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000888\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e7bfee5-ac9c-4ae2-b85d-7d3b7a785561\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220dbca248c28e4b7fa0e19acbcad78cbc\u0022\u003EROD DONALD (Musterer\u2014Green):\u003C/span\u003E Could the Chair please just clarify which three votes are we are having now?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000889\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ed9ad81-05c1-4171-80c6-24fa02cade42\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228cda926c67fa405eb4a58715efefd6a9\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich)\u003C/span\u003E: They are clause 6A and clause 20. So there will be votes on those two. At the moment we will be voting on clause 6A, clause 20, and the remaining amendments by the Minister. Is that all?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000890\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285712e72-b25f-4850-b4d9-90035064fde3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002263fe6985ece14049909d06d408e0abf3\u0022\u003ENandor Tanczos\u003C/span\u003E: In that case, I seek leave to also treat the amendments on Supplementary Order Paper 223 as a separate vote from the remainder of the amendments on Supplementary Order Paper 230, after taking account of the leave sought by Mr Ryall.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022 data-id=\u0022eba7ad8d1b0f4db79b4a7af2eb7b9292\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000891\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022eba7ad8d1b0f4db79b4a7af2eb7b9292\u0022\u003EHon RICK BARKER (Associate Minister of Justice): \u003C/span\u003ESo do we want Supplementary Order Paper 223 as a separate vote? That is OK. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000892\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ed9ad81-05c1-4171-80c6-24fa02cade42\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fe9381c2f2ce480c86e9842c8145bcc3\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich)\u003C/span\u003E: Is that all clear now? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022 data-id=\u0022a155ac48d9f14e499fdd587302dc089a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a155ac48d9f14e499fdd587302dc089a\u0022\u003EHon RICK BARKER (Associate Minister of Justice):\u003C/span\u003E Clause 20 is in Part 2, I am reliably advised.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000894\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ed9ad81-05c1-4171-80c6-24fa02cade42\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ab373e95c10247a2900f4facaceead04\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich)\u003C/span\u003E: What does Mr Ryall think of that? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000895\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002229f087865ff94ffcbaa73572dda6c060\u0022\u003EHon Tony Ryall\u003C/span\u003E: That is OK. Then we will have it later.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022 data-id=\u002274d217b40c9b403c9ef00c8e41106714\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000896\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002274d217b40c9b403c9ef00c8e41106714\u0022\u003EHon RICK BARKER (Associate Minister of Justice):\u003C/span\u003E So we have the amendment to clause 6A, the amendments on Supplementary Order Paper 223, and then a vote on the rest of the amendments on Supplementary Order Paper 230. Is that it? Right.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000897\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 230 in the name of the Hon Phil Goff to clause 6A be agreed to. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022d9d6da6e148042b3896a8a0f26bdbdb4\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 97\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Progressive 2; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 22\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand First 13; Green Party 9.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000898\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 223 in the name of the Hon Phil Goff to clause 12A be agreed to. \u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002202308fbe227549858164709da0ee5eb4\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendments be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 97\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 22\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000899\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the remaining amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 230 in the name of the Hon Phil Goff to Part 1 and the following amendments in the name of the Hon Rick Barker  to clause 6A, be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000900\u0022\u003Eto omit from paragraph (a) of section 15A(5) the words \u201Cof each class identified in subsection (1)\u201D; and\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000901\u0022\u003Eto omit from paragraph (b) of section 15A(5) the words \u201Cof each class identified in subsection (1)\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022d47d1e7c5cb84588b8a20108a4da13a9\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendments be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 96\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 23\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022884357fc8c8b46f4a94698d19a730312\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That Part 1 as amended be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 93\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; Green Party 5; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 26\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand First 13; Green Party 4; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 1 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000902\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022256339205bac415e881c6fc36a958f35\u0022\u003EPart 2  Amendments to Sentencing Act 2002 and Parole Act 2002\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022 data-id=\u0022981d8761b4e344c8b0e558c8e02d789a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000903\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022981d8761b4e344c8b0e558c8e02d789a\u0022\u003ERICHARD WORTH (National\u2014Epsom):\u003C/span\u003E A good starting point in talking about Part 2 is to note it in its context, and its context is that there are before the Justice and Electoral Committee 17 amendments at the moment, either proposed or passed, that have been placed before it by the Government\u201417 amendments. They are contained in Supplementary Order Papers 223, 229, and 230, and I have probably been generous to the Government in counting them in the particular way I have. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000904\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003EThe interesting thing about all this is that this bill\u2014the Parole (Extended Supervision) and Sentencing Amendment Bill\u2014has only just been reported back. It was reported back in mid-June. In that short time the Government has found 17 deficiencies in the legislation. It is a wholly unsatisfactory circumstance. While National is supporting the bill, we are doing so on the basis that there is really only one redeeming feature of merit in the bill, which is the introduction of a new, extended supervision regime that will manage high-risk child sex offenders. We have real reservations about how effectively this legislation will be administered by the relevant agencies, and we have good grounds for those reservations, given the comments of Justice Ellis as chairman of the Parole Board the other day, and the comments that the Minister of Justice, Phil Goff, made in reply. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000905\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003EThe reality is that the outcome of fiddling around with the Parole Act and the Sentencing Act has been complex and densely-worded legislation. It is full of subtleties. It is beset with qualifications, elaborations, and ambiguities. Members may recall that when the Parole Act and the Sentencing Act were first passed, there was trenchant criticism from the Court of Appeal. In fact, the legislation was described as being akin to the Hampton Court maze. Well, it has been made more complex, more subtle, and more difficult. In Part 2 we see again a raft of changes running right through the Sentencing Act and the Parole Act. Part 2 is in two subparts. Subpart 1 is \u201CAmendments to Sentencing Act 2002\u201D and Subpart 2 is \u201CAmendments to Parole Act 2002\u201D. That in itself is not strictly accurate, because there should be a third subpart in which the miscellaneous amendments to other legislation should be. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000906\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003EIt is far reaching\u2014there is no doubt about that\u2014because it touches, in the amendments to the Sentencing Act, on issues relating to reparation reports, and cumulative and concurrent sentences of imprisonment. There is a provision dealing with minimum periods of imprisonment in relation to fixed sentences. The issue of preventive detention has come up again for review. There is material about home detention and deferring its start date, which I would like to develop in later calls. The whole issue of discharge without conviction is being revisited, as is the question of orders to come up for sentence if called upon. The whole aspect of review of non-association orders is thrown into stark relief, and the Government has seen fit to make a number of changes to legislation such as the Misuse of Drugs Act, the Bail Act\u2014the changes to bail on deferment of sentence are quite significant\u2014and the sentencing regulations. As if that is not enough for one part, substantial changes will also be made to the Parole Act. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000907\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003EThe Minister has surely reached a position, with the patching that has been done to the Sentencing Act and the Parole Act since their enactments, where he can hardly say, as members heard him say as he stood in the Chamber, that he is proud of this legislation and that it is a triumph of the Government. In reality, it is wholly flawed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022 data-id=\u00223080b98b1bef4d2c817cad8f296c9772\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000908\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223080b98b1bef4d2c817cad8f296c9772\u0022\u003ERON MARK (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E This is the first call I have taken on this bill. I start my speech by simply saying one thing: stop and wake up! I draw to the attention of the people who are voting for this legislation that everything in Part 2 is aimed at achieving a new extended supervision regime that will actively manage high-risk child sex offenders in the community. Members should think about that. Everything I read in Part 1\u2014which I did not get the opportunity to speak on, because I did not get the call when I asked for it\u2014and everything in Part 2 is aimed at putting high-risk child sex offenders into the community under, supposedly, 24-hour supervision. We all know that nothing in this legislation will guarantee that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000909\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EHow do I know that? I know that because even yesterday there were articles in the paper stating that a home detention individual who was monitored with an anklet went missing for 4 months. Get that! Four months! I have one message for everyone on the Government benches who votes for this legislation. The day a high-risk child sex offender commits another crime on another child as a result of that offender supposedly being supervised 24 hours a day, 7 days a week under this legislation, I will do everything I can to put a billboard in those MPs\u2019 electorates stating that they personally voted for it to happen. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EThey should know that this legislation is fundamentally flawed. I go back to the third reading of the Parole Bill, when Winston Peters stated that this legislation was fundamentally flawed. There are arguments in this Chamber to the effect that it does not matter what one does with parole. Frankly, parole is past its use-by date. Eighty percent of people who are paroled offend within 5 years. Know that! Members should think about that. This legislation is all\u2014a term I cannot use in this Chamber because it is not parliamentary; \u201CBravo Sierra\u201D is an army term that springs to mind\u2014Bravo being \u201Cb\u201D and Sierra being \u201Cs\u201D\u2014and that is what this is. The crime here is that members like Mr Barker, Ms Pettis, Mr Benson-Pope, and Mr Gallagher will all sit here and pass this legislation, and working-class people will bear the results. Boy, am I looking forward to the hustings the day after the first recidivist offender offends, because I will nail them all as responsible. We over here in New Zealand First will vote against Part 2, because it is fundamentally flawed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000911\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EThere are some things that I can endorse. Why? Because we told the Government they were shortfalls and failures, and it would not listen the first time around. Take the deferred sentencing. Why are we dealing with that issue now? Why is it in this legislation? Because the Government would not listen\u2014and is that not interesting: again, it is not listening. The result we had from deferred sentencing was that people who were sent to jail did not go to jail. Where did they go? They went back out in the community on deferred sentence pending a home detention application. What happened? There is a high-profile case of a man who committed aggravated robbery, was sent to jail, did not go to jail, and was put out in the community. They suddenly find that, hello, DNA evidence shows he was involved in four other aggravated robberies, and when they went to pick him up from the place he was supposedly living on his deferred sentence, he did not live there any more. He had gone\u2014flown the coop. No one could find him. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000912\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EHello! If he had been locked up in jail for a start, the police would have known exactly where to go. Well! The Government suddenly realises that it has a problem, so it is moving to block that hole. But is it not also interesting, when looking at the beginning of the bill, to realise this Labour Government, supposedly cloth-cap, working class, and union representative, is now bleating the cry of an employer who wants to get off home, get a deferred sentence, because he is a rich guy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022 data-id=\u00222616d40915af4d3d9c1d073d8ae47761\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000913\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222616d40915af4d3d9c1d073d8ae47761\u0022\u003EHon RICK BARKER (Associate Minister of Justice):\u003C/span\u003E Firstly, I say to the Committee that this debate reminds me a little of the fabulous old cartoon, with Bill Rowling and Rob Muldoon looking out a window. The cartoonist observed that it was interesting that one could see blue sky, and the other could see only mud. Law and order debates are very interesting, because despite what the Opposition says, the facts are that since the Bail Act was passed, more high-risk defendants are being denied bail than before. Opposition members do not accept that. The second point is that there are projections now for an increase in New Zealand\u2019s prison population of over 20 percent in the next 7 years. Those are not the statistics Ron Mark would have, when he says we are soft on crime. The fact is that since 1996, when crime in New Zealand peaked, there has been a continued drop, and all members should say that is a good thing. But the Opposition members, for their own purposes, have to go and scare and terrify the electorate by saying there is more crime. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000914\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EI want to come back to Richard Worth, who made an interesting point when he identified that a number of corrections were being made to the legislation. He put that forward as a criticism. I think Richard Worth should say it is a positive thing. If things are not right, we try to constantly and incrementally improve the law. No one gets it absolutely, perfectly right the first time, and anybody who believes that is a fool. The Government has identified areas for improvement. For example, there is concern about the deferral dates for the start of sentences. We are now tightening the rules on that in the light of experience and practice, because we have now found that the words we wrote before, which we thought were adequate, are not. So, we are now to require exceptional circumstances instead of special circumstances\u2014we are going to do that. We are also to make it clear in sentencing that when considering non-parole periods of greater than one-third of a sentence, those should be imposed in cases where the statutory minimum would be insufficient to deter, denounce, and punish a serious crime. I think that is a very positive amendment, and the House should support it. Those are constructive amendments to improve the quality of our legislation, and I think people should applaud them. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000915\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003ESome people will condemn those amendments. Of course they will, because it is the nature of the Opposition\u2014oppose, oppose\u2014to lock themselves into that mentality. But the Opposition cannot deny the statistics. The facts are that the crime rate is on the way down, the prison population is going up, longer sentences are being imposed, and it is now much tougher to get bail. So there are some positive matters, and I think the Committee should have that put on the record. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022 data-id=\u0022c665ef3332414555909d112d7e2fcbf7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000916\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c665ef3332414555909d112d7e2fcbf7\u0022\u003ESTEPHEN FRANKS (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E Part 2 of the Parole (Extended Supervision) and Sentencing Amendment Bill has a whole raft of minor patch-ups to the Sentencing Act. I want to look at one or two of them. The first one is in clause 15, \u201CProof of facts\u201D. In the Sentencing Act, Mr Goff\u2019s brave new gift to criminal justice in this country, we had a complete code about the evidence that a judge has to take into account on sentencing. It is in section 24 of the Act. Let us look at what Mr Goff is now proposing: that in section 24(2)(c) the words \u201Cbeyond a reasonable doubt\u201D must be inserted. It now states that a prosecutor, the guy who is trying to get a decent sentence, must prove beyond reasonable doubt the existence of any disputed aggravating fact. That means any fact that would increase the sentence must be proved beyond reasonable doubt. The prosecutor must negate beyond a reasonable doubt any disputed mitigating fact raised by the defence\u2014that is, the guy who is trying to get the offender off a sentence. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000917\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003ELet us then look at what the offender has to do. The offender must prove on the balance of probabilities the existence of any disputed mitigating fact not related to the offence. So let us think what a disputed mitigating fact may be that is not related to the nature of the offence. It is something such as the offender had been nice to his or her mother. How can the prosecutor prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the offender was not? Or the mitigating fact may be that the offender gave lots of money to the SPCA. How is the prosecutor going to disprove that beyond a reasonable doubt? Whose interests is Mr Goff serving when he comes forward with that sort of fatuous amendment? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000918\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022aad8404b3e1b44a1b13b4cb6a5bc70ed\u0022\u003ERon Mark\u003C/span\u003E: \u201CI\u2019ve become a Christian.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000919\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022304bf9c6f17647298ffa7f8b3a27852c\u0022\u003ESTEPHEN FRANKS\u003C/span\u003E: The offender may say he or she has become a Christian, so the prosecutor must disprove that. The offender may say he or she has become a Christian and will never commit the offence again. Mr Mark has raised an excellent example of what seems to be deep at the heart of Mr Goff\u2019s priorities for the reform of our criminal justice system. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000920\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227000b644c1e1483d848934bc4d01611d\u0022\u003EJudith Collins\u003C/span\u003E: Any chance of Mr Choudhary becoming a Christian?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000921\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002245187c748fdd4f72bb46205ed26c90bf\u0022\u003ESTEPHEN FRANKS\u003C/span\u003E: I am not sure whether it would be of sufficient mitigation. If Mr Choudhary became a Christian, I do not think people would forgive him, either. However, looking back at section 24(2)(c) in clause 15, I cannot even see an explanation of why that is being done. I have no doubt that Mr Goff has a reason to now make the prosecution negate beyond a reasonable doubt the claim by an offender that he or she has become a Christian, but I would really like to see how that would be done. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000922\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EClause 17 states that when reparation is ordered against the poor, dear offender, the court must not impose a condition that it be paid as a lump sum unless it is satisfied that the offender has sufficient means to pay it immediately. The poor offender may have to sell his or her house. Reparation, of course, is simply compensation to the poor victim, but now in all the toughening-up that Mr Goff has been telling us about he is making sure that a court does not make the mistake of putting the offender under time pressure. We would not want that! \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000923\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EThen I look at clause 19, which refers to section 86 of the principal Act. Section 86 is the provision that has been put in to do what the Court of Appeal told Mr Goff was needed. Mr Goff told the Court of Appeal that in his judgment it was unnecessary, because he had already assumed that the court could do it. But the Court of Appeal said it needed to know when it could set longer non-parole periods, because the Act stated that it could be done only in extraordinary circumstances, or words to that effect. Section 86 is now to state that a longer non-parole period than the minimum can be set, in order to hold the offender accountable, denounce the conduct, deter the offender, or protect the community from the offender. Those are the purposes of sentencing. Mr Goff has had to state that when the court wants to set a longer non-parole period, it can apply the conditions of sentencing. What can it do? It can then set a non-parole period that extends to two-thirds of the sentence. In other words, the court can now go back to what the law was before Mr Goff changed it. Before it was changed, violent offenders had to serve two-thirds of their sentence. Now, in all his toughness, Mr Goff has gone back and stated that a court can reinstate the conditions that prevailed before he changed the law. What a toughening-up that is! He has gone back to the position that Mr Ryall had imposed when he was the Minister. Mr Goff has stated the court can now get us back to where we were before he started to change the law.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022 data-id=\u0022a99ceada0c15439a9abf06b8c156fb28\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000924\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a99ceada0c15439a9abf06b8c156fb28\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL (National\u2014Bay of Plenty):\u003C/span\u003E To listen to the Minister in the chair one would think everything was rosy in the garden in New Zealand. One would think that tonight hundreds of New Zealanders have not had their cars broken into, that tonight many New Zealanders\u2019 homes have not been broken into, and that if those people live in Auckland they do not expect to wait 24 hours before a police officer comes. It is a fact that tonight many New Zealanders are at risk of being bashed on the streets of New Zealand. Although crime dropped during the 1990s\u2014from the mid-1990s on\u2014crime is on the way up again, and reported violent crime is up 15 percent in the term of this Labour Government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003EIf this Government is so confident of its discredited parole system, it should tell this Parliament why 40 percent of people on parole reoffend within 12 months, 55 percent reoffend within 2 years, and 86 percent reoffend within 5 years. For some categories of offenders, over 95 percent reoffend within 5 years.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000926\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002226e0a57e542a4b1780dc38b3ced9f38e\u0022\u003ERon Mark\u003C/span\u003E: So parole works, right?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000927\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224445d2fabb83472086459d6d84165c22\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL\u003C/span\u003E: Yep, parole works for those people! Frankly, members on this side of the Chamber are left gasping. This Government can talk all it likes about what it is doing about the prison service, the Parole Board, etc., but 60 percent of the people who will go to prison this year will have been there before. Of the people released from prison, 86 percent will reoffend within the next 5 years. We know what that means. It means that tens of thousands of New Zealanders will become victims as a result of people being released on parole\u2014under Governments of both colours. Tens upon tens of thousands of people will have their cars broken into or stolen, or their houses broken into and ransacked, or be bashed or robbed in the street. So there is a human cost to the way in which the Government deals with the parole system.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000928\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003EThat is the reason why, during this debate, National members have sought to raise a real concern about this bill. We support the extended parole provisions in the bill; they are not our first choice on how to deal with these offenders\u2014our first choice is a law that allows one to convince a judge that these sorts of people should not be released from prison\u2014but we do believe that this bill has some merit. But it does not go far enough. We are most worried about what will happen after the 12 months of home detention supervision. The probation service told the Law and Order Committee that these people would be monitored or contacted weekly, to start with, and that eventually that would reduce to quarterly monitoring. The probation service told us that nobody would be monitored for the full 10 years and that about 8 years might be the maximum.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000929\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003EFrankly, that is not the level of supervision National wants. I give this commitment: a National Party - led Government will ensure that the monitoring of those people is real, and we will make sure that if they are out, the provisions that apply for the first 12 months apply for the full period. If we are going to agree to extended supervision, it should be meaningful, and the National Government after the election will make amendments to these provisions. But the Minister should not tell members that parolees are not reoffending. He should not say that tens of thousands of New Zealanders are not being made victims of the offending of parolees.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000930\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003ENor should he say that New Zealanders are treating the justice system with credibility. When a young woman in North Auckland was sentenced to 7 years in jail for driving a car into a crowd of schoolchildren and killing a young girl, the whole country said she would not serve 7 years but would be out in 2. That is what has happened: sentencing has become discredited.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022 data-id=\u002247f067ce03454262b576b6e0978fd6cb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000931\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002247f067ce03454262b576b6e0978fd6cb\u0022\u003EDEBORAH CODDINGTON (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E I want to look at several issues in Part 2. Stephen Franks raised the issue of reparation and pointed out that the Government is saying we must not be too hard when reparation is being ordered; that if the offenders cannot pay it all at once in one lump sum, because they do not have it or do not look like they might have it, we must be kind to them and let them pay it in instalments. Can members imagine saying to someone who holds them up and demands $10,000: \u201CI don\u2019t have it all right now.\u201D, and that person saying: \u201COK, I\u2019ll take it in instalments.\u201D? That is what this measure does to offenders.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000932\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003EFor 30 years this country has said that if we are nice to criminals they will be nice back. It just does not work like that. We should not even have parole. Parole does not work. It is a joke. It is a lie to the community. Tony Ryall talked about people saying that the girl who had been sentenced to 7 years would serve only 2. A lot of people still do not realise that. A lot of people still think, when they see a sentence of 7 years, that that is good, then are shocked when they read 2 years later that that person has been released. It is an anomaly that parole is given. We should not have parole at all.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000933\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003EBy having parole we create all these other huge problems. In fact, I wonder why we even bother with a justice system when members of the Parole Board are appointed by the Minister of Justice, and can be fired by the Minister, yet when they consider a person\u2019s parole they do not have to take into account why the judge set the sentence in an open court, in an open justice system\u2014except when the judge set a non-parole period, which cannot be more than two-thirds of the sentence. If that is not Kafkaesque, what is? Why do judges go through the process of sentencing someone to jail for a heinous crime\u2014of stating in an open court that it was a terrible crime, that the victims have been harmed immeasurably, that the crime has offended the community, that there needs to be a deterrent for this sort of thing, and that there needs to be reparation\u2014lulling the victims and the community into a false sense of safety and security, when that person can go before the Parole Board and none of that has to be taken into account? In essence, that offender goes before another, secret court, a secret set of judges who are appointed by the Minister and do not have to take into account any of those issues.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000934\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003EThe other anomaly in this legislation is the issue of cumulative and concurrent sentencing. I do not agree with concurrent sentencing, at all. It is a sort of bargain bin\u2014a two-for-one system.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ec957eedd0d245209e34d1b2530b89f1\u0022\u003ERon Mark\u003C/span\u003E: Buy one, get one free.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000936\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b369ec0b203e4f9e9cfa4710be90070e\u0022\u003EDEBORAH CODDINGTON\u003C/span\u003E: Yes; an offender who murders one person might as well murder three, because he or she will get the other two free. The bill contains a ridiculous clause, clause 18\u2014which I still do not really understand, even though Stephen Franks explained it to me\u2014which provides that a court cannot \u201Cimpose a sentence of imprisonment cumulatively on another sentence of imprisonment if, at the time of sentencing, the offender is subject to a sentence of imprisonment but, having commenced serving the sentence, is no longer detained under it.\u201D Well, why is the offender no longer detained? If the crime was so bad that there was a sentence of the kind that imposing another sentence would be cumulative, why is the offender no longer detained? Why did we get into this situation in the first place? If that person was on parole, he or she should have been recalled immediately. That is the issue with our having this nonsense of parole.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000937\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003EThe issue of preventive detention, which the Minister of Justice has boasted about constantly in this House\u2014about how people will be imprisoned for much longer periods\u2014is also misleading, if members look at the conditions this legislation places on the release of offenders. Not a week goes by when I do not get letters from families who know about convicted offenders\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022 data-id=\u00222e861fde76f94b0c9e71071ae74762c8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000938\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222e861fde76f94b0c9e71071ae74762c8\u0022\u003EDAIL JONES (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E Any party that takes law and order seriously and that voted against the Sentencing Act and the Parole Act in 2002 must surely vote against this legislation entirely. At that stage New Zealand First said the legislation was fundamentally flawed. In fact, these amendments prove that it is fundamentally flawed. We have a whole raft of extensive amendments from the minority Labour Government that indicate this legislation is flawed. One cannot rectify something that is basically wrong. As I said before, west Auckland had a problem with painted apple moth. We could not do something to make the painted apple moth problem better; we had to get rid of it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000939\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EThis legislation is flawed. We have to get rid of it and do something along the lines that New Zealand First proposed in 2002 and will continue to propose when it is a part of a Government of this country. We do not support parole in the way it is proposed in this legislation. We want to replace the Parole Board with a rehabilitation board, with a primary objective of minimising recidivism. Offenders are not given parole and they will be in prison for a much longer time. I support the building of all the new prisons. These people should be kept in prison, and for a longer time. That is why we need more prisons. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000940\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EAs far as convictions are concerned, some current statistics show that the longer the stay in prison, the fewer crimes are committed, because the criminals are in prison. If we keep criminals in prison, we will not get crime. The same people commit crime again and again, but if we lock them up, they will not commit crime. It is a cost on the community to lock them up, but maybe it will be a lesson to their families\u2014it will tell their families that this is what happens to criminals. The second thing is that they will not be able to get back home and encourage young children to do the same thing they were led to do when they were young children. That is one of the problems in this particular area. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000941\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EWe want these people to be put in jail and to stay in jail for the term of their sentence, unless towards the end of their sentence there is some indication of rehabilitation on their part. The rehabilitation board would be required to consider the actual duration of imprisonment and to ensure that offenders have demonstrated remorse and have a positive attitude to rehabilitation before it considers parole. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000942\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EStatistics can prove just about anything. On page 18 of the New Zealand Police Statement of Intent 2004/2005 the recorded crime trend indicator shows an upward trend for the years from 1999 onwards. In fact, since this minority Labour Government came into office, the indicator shows an upward trend for total recorded violence and sexual acts and for total recorded serious violence and sexual acts. That is what this legislation is about. To a large extent it is about the behaviour of sex offenders. And what does this minority Labour Government say? It says that it will give offenders better opportunities to go out into the public. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000943\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003ENew Zealand First says that if the Government is serious about dealing with crime, serious about making sure that people get punished, and serious about making sure that victims realise the people who harm them are getting punished, then it has to repeal entirely the Sentencing Act and the Parole Act, and has to pass the legislation recommended by New Zealand First to show that it really is tough about law and order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022 data-id=\u0022e820d679465f429899774eb920454075\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000944\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e820d679465f429899774eb920454075\u0022\u003EMARC ALEXANDER (United Future):\u003C/span\u003E I want to make just three brief points. One of the overriding concerns that I guess has been talked about at some length is the attack on the parole provisions. Nothing puts that more sharply in mind than a case of a gentleman by the name of Brian Alan Bolt. He is 48 years of age. The judge said it was clear that he offended regularly, and offended as soon as he was released from custody. While on parole he committed his 636th offence. If there could ever be an indictment of the parole provisions, I guess he must surely be it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000945\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022\u003EClause 22 states that the court may defer the start date of a sentence of imprisonment and justify it under exceptional circumstances. One has to ask why on earth we are giving the right to do that for an offender while no right of a similar nature has been given to the victim. Nobody has considered the victim\u2019s interest in this deferral. In fact, there is no provision for the victim to even make an impact statement with regard to the deferral provisions. It seems shocking that we are still going down the track of giving the weight of credence to an offender rather than a victim. It runs counter to the heart of the victims\u2019 rights legislation that was passed not that long ago, which tries to rebalance the justice system in favour of the victim. This legislation does not represent that, at all. It does not mirror those concerns. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000946\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022\u003EClause 21 deals with the fact that the court must consider granting an offender leave to apply for home detention in certain cases. Subsection (3), in clause 21, states: \u201CThe court may grant the offender leave to apply to the New Zealand Parole Board under section 33 of the Parole Act 2002 for home detention only if the court is satisfied that it would be appropriate to grant leave, taking into account\u2014(a) the nature and seriousness of the offence; and (b) the circumstances and background of the offender; and (c) any relevant matters in the victim impact statement in the case.\u201D It seems to me that the nature and seriousness of the offence can actually be decided upon by the victim impact statement, allowing the victim to have his or her say about just what the nature and the seriousness of the offence is. If anybody understands the seriousness of any offence it must surely be the victims. They are the ones who have to suffer for it. They are the ones who have to feel the full brunt of the offence. So, surely, the power ought to lie with victims to be able to ascertain the impact and the seriousness of the offence. I do not believe that clause 21 highlights that as adequately as it perhaps might. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000947\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022\u003EThe last point I want to talk about is clause 18, \u201CCumulative and concurrent sentences of imprisonment\u201D. It seems very difficult to understand exactly what this clause actually says. I am not a lawyer, but I did consult a lawyer not that long ago, and I asked what it means. He himself was not quite sure of it. It seems to suggest that again we are going down the track of offering people discounts for the offences that they commit based on concurrent sentencing rather than cumulative sentencing. If a person is out on parole, despite the fact that he or she comes under the sentencing provisions, and has another offence to answer to, the possible sentence that could apply in that case should not be waived. On what grounds can the offence be diminished simply by reason of a person being on parole and not having to address the offence or the sentencing that might ensue because of another offence given them? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000948\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022\u003EI have in my name a Supplementary Order Paper that I consider to be a technical adjustment of what clause 18 is doing, to at least allow the judges to take into consideration the fact that a cumulative sentence might actually hit the aims of justice a little better than the provisions that seem to be garbled and muddled as they are presently written. I look forward to the support of the Committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022 data-id=\u00227b9f80892d8141389b57e58542f74c61\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000949\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227b9f80892d8141389b57e58542f74c61\u0022\u003EJUDITH COLLINS (National\u2014Clevedon):\u003C/span\u003E Is it not about time we stopped playing politics with the victims of child sex abuse? National is supporting this bill for one reason and one reason only. It is a small improvement on the treatment of convicted paedophiles and their behaviour in the community after they are released. It is a small improvement, but at least it is a move in the right direction. Having sat through the speeches tonight, and having heard New Zealand First castigate this bill and the people who vote for it, I would like to ask where they were in the select committee voting. Did they vote for this bill, or did they vote against it? The answer is that they voted for the bill. It is not good enough to come into this House, use the victims of child sex abuse in this way, and talk about this bill and say: \u201CWe\u2019re not going to vote for it because it\u2019s not good enough.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000950\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EThe fact is that we know it is not good enough but it is a step in the right direction, and we have already signalled to this House that after the next election a National-led Government will improve this even more. We will sort this out in a big way. In the meantime, are we to allow convicted paedophiles to sit and think about how they can molest little children and do nothing about it? We know the supervision scheme is bad, but if it saves one child from a paedophile I for one, and the National Party, will say: \u201CThank goodness for that.\u201D But the trouble is that we will not know which children are saved by this regime. What we will know about are those who fall through the gaps. But if it saves one child\u2014and I believe that the main purpose and intent of this bill is to save those children\u2014it will be worth it, until after next year when we are in power and we can sort it out properly. It is an improvement, and that is why we are voting for this bill. There is no point in coming into this Committee and saying, in a grandstanding way: \u201CThis bill\u2019s not good enough so we won\u2019t vote for it.\u201D It is not, in fact, going backwards; it is actually affecting these people. It is to do with people who were not sentenced under the preventive detention regime. That was not available then to them. It is now available, and consequently this is retrospective legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000951\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EI am appalled to see that people voted against this\u2014as I noted at the select committee\u2014because it is retrospective legislation. The only people I noticed who are against this bill are those who are consistently and constantly concerned with the rights of child sex abusers. Every single civil libertarian did not like this bill. Every single one came along and said: \u201COh, it\u2019s bad.\u201D That should be a signal to every right-thinking person in this Chamber that it is in fact an improvement on the current law\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000952\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fe73cb0ee25d4b47ab43164091c95365\u0022\u003EStephen Franks\u003C/span\u003E: And the New Zealand Law Society.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000953\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a2b2471878a047abafdbf92c138c3773\u0022\u003EJUDITH COLLINS\u003C/span\u003E: And the New Zealand Law Society\u2014I put them on that particular list.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000954\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224ee7af63ab82497b97cfd9bc4007ee61\u0022\u003EHon Member\u003C/span\u003E: Pinkos!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000955\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fa02b5b58bd1463598646949d0ea3c1d\u0022\u003EJUDITH COLLINS\u003C/span\u003E: They definitely are a bunch of pinkos on these sorts of issues. Of course, they feel that they have to do that because they are there, they say, to look after the rights of everyone, just not necessarily the rights of the victims of child sex abuse. That is why we are voting for the bill. [Interruption] I am shocked to hear the former Minister, Lianne Dalziel, shouting out against us on this bill. I was convinced by her argument in the select committee. [Interruption] I say thank you very much to Ms Pillay for her confirmation that I am right and she is wrong. Well done! I always knew there was hope for that member. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000956\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EI have to say that the Government at least has made an attempt, not much of an attempt but at least an attempt. It does not help that people are now given parole after serving one-third of their sentence, but at least it is an improvement. We are pleased to be able to do that. I understand why Ms Dalziel would like my speech to come to an end. It is just too embarrassing for her\u2014people will hear that she has been abusing this speaker all the way through. She has been sitting there, chewing gum, and screaming like an old harridan. I say to Ms Dalziel that it is not a good look. In fact, she does not want us to support this bill. I say to Ms Dalziel that I am sorry but I will not oblige.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000957\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c61c6fddee2f4b4088e21ea053e8368a\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: Just before I call the next member, I have a correction to a vote. The result of the vote on the question that the amendment in the name of Nandor Tanczos to clause 10 of the Parole (Extended Supervision) and Sentencing Amendment Bill be agreed to was incorrectly announced. The correct result is Ayes 17, Noes 102.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022 data-id=\u00228e1f1ca628014f65a6b6c0b0ea0ab7be\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000958\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228e1f1ca628014f65a6b6c0b0ea0ab7be\u0022\u003EDr WAYNE MAPP (National\u2014North Shore):\u003C/span\u003E The speech just given by my colleague Judith Collins tells us why National has taken a principled approach. It is an approach that says the bill is an improvement and it will make a difference. She also pointed out that the New Zealand First representative voted for the legislation in the Justice and Electoral Committee. So New Zealand First members are just making cheap political points tonight, by changing their stance on this issue. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000959\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EPerhaps the most notable interjection today was the one from Lianne Dalziel. She proudly supports the Sentencing Act and the Parole Act. How could anyone stand in this Chamber and say he or she supports legislation that allows parole for the worst offenders at one-third of their sentences? An offender sentenced to 9 years can apply for parole after serving 3 years. The Government claims that that is an improvement. [Interruption] I have to correct Mr Mark. National is utterly and completely opposed to the whole notion of applying for parole at one-third of a sentence. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000960\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EI took the Government at its word when it said it was going to abolish automatic parole at two-thirds of a sentence. Everyone in this Chamber, and everyone in the entire country, was shocked to find that the Government\u2019s solution, so-called, was to substitute eligibility for parole at one-third of a sentence. That is not just for the non-violent offender or for the first-time offender, but also for the worst offenders. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000961\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EThat is one of the reasons why I have put in an amendment today. I have sat here and listened to the questions\u2014some of the questions were asked by Mr Ron Mark\u2014about the scandals that have occurred with home detention. These are seriously violent offenders who commit the worst and most vile crimes whilst on home detention. Surely experience should tell us that in those circumstances those people are not eligible for home detention. It might be at the back of a sentence, but in practice, the actions of many offenders show it is not right. So that is why I have given Government members the opportunity to vote tonight to stop home detention for violent and sexual offenders. They have the opportunity tonight to say no to that. Will they take that opportunity? Will the Minister say that in principle he and his Government oppose home detention for violent criminals and sexual offenders? He has that opportunity. It is not something unreasonable. The Minister knows full well that he would receive the thanks of New Zealanders if he voted for that amendment. He has that opportunity. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000962\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EI have listened with huge concern over many, many months as members right across the parties on this side of the Chamber have raised scandalous incidents. I have listened to the answers given by the Minister of Justice. He himself knows that it is wrong. Well, tonight Government members have an opportunity to fix it. If they have the real interests of law-abiding New Zealanders at heart, they will vote for the amendment that will stop home detention. The Minister might well say: \u201CBut it was put in there to provide people with an opportunity.\u201D But experience tells us that it was a mistake. Home detention should be limited only to the non-violent offender\u2014the person who does not pose a risk. So the amendment gives a clear instruction that home detention will be banned for violent offenders. We have the opportunity to learn from experience, to say that practice shows it is too big a risk to take, and therefore we should vote against it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022 data-id=\u0022be4a12e7d331489dad7afca004c5dc10\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000963\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022be4a12e7d331489dad7afca004c5dc10\u0022\u003ERON MARK (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E Is it not interesting that finally we are starting to get some indication from National as to where it might be going with its law and order policy, but we will deal with that at a later stage. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000964\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EFirstly, I hope that when National members give their law and order speeches they will acknowledge that it was New Zealand First that brought home detention\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000965\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d00f0c4b6cb34797a79ed864b91970bc\u0022\u003EJudith Collins\u003C/span\u003E: Ha, ha!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000966\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022008c23690cf743c684681352015a8006\u0022\u003ERON MARK\u003C/span\u003E: The member can laugh all she likes. She should go to the written questions, because they do not lie. There is New Zealand First\u2019s track record on exposing home detention for the sham it is. The point is in there. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000967\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EIf this Parliament seriously believes that the provisions in Part 2 with regard to 24/7 monitoring of offenders through extended supervision will work, it is dreaming. Take the example in Christchurch of the young man who was picked up by a taxi-driver outside the casino, having called a taxi to take him home. He got to his home and did a runner on the taxi. Normally the police do not get involved in civil cases such as this, because they do not believe it is their job to make people pay for their taxis. But is it not interesting that when the taxi-driver gave the address of the property he was outside, suddenly police cars arrived. Why did they arrive? Because the person whom the taxi-driver had picked up outside the Christchurch Casino was on home detention, and supposedly was being monitored 24/7 on his anklet. He still managed to go to the casino for an evening\u2019s gambling and do a runner on his taxi fare. So with that in mind, what confidence am I expected to have in this garbage before me? The answer is none. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000968\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EIf that is not enough, consider the man in Christchurch who was on home detention, under supervision, with an anklet on, under 24/7 supervision, and who was committing burglaries. He had accurately worked out that from the time he activated his alarm it took a minimum of 1 hour for the security people to arrive on his doorstep. So he knew that he could race off his property, break into his neighbour\u2019s home, steal his stereo, get home, have it planted and hidden, and when the people from Chubb Security arrived to see whether he was there, he was there. He simply said: \u201CWell, there\u2019s something wrong with your gear, bro\u2019, it doesn\u2019t work, does it? Must be something wrong.\u201D, and so they thought there was. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000969\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EThat 24/7 supervision is so effective that we now have the infamous case of a person who was personally supervised by a Chubb Security guard, who was standing outside the door whilst the offender\u2014the inmate under 24/7 supervision\u2014was inside the room sexually assaulting his cleaner.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000970\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fb9d1d6784fd4012be401cbfbefe09a5\u0022\u003EJudith Collins\u003C/span\u003E: As you do!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000971\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e7d5afc963e641aeac339f04d0ae527a\u0022\u003ERON MARK\u003C/span\u003E: As you do! The Government cannot tell me that this piece of garbage that should be sitting on a roll in someone\u2019s lavatory is going to work\u2014it is rubbish! \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000972\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EWith all due respect to my National Party colleagues, who have a proven track record of saying: \u201CWe\u2019re gonna get rid of the gangs, we\u2019re gonna get tough on crime, we\u2019re going to do this.\u201D, and when they get into Government they spend 9 years doing nothing\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000973\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cbcf0974a2c348d1bed7288358c13fac\u0022\u003EDr Wayne Mapp\u003C/span\u003E: With help!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000974\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002290ecaea0f8d348899c050abc3a0ff1ef\u0022\u003ERON MARK\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, the member should not say \u201Cwith help\u201D, because when New Zealand First came into coalition with National we put steel in the spine of that party, and we brought in 500 extra police. We brought in the non-association laws, and we were the motivation behind that\u2014and I still have the coalition agreement. I still have the black and white coalition agreement, signed by Jim Bolger, that stipulated and laid down the firm improvements we made to law and order under a National - New Zealand First coalition. Now the problem is, to sit here and tell me\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000975\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225235bd8370ec4a06bea23ceb6a68ce05\u0022\u003EHon Rick Barker\u003C/span\u003E: There was no order in that coalition.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000976\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225cce66453c7d459ca058e1cd0262f1ab\u0022\u003ERON MARK\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I tell the Minister that in the 12 months that New Zealand First was in Government, there were far better laws passed through this House than the sort of garbage I am seeing right now. Because at the end of the day the proof of the worth of this document lies in the victims, and the Minister can be assured of that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222a849ed4-a817-45a7-8b86-dbc9dd210193\u0022 data-id=\u0022790a9e1cd6144b88b47dfac856cb83fc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000977\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222a849ed4-a817-45a7-8b86-dbc9dd210193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022790a9e1cd6144b88b47dfac856cb83fc\u0022\u003EJILL PETTIS (Senior Whip\u2014Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022 data-id=\u002233022b4a3b29488a99552a2fa674b466\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000978\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002233022b4a3b29488a99552a2fa674b466\u0022\u003ESTEPHEN FRANKS (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E I realise that I should move on to something other than the things that have already been debated, and I will do that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000979\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EThe schedules, which I believe are part of this debate, are of interest. I see that Form 4, in schedule 2, was approved unanimously by the Justice and Electoral Committee. I did not realise that it obliges a judge who wants to set a non-parole period to sign, in effect, a form of confession or check sheet. If members refer to schedule 2, they will see that a judge who wants to set a non-parole period has to state expressly that he or she considers that the minimum term of imprisonment \u201Cis necessary to satisfy all or any of the following purposes: holding the offender accountable \u2026: denouncing the conduct in which the offender was involved: deterring the offender \u2026 from committing the same or a similar offence: protecting the community \u2026 .\u201D Those are four sensible purposes of sentencing, all drawn from the beginning of the Sentencing Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000980\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EBut when I look at the purposes and principles of the Sentencing Act, I find that those purposes are only a few of the ones listed. The form does not, for example, allow the judge to decide that a one-third release would be offensive to the victim or to the community because it would fail to satisfy, for example, the purpose in section 7 of providing for the interests of the victim of the offence. If the victim is terrified and really needs to be reassured that the offender will not be out in 3 or 4 years, or perhaps 5 years if a court ever ordered the maximum sentence, then the court cannot find that that is sufficient reason to impose a non-parole period of 9 years or whatever, because the court cannot order a non-parole period of longer than two-thirds of the sentence.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000981\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003ESo why do this form and the section of the Parole Act to which it relates exclude providing for the interests of the victim of the offence? Why does the form also omit the purpose of promoting a sense of responsibility? How can an offender feel that the community is taking the offence seriously, when the offender hears a court order a sentence of, let us say, 12 years for a serious offence, and knows that he or she will be out in 4 years? And it will be 4 years for a number of very serious offenders. Take, for example, an offender who is liable to be deported at the end of the sentence: any offender who is liable to be deported at the end of the sentence must know that he or she will serve one-third\u2014the minimum\u2014because the Parole Board must be absolutely certain that such an offender can be no risk to the safety of the community at the end of his or her sentence! It is absolutely rational that every foreign thug who commits an offence in New Zealand, and is therefore liable to deportation, must know that when the court solemnly pronounces a sentence of 9 years or 12 years, at the most he or she will serve 3 or 4. How can that promote in the offender \u201Ca sense of responsibility for, and an acknowledgment of,\u201D the harm of the offence?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000982\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EYet the Minister of Justice has come here with his patch-up bill and has provided in Form 4, in schedule 2, that the only way in which a judge can give a longer non-parole period is by finding one of the four permitted purposes, but not any of the others. The judge cannot say that because the offender showed no remorse he or she will set a longer non-parole period, because that is not one of the purposes set out in Form 4, or in this part of the Act. Use of a weapon, particular cruelty, and premeditation are all aggravating factors, and one would have thought it was perfectly proper for a judge to take them into account and to say that therefore it would be offensive to the community to release the offender at one-third of the sentence, but the judge is not permitted to take those factors into account, as far as I can see.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022 data-id=\u0022c02d9e3dd9ec400b848c9b1f0016f5a7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000983\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c02d9e3dd9ec400b848c9b1f0016f5a7\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY (Labour\u2014Waitakere):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00227a3d58fcbe614bfab4f5826fbacd5aac\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 70\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 49\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000984\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Stephen Franks to clause 15 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000985\u0022\u003Eto omit this clause.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022aa8be46bcd9041d69331bd2643c38ac8\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 22\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 97\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000986\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Stephen Franks to clause 17 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000987\u0022\u003Eto omit this clause.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022eb413bf4ec4c4086b8f33319c97d6149\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 22\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 97\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000988\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 230 in the name of the Hon Phil Goff to clause 20 be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00223127f161d0c04ac68f4aef7e2717c9ad\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 70\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 49\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000989\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Dr Wayne Mapp be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000990\u0022\u003Eto insert, after clause 37, the following new clause:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000991\u0022\u003E37A\tSection 34 of the principal Act is amended by adding the following new subsection:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000992\u0022\u003E(4)\tUnder no circumstances will an offender be regarded as suitable for home detention if the offender has committed a violent offence or sexual offence.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00223e7a5eca6c6d4f65bb23b944b60c68be\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 57\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 62\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000993\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 230 in the name of the Hon Phil Goff to clause 36 and the subpart heading above it be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000994\u0022\u003EAmendment agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022ed18ec6a7b384654aea6aee8e2fbf598\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That Part 2 as amended be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 97\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 22\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 2 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000995\u0022\u003ESchedule 1 agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000996\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002271a8eea172664b6aa1e70118c7d1ff10\u0022\u003ESchedule 2  New forms substituted for Schedule of Sentencing Regulations 2002\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000997\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 230 in the name of the Hon Phil Goff to schedule 2 be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000998\u0022\u003EAmendment agreed to, and schedule 2 as amended agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84000999\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022ed27dad0649b4683a5cebe242dea34f9\u0022\u003EClauses 1 and 2\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022 data-id=\u00226de8134303e0477a96ccc14b9a62d108\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001000\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226de8134303e0477a96ccc14b9a62d108\u0022\u003ERICHARD WORTH (National\u2014Epsom):\u003C/span\u003E Madam Chair, I am just looking at raising a point of order before commencing my speech, but perhaps I will come back to it in a moment. It relates to the last vote.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001001\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dca486f0100c4c0f9889f2f383d0a28c\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: Shall we deal with it now?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001002\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022046f772d5e5a4946aa4b345551d5fedb\u0022\u003ERICHARD WORTH\u003C/span\u003E: Yes. I raise a point of order, Madam Chairperson. It relates to the last vote and whether it was appropriate that the question was put on schedule 1 as well as schedule 2. I am just looking at it quickly, as the vote took me by surprise. Madam Chair, I thought schedule 1 was concerned with Part 1\u2014I am just seeing whether that is so\u2014yet you took a vote on schedule 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001003\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221788a2f7d62b4bca84954002b7bf0b05\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: I shall just clarify the matter. That is how the schedules are dealt with now. They are put separately, with no debate. The actual debate is included with the debate on the parts of the bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001004\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f8d4911dc9744dffa0fbd888ad332427\u0022\u003ERICHARD WORTH\u003C/span\u003E: Right. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001005\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222e398fa5d5d6452bb652269ba3315c31\u0022\u003EHon Rick Barker\u003C/span\u003E: Has the member not read the Standing Orders report? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001006\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e39986baeea64a2d913ac5dd1874c0be\u0022\u003ERICHARD WORTH\u003C/span\u003E: I am well aware of the Standing Orders. It is excellent that that Minister is in the chair. He has had an easy ride tonight because he has chosen to stay out of the arguments. I will substantially confine myself to the title clause and commencement date, although, of course, as the Standing Orders make clear, the debate can be more wide ranging. I am sure the Minister is aware of that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001007\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003EThis legislation is called the Parole (Extended Supervision) and Sentencing Amendment Bill. I would argue that it is the purpose of a title, first of all, accurately to capture what the content of the bill is, and also correctly to describe it in legal terms. This title is right in that parole supervision provisions are extended in Part 1, and sentencing amendments are contained in Part 2. But Part 2 goes far beyond that. It makes amendments to a number of pieces of substantive legislation: the Misuse of Drugs Act, the Bail Act, and also subordinate legislation\u2014the Sentencing Regulations. So we have a case here\u2014and it may not be a matter of great moment except to those archivists who later come to research the history of these legislative changes\u2014that the title of the bill does not accurately reflect what its true content is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001008\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003EThe commencement provision is contained in clause 2. The plan is for the Act to come into force on the day after the date on which it receives the royal assent. That certainly is one of the legislative drafting possibilities. I think it is a pity, however, that, given the retrospective nature of some of the legislation, it was seen by the drafters as the best mechanism for its commencement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001009\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003EI would like to talk briefly in the time that remains about the issue of electronic monitoring. The reason for that is it relates quite directly to the certificate that the Attorney-General gave on the breach of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. Electronic monitoring has been with us for a while. It started off in New Zealand in about 1999, when it was picked up by the Department of Corrections to monitor offenders on home detention. We have in this bill a special condition requiring an offender to submit to electronic compliance with conditions relating to where he or she is. It usually involves an offender being fitted with a transmitter that continuously sends signals to a receiver. We have seen in recent times, with technological advances, the development of the Global Positioning System technology and other technologies that offer a tool for monitoring offenders in the community. The Global Positioning System has some distance to go. It is fitted to taxicabs with no great degree of reliability. I entertain similar doubts that, in trying to precisely pinpoint the location of offenders, there will be shortcomings in that process.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001010\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003EThe relevance of it, though, is directly related to the Attorney-General\u2019s report, because there were two issues expressed by the Attorney-General that were apparently of concern to her in the context of compliance with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. The first related to the issue of search and seizure as contained in the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. The argument is that, in terms of search and seizure, there is a need for additional information about the proposed method of electronic monitoring.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022 data-id=\u00220250cd7715724ae4a8139c1242754528\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001011\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220250cd7715724ae4a8139c1242754528\u0022\u003ERON MARK (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E Carrying on from the honourable Richard Worth, it is possibly the\u2014[Interruption]. He is honourable. He is an officer and a gentleman by royal decree. Not all men are born officers and gentlemen, are they Mr Worth? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001012\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EThis bill should be more appropriately entitled \u201CCleaning Up Our Mess: Tidying up the Problems That We Created Because We Did Not Listen\u201D, or \u201CKnow-it-all Legislation Corrected\u201D, or \u201CWe Have The Answers To All Your Problems\u2014Sometimes\u201D. Those are a number of titles that could be accorded this legislation. I say that because the simple fact is that we would not be here debating this legislation if it was not a fact that the original Parole Act 2002 was flawed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001013\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EWhat is good\u2014and I will compliment the Government on this, so the Government MPs need to listen up\u2014is that this bill is a good step in the right direction. This bill will make provisions tighter for dealing with those serious child sex offenders, but it does not go far enough to address the fundamental flaws that were passed into legislation with the Parole Act 2002. That is what New Zealand First cannot sign up to. By voting for this legislation, we would be endorsing the original fundamentally flawed legislation, and that we cannot do, because we think it is wrong. We think it is wrong because this legislation allows for violent offenders to be on home detention. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001014\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EI note that the Greens have voted to allow wife-beaters to have home detention. The Green Party that advocates so often for the rights of women, equality, and respect for women has voted to allow wife-beaters home detention. We do not agree. We do not approve of that in New Zealand First, and hence we will vote against it and tell everybody that the Greens do like it. They like the idea that wife-beaters should have home detention and be put in a position where they can bash women again. We do not agree with the fact that people voted against amendments that would have corrected that. The Opposition has done its very best to help the Government here. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001015\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EWe vote against this bill because the electronic compliance that this whole bill hinges on is already known to be flawed and faulty, and I will not bet the safety of a child against that. Sorry, but New Zealand First will not bet the safety of a child against that electronic monitoring. People talk about the global positioning system and the Government has been really quick to say\u2014and Mr Goff has said often\u2014that global positioning system technology enables us to know exactly where these people are. That is fine, but although Mr Goff might know where they are, he does not know what they are doing. It could well be that a sex offender who has gone home on home detention and is under 24/7 monitoring can be in the house, as required, but is offending, and the Government does not know it, and cannot do a thing about it until maybe the charges are recorded. We do not accept that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001016\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EThe Government should not to talk to me about how accurate the global positioning system is. We know it is very accurate, but if it is so accurate, how did those British SBS guys get arrested by the Iranians? They had global positioning systems on their boats, and yet those systems did not account for human frailty. Hence we have a very high-profile example of how all the wonders of science and technology still cannot stop a situation from going wrong. If this Government is prepared to bank on this technology and tell the House that it will defend and protect all the children, then fine. New Zealand First is not, and that is where we draw the line. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001017\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EI say to the Government that home detention is a jolly mess. It was never intended for violent offenders. The Opposition has tried desperately to move amendments and Supplementary Order Papers to reverse that decision, and regretfully, despite those attempts, the Government has rejected it. On that basis we cannot support the Parole (Extended Supervision) and Sentencing Amendment Bill. Had the Government shown some flexibility and ability to listen to the Opposition, as it failed to do when the Sentencing Act and Parole Act were passed in 2002, maybe we would be in a different position. But we are not, and that is the way it is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022 data-id=\u00222a902a572aa94ba381649e16e5212659\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001018\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222a902a572aa94ba381649e16e5212659\u0022\u003EJUDITH COLLINS (National\u2014Clevedon):\u003C/span\u003E I am really pleased to be able to say that New Zealand First, United Future, and ACT have joined with National to support an amendment that would see no home detention for violent offenders and sex offenders. It is really good that they have come to that decision and supported Wayne Mapp\u2019s amendment. But unfortunately, after all the rhetoric from the Minister and all the shouting out from the Labour benches, the Government has decided to side with the Greens and the Progressive Party against women and children\u2014as Dr Mapp so succinctly puts it. They are siding against the victims of violence and the victims of sex abuse. That shows the Government\u2019s true colours, which are that they are very much for the soft option when it comes to crime. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001019\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EThe biggest thing about this Parole (Extended Supervision) and Sentencing Amendment Act is its name, and that is about it. As my colleagues and I have said tonight, we are supporting it for one reason and one reason only: that it is at least a little move towards looking after the victims of child sex abuse. That is all it is, and it is only a little, teeny move. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001020\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E I know that the Government will get out after this bill is passed\u2014if it does, in fact, pass\u2014sing from the tops of trees and say that it is the most fantastic thing. It will say that the bill is the most fantastic thing for victims of child sex abuse, just like it said it would stop this automatic two-thirds parole. What a hollow promise that was! It was a cynical vote-buying attempt, and, unfortunately, too many people\u2014even those on this side of the House\u2014believed that the Government meant what it said. Unfortunately, it was just a cynical move by the Minister of Justice, the Hon Phil Goff, to get a few votes. He has been and will be forever condemned by it, because we know that that man is soft on crime, just like his Government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001021\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EI notice that he has not taken a call tonight. I notice that he has not stood up for his bill. I notice that he does not care enough to take a call, and that has to be commented on. It is pretty appalling when the Minister in charge of the bill really does not care enough even to take a call. What he has put to us instead is a lot of Supplementary Order Papers. Instead of getting these things sorted out beforehand\u2014instead of working with the select committee\u2014he turned up afterwards with a whole raft of amendments. Of course, we got them at the last moment, and we are supposed to agree or not agree on them. It treats us in Parliament with a great deal of contempt when these sorts of matters are brought in at the last moment with no discussion, no opportunity to take them to caucus, no opportunity to talk to our electorates about them, and no opportunity at all to have an input into them. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EThat shows just what contempt Mr Goff obviously feels in relation to this particular area. Obviously parole, extended supervision, and sentencing amendment bills are not nearly as much fun as foreign affairs. Quite clearly, the Minister of Justice has lost the plot when it comes to justice. He is now the \u201CMinister of Overseas Travel\u201D and is only slightly behind \u201CHoliday Helen Clark\u201D in her particular movements overseas. Justice has been left in the very shaky hands of several Associate Ministers of Justice, and unfortunately, despite the attempts they have made, they are not really coming to grips with it. That is why we get this sort of legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001023\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EAny attempt made by members on this side of the House to toughen such legislation up and give it a bit of spine is treated with a dismissive wave and a \u201CNo, we will not vote for that, because it was not our idea.\u201D This Government continues to treat the victims of crime with contempt, continues to wave away any view that is not its own, and continues to be able to oversell its spin on these sorts of amendments to try to get what it wants. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022 data-id=\u00221588d316ca5b4e1cb612c48eb3668d2a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001024\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221588d316ca5b4e1cb612c48eb3668d2a\u0022\u003ESTEPHEN FRANKS (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E The title of this bill is the Parole (Extended Supervision) and Sentencing Amendment Bill. The Minister has tabled Supplementary Order Paper 229 to divide it into the component parts, and, of course, it will be renamed then, but nothing in clause 1 properly reflects the real driver of this bill. This bill is an attempt to protect the Privacy Act. It is an attempt to avoid using ordinary common sense, which would allow New Zealanders to do what they have done with sex offenders for generations until now. What ordinary communities did with child sex offenders up until the last 30 years\u2014and, indeed, until the Privacy Act and the emergence of the whole \u201Cwe know best\u201D movement in the criminal justice establishment\u2014was to try them in open court. Everyone in the community knew whom the sex offenders were. They were not lynched; they were not hounded to death. They went back to their communities, and the communities, who knew the temptations such offenders were subject to, made sure that they did not get a second chance at offending. Sex offenders did get a second chance at working, at trying to rebuild their lives, and at being part of the community, although they were always suspected. This bill states that instead of communities being allowed to know whom the offenders are, they should leave it to the justice establishment  and the experts to do the monitoring of sex offenders. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001025\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EThis bill could have been an opportunity to resolve once and for all the hassle between the police, the Department of Corrections, and all the other do-gooders employed by the Government over whether it is proper for the police to go around a community and tell people just what kind of exposure they are facing\u2014to go and warn people when there is a paedophile in the community who may be hanging around a school. This bill could have been a chance to confirm that it was entirely in order for people to know that. This bill could also have been the Minister\u2019s chance to do his own version of my colleague Deborah Coddington\u2019s Sex Offenders Registry Bill. Instead, we have the Hon Phil Goff\u2019s Supplementary Order Paper 223, which is not reflected at all in the title of the bill or in clause 1, and is a piece of bureaucratic bumf. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001026\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EThis bill is the outcome\u2014which the Justice and Electoral Committee was not allowed to see\u2014of the dispute between the various agencies about how far they can go in sharing information about sex offenders. When we asked officials at the committee why they did not just use the provisions of the Privacy Act that state the privacy principles are subject to law enforcement purposes, they told us in a sort of\u2014I would have to say\u2014embarrassed way that discussions were continuing. They had not resolved the proper form of the protocols that were being developed between the agencies. What protocols? Why was there the slightest doubt about that issue? What has made the justice system\u2014which was once open court justice, where the facts would have been out in public, the conviction would have been known to everyone, and anyone who wanted to find out could simply have looked at the court register\u2014into a system whereby the last residues of open justice are being buried in information-sharing protocols? We have two full pages of rules about managing the risk. What about minimising the risk? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001027\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EThe Supplementary Order Paper that purports to allow information sharing at the same time states that nothing limits the operation of the Privacy Act or of section 182 of the principal Act. That insertion into the Corrections Act states that the Department of Corrections, the Department of Child, Youth and Family Services, Housing New Zealand Corporation, the Ministry of Social Development, the New Zealand Police, and any sector agency named by the Minister can share information for some very limited purposes. If that had been mentioned, and if the people had realised that Mr Goff\u2019s vaunted extended supervision was a substitute for people being allowed to know themselves whom the offenders were\u2014a substitute for open justice being used for the purpose for which it was intended\u2014he would not be able to trumpet it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022e68727045b2e4b8e97af417ca2f7e0eb\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote  was called for on the question, That clause 1 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 93\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; Green Party 5; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 26\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand First 13; Green Party 4; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 1 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00224d41801d92ff42d3bb3d6feba849c958\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That clause 2 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 97\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 22\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 2 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001028\u0022\u003EThe Committee divided the bill into the Parole (Extended Supervision) Amendment Bill and the Sentencing Amendment Bill (No 2), pursuant to Supplementary Order Paper 229.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001029\u0022\u003EBill reported with amendment.\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001030\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022aa959559f79f426ea9738146bd1b59e9\u0022\u003EParole (Extended Supervision) Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001031\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022aa959559f79f426ea9738146bd1b59e9\u0022\u003ESentencing Amendment Bill (No 2)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001032\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022de148661522b4c2095ed022ed7243ee4\u0022\u003EThird Readings\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022 data-id=\u002264de435e48564d87a1c18881b6ca69a0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001033\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E, on behalf of the\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002264de435e48564d87a1c18881b6ca69a0\u0022\u003EHon RICK BARKER (Associate Minister of Justice) \u003C/span\u003EMinister of Justice: I move, That the Parole (Extended Supervision) Amendment Bill and the Sentencing Amendment Bill (No 2) be now read a third time. The passage of this legislation will establish in New Zealand for the first time an active monitoring regime for high-risk child sex offenders living in the community. Child sex offenders are known to be, in many cases, compulsive repeat offenders. The bill establishes a new regime that allows extended supervision orders to be imposed on child sex offenders who are likely to continue to sexually victimise children once their sentences are finished. In order to address the issues for those who are sentenced under the old laws, this legislation has transitional, limited, retrospective provisions that may be brought forward to apply to those high-risk offenders who are still in prison and subject to release conditions at the time of the introduction of this legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001034\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EExtended supervision will be made available to those who are eligible for it, the high and medium to high-risk child sex offenders, for a period of up to 10 years. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001035\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EI do not want to go on much more about that, except to say that this has been an interesting debate. It has been one in which there have been measured contributions, and I do appreciate the positive contributions made by Opposition MPs. It has been very interesting to note that the Opposition has voted with the Government on many occasions on this legislation. I accept that Opposition members agree with the direction of the legislation, but qualify that by saying it does not go far enough. The Government feels that in fact we have made significant advances, and that this legislation should be seen in the context of the other legislative changes this Government has made. We have made significant changes to deal with the issues in terms of these types of people. For example, we have widened the scope of preventive detention\u2014something the previous administration left for some time. It is also interesting to note that more people are being denied parole, that the provisions are being tightened, and that we now have an amendment in this legislation that gives better facilities for the sharing of information by Government agencies, to help improve the manner in which we can deal with these people. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001036\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EI am sure that Parliament will be very pleased with the legislation we have passed, and I am confident that it will be effective in protecting the people we seek to protect. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022 data-id=\u00224f389550c1d246b898fcf9fc8b62315a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001037\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224f389550c1d246b898fcf9fc8b62315a\u0022\u003ERICHARD WORTH (National\u2014Epsom):\u003C/span\u003E As I gaze across to the Government benches on the opposite side of the Chamber and see the crowd of members present\u2014and I look specifically at Marian Hobbs, at Mark Peck, at the two whips of the Labour Government, at Helen Duncan, at a widely alert Parekura Horomia, at the Minister in charge of the bill, at David Parker, and at Lianne Dalziel\u2014I pause to reflect on how they will judge the contribution they have made tonight to this significant legislation. The reality is that apart from the Minister, no one else has uttered a word of any substance, at all. A number of people have successfully taken closure motions, and the whips have apparently cast votes accurately on behalf of the Labour Party, but apart from that the Labour members have contributed nothing. I think it is a great shame that in a Chamber that should be a place of public debate, the Government members sit silently and sullenly waiting for the close of business on this legislation, when the House is in urgency on 29 June. It is instructive to note that the second reading of this legislation has followed from a Justice and Electoral Committee report presented on 14 June 2004. As I had the opportunity of saying at an earlier part in the debate, it is quite surprising that since the original bill was presented to the House for its second reading, the Government has found 17 shortfalls in this legislation, necessitating a scurry of amendments. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001038\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003EMr Barker has spoken of, and properly acknowledged, the reservations that National has in support of this legislation. We have voted in favour of most of the major provisions, but we have done so with a reservation, because really all that we see of merit and intrinsic worth in this legislation is the introduction of a new, extended supervision regime that will manage high-risk child sex offenders. It would be great if we could say that the legislation had within it the mechanisms to actively\u2014and I underscore that word\u2014manage high-risk child sex offenders, but the history of the supervision of offenders by the agencies responsible for that task is unfortunately lamentable. That was identified very clearly for us the other day by the chairman of the New Zealand Parole Board, in the comments he made when he realised with surprise just how poor that supervision was. Parole supervision starts with a bang but very much ends with a whimper, and the consequence is, unfortunately, a hugely high rate of recidivism. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001039\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003EI have spoken in the course of the debate about the particular clauses that cause a degree of concern to National, and I have also noted that this legislation is amongst that where the Attorney-General has given a certificate that it infringes the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act\u2014not only in one respect but in two. When I last looked at that issue, which was about half a year ago, I found that no fewer than 19 statutes had been passed in the term of the present Government\u2014and presumably the number is much higher than that now\u2014where the Government had pushed on recklessly in the face of determinations by the Attorney-General that there had been breaches, of various degrees of egregiousness, in respect of the civil rights legislation. That is a great pity. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001040\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003EIt is also right to say that the select committee that sat in judgment on this legislation did something to improve it. But it still remains the case that the whole regime of parole has become overly sophisticated, complex, and beset with qualifications, elaborations, and ambiguities. With the open-weave legislation style that has been adopted, an opportunity is provided for the courts to actively intervene and gloss up the gaps in the legislation that seem to require the interpretative aid. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001041\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003EI will just conclude by saying that it has proved possible, in the context of looking at the problems that child sex offenders cause to the community, to identify the factors that increase the risk of sexual recidivism against children. The key factors seem to be, first, the age of onset of the offending. It seems to be the case that the younger the offender, the greater the risk is of reoffending, particularly for those people who are under the age of 25. Second, it seems clear that those who offend against boys rather than girls pose a greater risk of reoffending, although I was interested to see on television this evening that increasing consideration is being given to dealing with the problem of those female offenders who have lurked for a substantial period undetected in the community. The third aspect is whether the victim is a stranger or a relative, for it seems to be the case that there is a greater likelihood of reoffending where the victims are strangers. Then there are the issues of previous offending history, and finally, to the extent that therapy is available, of whether the particular offender has embarked on a course of therapy and completed it, or has failed in that process. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001042\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003EThis legislation is about to go to the further step of obtaining the Royal assent, yet National judges it to be not without blotches. Certainly, in the context of the policy National plans to announce on 4 July this year in connection with law and order, a lot of this material will not sit well with that policy. We can confidently expect, when National comes to power in May 2005, that legislation of this type will significantly come under the blowtorch and is likely to be substantially changed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022 data-id=\u002293b51a8114d745b784bebb0f7f337481\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002293b51a8114d745b784bebb0f7f337481\u0022\u003ELIANNE DALZIEL (Labour\u2014Christchurch East):\u003C/span\u003E I wish to speak in the third reading of the Parole (Extended Supervision) Amendment Bill and the Sentencing Amendment Bill (No 2). The National Opposition spokesperson on justice has commented on the excellent contribution of the Minister, who has represented the Government\u2019s position very well tonight, and I would like to fully endorse that. The Minister has represented the Government\u2019s position on behalf of us all. I am fully supportive of these two bills. I reject the assertion of the National Opposition spokesperson that this legislation in fact offends against the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. Ongoing monitoring actually protects against further offending and against there being further victims of sexual offences. The Justice and Electoral Committee report acknowledged that some people do not regard that as a punishment, but as a sensible protection on both sides of the equation. I just want to place on record that I am one of those. I do not regard such monitoring as a punishment. I regard it as a sensible protection and a sensible course of action for this House to follow, and I endorse the legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022 data-id=\u0022cabb53f5c43848c49ace2553a71ba4f5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001044\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022cabb53f5c43848c49ace2553a71ba4f5\u0022\u003EDAIL JONES (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E On behalf of New Zealand First and as the Opposition spokesperson on justice for New Zealand First, I wish to remind the House that New Zealand First reaffirms its opposition to the Parole Act of 2002 and the Sentencing Act of 2002. That was our policy then and it continues to be our policy now. I see tonight the National Party are cuddling up to the Labour Government on this particular legislation, and at this hour of the night that must be quite a cuddle! When the National Party supports the Labour Government, it tends to be described as cuddling up to the Labour Government, and we do not support cuddling up to the Labour Government in the second reading and following. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001045\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EAs soon as we had a close look at our policy\u2014the two new members; Edwin Perry and myself\u2014we realised where New Zealand First stood on the matter, and we have constantly opposed this legislation in the House tonight. We take the view that this legislation should be repealed now. The National Party comes up with some sort of policy that perhaps sometime after 2005 something might happen to this legislation, but we want to see all of it go now. That is our policy. We do not accept any amendments to it at all; it should all go. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001046\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EThis legislation allows high-risk sexual offenders more freedom and to be able to get out into the community more. That is what will happen under the Parole Board\u2019s view of these matters. Once it sees high-risk sexual offenders being allowed to go out into the community, it will grant more parole. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001047\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EThere was an interesting comment from the Minister. He said that more people are being denied parole. That is right; he said more people are being denied parole today. That is because today, under the Labour Government\u2019s legislation, more people can apply for parole. If one can apply for parole after one-third of a sentence rather than two-thirds, it is mathematically certain that more people will apply for parole, and more people will be denied parole. So there is no point in the Minister saying that more people are being denied parole today than before; it is only because more people can apply for it under this Labour Government legislation, which New Zealand First does not support\u2014as the Rt Hon Winston Peters made clear when the party opposed both the Parole Act and the Sentencing Act in May 2002. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001048\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EWe do not support a system that allows high-risk sex offenders, for example, to be let out about one-third of the way through their sentences. We say that they should stay in prison until the end of their sentences; and then only if they have shown remorse, with perhaps some degree of rehabilitation, then for them there should be the type of extended supervision mentioned in this legislation, after the completion of their sentences. It is a good idea, but only after those people complete their sentences. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001049\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EVarious amendments were put forward during the Committee stage of this legislation by the ACT party, and I think New Zealand First supported every one of them. We supported every ACT amendment on this issue, because only ACT and New Zealand First have remained consistent with their voting in May 2002 and have continued to oppose the Sentencing Act and the Parole Act. Many other amendments were put, including one put forward by the National Party, and New Zealand First supported with an open mind the National Party amendment to add a new clause 37A. The clause said: \u201CUnder no circumstances will an offender be regarded as suitable for home detention if they have committed a violent offence or sexual offence.\u201D Well, that is totally consistent with our policy, and I am glad the National Party is picking up New Zealand First policy, but it does that all the time, does it not? So we are not at all surprised to see our policy being mirrored in National Party policy yet again. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001050\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EThere was a referendum in New Zealand not too long ago, in which 92 percent of New Zealanders wanted tougher legislation. They did not really get it in the Parole Act and the Sentencing Act in 2002, and that is why we opposed that legislation. It is interesting that only recently in this House, 0.3 percent of people in New Zealand society\u2014homosexuals and lesbians\u2014wanted a form of legislation, and this minority Labour Government has given it to them. That shows where the priorities of this minority Labour Government are. It will not support tougher legislation, as New Zealand First would do on sentencing and parole, but it will support very, very readily the 0.3 percent of the community who want a certain type of lifestyle\u2014a type of lifestyle that is not lived by 99.7 percent of our society. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001051\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003E That shows up this Labour Party for what it is. It has no heart for tough legislation. This legislation is totally out of order, in the sense that those people should be made to continue their sentences. The minority Labour Government, if it had wanted to adopt that policy, could have brought in legislation to that effect, just as it has brought in legislation for homosexuals and lesbians. It has failed to do so, and that shows the weakness of the Government on law and order matters.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220ed9ad81-05c1-4171-80c6-24fa02cade42\u0022 data-id=\u00227685d6d74b0f43be943657e6ced915a2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001052\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ed9ad81-05c1-4171-80c6-24fa02cade42\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227685d6d74b0f43be943657e6ced915a2\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich)\u003C/span\u003E: Green Party members are next and they wish to have two speakers with 5 minutes each. The bell will be at 4 minutes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002285712e72-b25f-4850-b4d9-90035064fde3\u0022 data-id=\u00223897a9e0cafc4589863369b72942c73f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001053\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285712e72-b25f-4850-b4d9-90035064fde3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223897a9e0cafc4589863369b72942c73f\u0022\u003ENANDOR TANCZOS (Green):\u003C/span\u003E Like Mr Worth, I would like to refer to some of the contributions of previous speakers. It has been instructive and interesting to hear members across the Chamber talk about the different and very serious issues that this legislation raises. We could characterise the contributions from the National Party, New Zealand First, and ACT as basically saying that the legislation does not go far enough, that it is weak legislation, and it is just showing the Government\u2019s soft-on-crime credentials. As is usually the case, that has been done without offering any real solutions as to how those things should be fixed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001054\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285712e72-b25f-4850-b4d9-90035064fde3\u0022\u003EI say that, but it is not quite fair, because New Zealand First and ACT did offer some solutions\u2014unworkable solutions, rhetorical devices, meaningless and impractical\u2014but they did offer solutions, unlike the National Party members, who criticised but had nothing to say about how they would address this serious problem and, given that the legislation does not go far enough, what they would do to make it go further. Of course, National does not need to express a policy, because it will leave that to ACT and New Zealand First, which are desperate to get in on the tough-on-crime rhetoric for the last week that they can claim that prize. Come Sunday, all their policies will be stolen by Dr Brash! Mr Worth has told us exactly what will happen. He said that it would be on 4 July\u2014a good date, in deference to their American idol.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001055\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022695d157c39ec447386bf43ea21c1d1b7\u0022\u003EDarren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: Without reservation!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001056\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285712e72-b25f-4850-b4d9-90035064fde3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002206599ab2c05741d6bd1e1a127968ef10\u0022\u003ENANDOR TANCZOS\u003C/span\u003E: That is right. So Mr Brash will be stealing the policies of ACT and New Zealand First on Sunday in order to have another attempt at pushing the emotional buttons of the New Zealand electorate to get a quick rush in the polls. It will be interesting to see whether that works for the National Party. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001057\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002222b25cd300af4667bf0b9a2920017793\u0022\u003EDarren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: But it\u2019s never the same the morning after.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001058\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285712e72-b25f-4850-b4d9-90035064fde3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d24e509d95894442b4979154ae2cf334\u0022\u003ENANDOR TANCZOS\u003C/span\u003E: That is right. Who knows what sort of headache they will wake up with? This is serious legislation. At the heart of the debate is a real question about whether extending supervision is double jeopardy and whether it is punishment. The Justice and Electoral Committee talked a lot about the issue. Lianne Dalziel spoke very strongly at the committee and made her point just now in the debate on the third reading. Her opinion is that it is not punishment. I think that that is a semantic device to get around the problem. I do not see how we can say that adding restrictions to a person against his or her will is not a punishment of some form. The question is whether that punishment is justified, and I have already indicated to the House this evening that I think it is justified in light of the serious risk and the serious consequences we are talking about when it comes to child sex offenders. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001059\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285712e72-b25f-4850-b4d9-90035064fde3\u0022\u003EUnfortunately the Committee did not support my Supplementary Order Paper that proposed a sunset clause. One of the things we have to remember is that this legislation was an attempt to patch up and fix up a legacy of National Government inactivity during its last term in Government. Many of the people sentenced today under the Sentencing Act 2002\u2014the kinds of people we are talking about\u2014are likely to get preventive detention, which would allow restrictions and supervision to be put on them for the rest of their lives. That did not happen under the old regime. One of the principal things about this bill is that it is an attempt to create a situation to catch those people who were sentenced to a finite sentence under the old regime. They have been in prison because they are too high a risk to let out, and, because they have reached the end of their sentence, no supervisional restrictions can be put on them. It is unfortunate that that sunset clause did not get picked up. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001060\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285712e72-b25f-4850-b4d9-90035064fde3\u0022\u003EI do support the legislation, but let us not forget that it is a patch-up. The real issue is about how we increase justice and how we reduce crime. It is not about sentencing. It is about justice. What we need is a package of solutions that will reduce crime in this country. That means we have to start focusing on early intervention and crime prevention, and start moving away from an adversarial system that is concerned only with technical questions of guilt and innocence. We have to take restorative justice and M\u0101ori justice processes more seriously. We have to look at prison reform. We should look at the Roper report, which was written in 1989 and has a lot to teach us today, and we should look at reintegration.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022 data-id=\u00220124c128cf454f88a2c86679ac47123f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001061\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220124c128cf454f88a2c86679ac47123f\u0022\u003EKEITH LOCKE (Green):\u003C/span\u003E As members will gather from my colleague\u2019s speech, the Green Party is not directly opposed to all these issues, even though we are dividing our vote. We just weigh the considerations a bit differently. We have to seriously weigh up the question, when Parliament brings in measures that are intrusive of privacy, of whether the benefit outweighs the cost to the community as a whole. Privacy is continually under challenge on two counts. There is a long-standing desire of State agencies\u2014not just in New Zealand but also in other countries\u2014to get greater surveillance powers. Unfortunately the speed of technological change and the efficiency of modern surveillance technology, with satellites, global positioning systems, and computers, make surveillance so much easier to do. But when one is bringing in an intrusive surveillance measure, one has to judge it according to recognised privacy criteria. Tim McBride, on behalf of the Auckland Council for Civil Liberties, in his submission referred to the four-part test of the former Canadian Privacy Commissioner in 2002. He said that any new measure must meet the following requirements. It must be demonstrably necessary, in order to meet some specific need; it must be demonstrably likely to be effective in achieving its intended purpose; the intrusion of privacy must be proportional to the societal benefit to be derived; and it must be demonstrable that no other, less privacy-intrusive measure, would suffice to achieve the same purpose. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001062\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThose who have promoted the electronic monitoring surveillance system have not justified it. It is not just about child sex offenders, because, now that the Minister\u2019s amendment has passed, it is even worse. It applies to all parolees and, as amended, it does not even need to meet the test of undue risk to the community on behalf of the parolee. It can apply more generally. If the special conditions are that the parolee should not go to a certain place or places at any particular time, then that can be subject to the electronic monitoring by the global positioning system to test that the parolee is meeting that condition. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001063\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThat is a very general power. If we allow that to go through without any particular argument as to why we need it and without looking at the real balance, we do not have any real defence against its extension beyond parolees to people on bail for all offences. It becomes an easy technology to use, and we start to go down a very bad track. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001064\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EPeople have said in this debate that New Zealand is now at the cutting edge of this type of surveillance system. We are a test case for its international application. I do not think, given that we are moving bit by bit towards a surveillance state in terms of ID card systems that are coming in one way or another, and greater electronic interception systems, that we should go down an extra surveillance path without a very good reason. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001065\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThere are other ways of going about the problem for the particular group that is discussed in this legislation\u2014sex offenders. SAFE, in its submission, stated that there is a lot we can do to deal with the problem of recidivism in high-risk offenders by the agencies working together. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001066\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003E To move to a surveillance state does not make us safer, because it only leads to a more anxious, less-empowered populace who feel a sense of antagonism towards the State if they are under surveillance, and that leads to insecurity and to more crime. It does not lead to a better society and, of course, despite what Lianne Dalziel states, these provisions offend the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. Margaret Wilson said so in her very strong criticism of this legislation. She said very clearly that it offends section 26(2) of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. It also offends section 21 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act and there is absolutely no reason why Parliament should go ahead against Margaret Wilson on this issue and against all the other people who made submissions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022 data-id=\u0022730f9f04b0104f42bdf8a17c51e51d13\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001067\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022730f9f04b0104f42bdf8a17c51e51d13\u0022\u003EMARC ALEXANDER (United Future):\u003C/span\u003E I rise for United Future to speak on the third readings of these bills, and I have to preface what I want to say by making the observation that I was quite interested to hear Dail Jones from New Zealand First come out as the super crime-fighter talking tough and saying the word \u201Ctough\u201D so often that we got the impression that he was trying to make himself believe his sense of toughness. It almost seems to me that he wants to go the full hog and to try to outdo the toughness of everybody else. He is going to institute a policy of mandatory life sentence and pray for reincarnation so that he could re-imprison the infant when reborn again, to show just how tough he and New Zealand First really are. Of course they are not very tough at all. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001068\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225f088fa176fd41728da3f75da0917fb6\u0022\u003EStephen Franks\u003C/span\u003E: They\u2019re wimps.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001069\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ea2a174ecf534ca3b99b9411e4cfb704\u0022\u003EMARC ALEXANDER\u003C/span\u003E: That is exactly right\u2014they are absolute wimps. They are not in favour of crucifixion, they are not in favour of flogging, and they are not afraid of eating at Bellamy\u2019s. What I would like to say though, getting a bit more serious, is that we should have a look at the victimisation survey. In 2001, there were 70,000 sex offences, not including rape, in this country. That is a very high rate of crime in New Zealand, and despite the rhetoric of the behavioural apologists, the recidivism rate for sex offenders shoots up to 70 percent if we take a 22-year study and have a look at what they do. They may not reoffend quite so quickly in the early years, but in 22 years it shoots up to 70 percent, and that compares with an 86 percent recidivism rate for all offences. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001070\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022\u003ESo it is a very high recidivism rate, and the damage done by sex offenders is enormous. It destroys young children if that is whom they prey upon\u2014it destroys families and rips them apart. The hardest thing for most families to cope with is to see the destructive force of those sexual predators on their children. It is absolutely heartbreaking. These are the most vulnerable members of our society and they are preyed upon by a number of these sex offenders. Of course they prey on others, besides children, but particularly in regard to vulnerable children it seems all the more poignant that we do not have legislation in place to deal effectively with them. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001071\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022\u003EI have three major concerns\u2014first of all, the recognition that the sentences were too lenient in the first place, and that has not really been addressed by this legislation; it is a patch-up job. Secondly, the recognition that our parole provisions are a joke: 86 percent of individuals are back in prison within 5 years, most of them let out through the parole provisions after one-third of their sentence. It is pathetic. Thirdly, the culture that the rights of the offender are, when in conflict with the rights of the victim, often given primary importance, has got to change. At some point we have to make a value judgment and say that victims\u2019 rights and the rights of the law-abiding should supersede that of offenders. This should be made a standard practice. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001072\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022\u003EAt some point we must recognise that the good guys\u2014the victims and the law-abiding\u2014have rights that supersede those of the offenders. We cannot say that often enough. A sentence must give full consideration in retribution to the interests of the victim. It should not be circumvented, shortened, or given a discount. That is exactly what parole does\u2014it revisits the sentence and says it was too much. What has changed? What amelioration has there been in the impact of the crime on the victim? Absolutely none! Yet we are giving a discount. That has got to change. I do hope the Parole Board is listening to this debate and that the probation service is taking note of the concerns raised in the debate and is taking them on board, because they will be held to account for this, as will the Government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001073\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022\u003EOne thing I would like to highlight is that according to the Attorney-General the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act was a cause of concern. Well, again, we are talking about the wrong thing. Whose rights? The rights of the victim must take supreme position over those of the offender. Quite frankly, when an offender has already made the choice to offend and has been incarcerated and dealt with, the offender has made a choice and that offender\u2019s rights are of lesser concern. The real villains of the piece\u2014the music behind the sad operatic tourniquet on the bleeding stump of what passes for our criminal justice system\u2014are the Sentencing Act and the Parole Act, of 2002. They are the clowns that maintain the circus of our justice parody, and until they are dealt with, until they are dragged back into this House and dealt with properly, until the provisions of the parole system have been duly altered to reflect the 92 percent who wanted tougher and more justifiable sentencing, we cannot proceed down the path of giving true justice to the people of this county. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001074\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022\u003EUnited Future will support this bill because it is better than not supporting it. We have to support it because it would be on our conscience not to support it and to allow predators out of prison to prey on unsuspecting, innocent victims. But it is the Parole and Sentencing Acts that must be brought to trial for their culpability in allowing this farce to continue. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022 data-id=\u0022021b1da63d21425da28da59316a41af7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001075\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022021b1da63d21425da28da59316a41af7\u0022\u003ESTEPHEN FRANKS (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E It is interesting that when the United Future spokesman was summarising he managed to characterise the Parole Act and the Sentencing Act as villains to be dragged back into this House to be dealt with. Of course, it is very hard for United Future members to look in the mirror or to look at the people they sit amongst and admit that those Acts passed by this Government would not be operating if United Future had used its vote to bring the Government down. United Future has propped up this Government, and, in the end, it cannot wash its hands of the fact that this Government has maintained an attitude that is completely at odds with United Future\u2019s values on almost every issue that United Future says it holds dear. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001076\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EHowever, I am in a curious position on this legislation. I support Margaret Wilson\u2019s views entirely. I support what Margaret Wilson said about this legislation because she was right. This legislation trashes an ancient and very valuable principle\u2014the principle against double jeopardy. It is explicitly retrospective, and quite unnecessarily so. I am sorry that people seem to feel there is a sort of macho credit in asserting that retrospectivity does not rank when it is weighed against the interests of victims. That is not a necessary balance. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001077\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EIt was perfectly in order for Margaret Wilson to have written what she did and for the solution to be very obvious\u2014and the solution does not ignore victims\u2019 interests. Victims\u2019 interests would have been just as well\u2014in fact, probably better\u2014secured simply by dumping the foolish privacy provisions that restrict or discourage the police, and every other authority who has knowledge about these sex offenders, from warning people who could be vulnerable. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001078\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EIt would be very simple for the authorities to tell the communities in which these people settle exactly what they have done\u2014simply to advise the communities of the proceedings in open court, the conclusions of the court, and the sentence that has been served, and to warn people to keep an eye out. The community does not need to rely on the agencies and the Government officials who believe they know best and that they should be the only ones allowed this information. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001079\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EThere was a solution that would have been perfectly consistent with Margaret Wilson\u2019s warnings about the grave breach of established principle and with the interests of prospective victims. If the 44 people for whom the worst form of retrospectivity is reserved in this legislation had been named and had their photos published, the entire community would have made sure they were kept out of temptation\u2019s way. That disclosure would have been completely consistent with longstanding principles of justice. If the courts remained transparent, we would not be pressured to impose fresh sentences of supervision after the men serve their time. We would not be creating that dangerous precedent of going back and, effectively, resentencing. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001080\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EThere is no getting around the fact that this is a new law to confine people for what they may be thinking of doing, not for what they have done. It has been a proud boast of our law for centuries that it punishes people for what it is proven they have done, not for what some authority or expert theorises they might want to do. We have to remember that despite the grave figures for reoffending by sex offenders, even the best predictions about the worst of those offenders are right less than 50 percent of the time. In other words, we will confine offenders on suspicion that they may reoffend, and we know that at least 50 percent of them will not do so. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001081\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EThere are far better ways of dealing with this, and the first is to have decent sentences. The second would be to trust New Zealanders and communities. When these people go out into communities, their neighbours should know what they have done. Everyone should be keeping an eye open for them. When they get into a position of temptation they should be harried out of it by vigilant police. There are not so many of them that that is an unreasonable burden. If the community knew, they would ring the police as soon as they were suspicious. ACT would substantially increase the sentences for what those offenders do, and there should be supervision at the end of every new sentence, but that would not override our ancient principles. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001082\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EThis is an attempt by the Government\u2014and, it seems, by every other party in this House, other than New Zealand First, which is voting for this legislation\u2014to preserve the discredited Privacy Act. I say to Mr Alexander that the 10 or 15-year-old theory that privacy stands ahead of every victim is what is being protected here, not the victim. This legislation is to protect the Privacy Commissioner and those absurd privacy codes. It asserts retrospectivity by Mr Goff as if it were a badge of honour. He should know that it is a badge of shame for any Minister of Justice. For once I will say that I honour Margaret Wilson for being so uncompromising in her comments on this legislation. She was right. If only she had insisted in Cabinet on a solution that then fitted with her conclusions. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001083\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EThis legislation also omits the other changes that should have been made in the Parole Act and the Sentencing Act. This legislation makes some absolutely ludicrous changes. The Supplementary Order Paper I put forward was a solution that would have helped Mr Goff politically. When he faces Don Brash\u2019s speech on Sunday he will wish he had accepted the advice of the Parole Board, which he appears to want to keep. There is no place for parole, but he wants it. He would wish that he had accepted at least the urging of the ACT party over last month that the Parole Board be allowed to consider the purposes of sentencing. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EDeterrence, denunciation, and accountability are all of legitimate interest to victims. They are all legitimate interests for the Parole Board to take into account. Instead, the board is very carefully confined to one role and one role only\u2014to unpick the sentences given by the courts. According to the anointed that surround the Minister of Justice, the courts cannot be trusted. They may actually sentence people to a term of imprisonment that delivers some sense of balance. They may even give a retributive sentence. The Minister could not stand that idea, so his Parole Act made sure that the Parole Board deliberates in secret to unpick the decisions of open courts, and is allowed to take into account only what Mr Goff calls protection of the public. Protection is only one of the four recognised purposes of sentencing. He would have done well to accept my amendments that would enable the Parole Board to look at the other purposes. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001085\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EThe legislation also provides for the courts now to have more simplified grounds for setting a non-parole period. In my opinion, the non-parole period will now be seen by judges\u2014were that regime to last\u2014as the important part of their sentencing. Judges know that the non-parole period is now regarded by the public as the real sentence. The courts now have a near open sesame to set the real sentence through non-parole periods. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001086\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EAs I read the new criteria, section 86 of the Sentencing Act is now no longer confined to extraordinary or unusual cases. Judges will now be able to use it to set a sentence they want, with one qualification: this legislation does not allow them to go past the two-thirds of a sentence parole threshold. All that has done is restore the position for the courts to where the National Party had left it automatically for violent offenders. Parole was not available for serious violent offenders before two-thirds of a sentence had been served under the National Party\u2019s much maligned legislation. It was rightly maligned. It did not allow truth in sentencing. However, we have a Minister of Justice who stands up in this House almost every day when questioned about parole and brays about having got rid of automatic release. He has now given the courts the power to stop early release, but stopped it at what was automatic for the National Party. That is so cynical, and it will be amusing to watch him wriggle and struggle over the next week or two to persuade people of the toughness of a policy that was anything but.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022 data-id=\u0022d8386372993b480eae71f1ea8454bbee\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d8386372993b480eae71f1ea8454bbee\u0022\u003EDr WAYNE MAPP (National\u2014North Shore):\u003C/span\u003E The Government may not like to hear that it voted against disallowing home detention for violent and sexual offenders. It had the opportunity tonight to fix up a glaring omission\u2014one that it is questioned on time and again in the House\u2014and the Minister tried to say it is all right. The Government had the opportunity tonight to vote to stop that, and it failed. All the Opposition parties, with the exception of the Government\u2019s little helpers, the Green Party, voted in support of that proposal. Why did the Government not do that? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001088\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EI want to make this very brief point. On Sunday there will be a revolution in our criminal justice system. The public will get a real choice. This Government will be left hapless and helpless, because it introduced parole eligibility at one-third of the sentence. The Government stands condemned for that and will be forever. That is why Mr Goff is ridiculed up and down the country. The legislation may be a small and modest improvement\u2014that is why National is supporting it\u2014but the philosophy of the two bills is ultimately bankrupt, and it will be changed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001089\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EDebate interrupted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001090\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022665e5129518c40d4b47a6810ae7b8e95\u0022\u003ESittings of the House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001092\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002250986f61d3314b2a8cb0ac7643d83c04\u0022\u003ESittings of the House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002272e48ab0-e7ae-427f-bedc-793b7a91adba\u0022 data-id=\u0022c2a94697fbe94fee9aa89c11a6966992\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001091\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002272e48ab0-e7ae-427f-bedc-793b7a91adba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c2a94697fbe94fee9aa89c11a6966992\u0022\u003EHon MARK BURTON (Deputy Leader of the House):\u003C/span\u003E I seek leave for the House at its rising to adjourn until the ringing of the bell on Tuesday, 27 July 2004. That is in keeping with discussions I personally have had with representatives of all parties and with the whips earlier on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220ed9ad81-05c1-4171-80c6-24fa02cade42\u0022 data-id=\u0022a1c702a3313b4acc99687f2a7fb02d32\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001093\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ed9ad81-05c1-4171-80c6-24fa02cade42\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a1c702a3313b4acc99687f2a7fb02d32\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich)\u003C/span\u003E: Leave has been sought for that course of action. Is there any objection? There appears to be none.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001094\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022b9069abaca0b4df4821d134a4be06b45\u0022\u003EParole (Extended Supervision) Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001095\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022b9069abaca0b4df4821d134a4be06b45\u0022\u003ESentencing Amendment Bill (No 2)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001096\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a143b1845fc1406f85b38a9936b1defa\u0022\u003EThird Readings\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001097\u0022\u003EDebate resumed.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00225d8b128e8f2147a7817ec960f43d9908\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the Parole (Extended Supervision) Amendment Bill and the Sentencing Amendment Bill (No 2) be now read a third time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 91\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; Green Party 5; United Future 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 25\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand First 13; Green Party 4; ACT New Zealand 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBills read a third time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20040629f6ff799cb36f460cb2340b18b2b0bd84001098\u0022\u003ESitting suspended from midnight to 9 a.m. (Thursday)\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000001\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022c37bfdd88be7452b9f344a3495742758\u0022\u003ETuesday, 29 June 2004\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000002\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002236a535d435aa446cbb4959e7887aac40\u0022\u003E(continued on Thursday, 1 July 2004)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000003\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a7fad61dfa0d4f80a88ade6f59d295bb\u0022\u003EElectoral Matters Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000004\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002292bc40c6095e462b8ba62b6e215fb95a\u0022\u003EFirst Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022 data-id=\u0022a5587a47ca044b969cf9103ec9453baa\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000005\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a5587a47ca044b969cf9103ec9453baa\u0022\u003EHon RICK BARKER (Associate Minister of Justice):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the Electoral Matters Bill be now read a first time. At the appropriate time I will move that the bill be referred to the Justice and Electoral Committee for consideration and that the committee present its final report on or before 1 November 2004, and that the committee have the authority to meet at any time while the House is sitting, except during oral questions, and during any evening on the day on which there has been a sitting of the House and on a Friday in a week when there has been a sitting of the House, despite Standing Orders 191 and 194(1)(b) and (c).\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000006\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThis bill amends provisions in section 55 of the Electoral Act relating to when a member of Parliament must vacate his or her seat. It also cures an anomaly in section 55E of the Electoral Act that could see the Governor-General or a senior judge take a role in the party-hopping procedure, which would be inappropriate to their constitutional functions. The bill also makes a number of procedural and technical amendments to the electoral broadcasting regime to allow the Electoral Commission to allocate funds effectively for electoral broadcasting for the next general election. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000007\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003ENew Zealand is a diverse, multicultural society that recognises the rights of its citizens to hold citizenship in other countries in addition to their New Zealand citizenship. In the 21st century New Zealand people with dual or multiple citizenships are becoming more and more common. There is no reason to think that the situation will be different for members of Parliament. However, MPs differ from other citizens in one vital respect. They represent the people of New Zealand, and it is essential that they demonstrate an ongoing commitment to New Zealand and the people they represent. This bill clarifies the position of MPs who wish to exercise the same rights of citizenship that are granted to other New Zealand citizens. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000008\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe bill amends section 55 of the Electoral Act so that it is clear, first, that a member of the New Zealand Parliament must be a New Zealand citizen at all times and, second, that an MP must vacate his or her seat if he or she acquires the citizenship of another country by grant. This means that an MP must vacate his or her seat in the New Zealand Parliament if, firstly, he or she accepts nomination as a candidate for election to another Parliament or, secondly, takes office, including by appointment, that involves the swearing of an oath of allegiance to a country other than New Zealand. But an MP who is entitled to citizenship of another country by birth or descent, who renews an existing passport to another country, or who automatically acquires citizenship as a result of marriage to a citizen of another country can continue as a member of the New Zealand House of Representatives and does not have to vacate his or her seat. I am sure that members of the House and the public would view this as a sensible arrangement. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000009\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003ETurning to section 55E of the Electoral Act, the current wording of this section has it that when the Speaker of the House is absent the Governor-General or, in her absence, the Administrator of Government\u2014either the Chief Justice or the President of the Court of Appeal\u2014would be the person to whom a parliamentary leader must deliver notice that he or she is exercising the party-hopping provisions under the Electoral Act. Given the political nature of these provisions, it would be undesirable for the Governor-General or a senior judge to take such a role. The bill, therefore, substitutes a new definition of \u201Cappropriate person\u201D in section 55E of the Electoral Act, which removes this anomaly by referring only to the Speaker, and which is consistent with similar provisions in the Electoral Act. In other words, in the absence of the Speaker, the Deputy Speaker would fulfil the function. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000010\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe electoral broadcasting regime is vital to our healthy democracy. It allocates a slice of the pie to parties, whether they be big or small, to enable them to deliver key messages to voters in a fair and equitable way. Following inquiries into the 1996, 1999, and 2002 elections, the Justice and Electoral Committee has recommended a number of procedural and technical amendments to the broadcasting regime. While not all those recommendations have been included in this particular bill, it does include a number of straightforward amendments that will allow the Electoral Commission to more effectively allocate funds for electoral broadcasting for the next general election. It does this by removing some of the well-recognised anomalies and administratively burdensome processes of the current broadcasting regime. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000011\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EIn particular, the bill will repeal the outdated requirements for the Electoral Commission to invite broadcasters to provide free or discounted time for electoral broadcasting\u2014a process that must start some 8 to 9 months before Parliament is due to expire. The invitation process is administratively burdensome and achieves no greater level of discount than broadcasters would offer in the normal course of events. The select committee inquiry into the 2002 election saw no value in retaining those provisions. The change effected by this bill would not remove the allocation of free time for the opening and closing addresses that TVNZ and Radio New Zealand have to provide, but it will allow the Electoral Commission to conduct the allocation process more efficiently. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000012\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003ESecondly, the bill amends the provisions of the Broadcasting Act so that only registered parties will be eligible for allocations of time and money. The current provisions allow unregistered parties to be eligible for an allocation if they have at least five constituency candidates on the eligibility date. The select committee considered that eligibility should be confined to registered parties in order to ensure that parties have some degree of public support before being eligible for an allocation of public funds. I agree with its recommendation. Because the invitation process, if it were to remain, would have to commence in November this year, and because a select committee has already debated the proposed amendments in relation to the broadcasting regime, I shall be asking the Justice and Electoral Committee to make its report to this House on or before 1 November 2004. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000013\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe primary objective of bringing this bill before the House has been to amend the Electoral Act to clarify when a member of Parliament must vacate his or her seat. At the same time it has provided an appropriate vehicle and an opportunity for other amendments, particularly those that will assist the efficient operation of the Electoral Commission. The Justice and Electoral Committee has, of course, recommended a fundamental review of the law relating to parliamentary elections. The Government is giving further consideration to the significant matters raised by the committee and the scope, resource implications, and timing of the work required to undertake this review. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000014\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EI intend to move that the bill be referred to the Justice and Electoral Committee for consideration, and that the committee present its final report on or before 1 November 2004, and that the committee have the authority to meet at any time while the House is sitting, except during oral questions, and during any evening on a day on which there has been a sitting of the House and on a Friday in a week in which there has been a sitting of the House, despite Standing Orders 191, and 194(1)(b) and (c). I commend the bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022 data-id=\u0022d566a8f4e84c4850a6f5beb7fbc187f4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000015\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d566a8f4e84c4850a6f5beb7fbc187f4\u0022\u003ELINDSAY TISCH (National\u2014Piako):\u003C/span\u003E On behalf of National I want to take a call that primarily will deal with the changes to the Broadcasting Act. But, firstly, I would like to comment on the changes the Associate Minister of Justice mentioned that relate to the eligibility of people to stand for Parliament when they cease to be a New Zealand citizen, or acquire dual or multiple citizenship except by descent or birth. Those criteria, which are mentioned in the explanatory note, can be regarded as coming about because of the Harry Duynhoven case earlier, when we had the Electoral (Vacancies) Amendment Bill, so I will be referring to the \u201CHarry Duynhoven amendments\u201D that will come forward. It will be very interesting to see in the Justice and Electoral Committee how that matter will be handled.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000016\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003EAs I mentioned, I want to spend my time on the other matters, because they affect the way that we will be operating the next election. I draw the attention of the House to the select committee report Inquiry into the 2002 General Election. One of the points made in that report\u2014and that inquiry was the third inquiry following a general election, after the 1996 inquiry and the 1999 inquiry\u2014was that recommendations that had been made had not been carried through. National will support this bill going to the select committee because it allows a very focused attempt, in the short term, to remedy some of the inconsistencies and problems that were highlighted in those previous inquiries.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000017\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E But I make the point that what we are doing today does not matter, because the Electoral Act is riddled with ad hoc fixes and additions, and there is very limited capacity in the system to consider the overall effect of changes that are made. We know, election after election, that there are things we would like to see changed; we would like to see some things done differently and we would like to make improvements. Yet Parliaments over that time, since the 1996 election, have not had the will to do anything about it. After the 2002 inquiry it became very clear that a fundamental review of the Electoral Act of 1993 needed to be undertaken. I was on that inquiry, and I am happy to say that I believe that the way the review will be set up\u2014with the prospect of there being major changes that the parties can debate and agree to, and that will come into effect for the 2008 election\u2014will be welcomed. Those areas that the review might cover include electoral organisational structures, State funding, election broadcasting rules, party donation disclosure regimes, the changes to the Broadcasting Act of 1989, a common date for the broadcasting of all types of election programmes, the inclusion in Part 6 of the Broadcasting Act of a procedure for establishing the start date for opening addresses, and, of course, the taxation status of political parties.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000018\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003EAll of that, in effect, is a very good start, but it is part of the big review, which, I understand, Tim Barnett will be chairing, and which will have an effect in the longer term, on the 2008 election. In the immediate future, however, for the 2005 election, there are some changes that are mostly technical in nature, and they are included in this bill we are debating this morning\u2014the Electoral Matters Bill. With that in mind, I want to comment briefly on a couple of areas that I think are important.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000019\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003ESince 1990 the amount of money allocated to political parties for broadcasting has remained very low. If we take into account inflation and the costs associated with broadcasting over that period of time, we see that the initial figure of just over $2 million will be increased up to $3.212 million inclusive of GST. If I look at the cost of inflation and other associated broadcasting costs, I think that increase does take account of those particular areas.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000020\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003EI also want to draw attention to new subclause (4)(b) of clause 2A of schedule 1 of the principal Act, which is in clause 8(2). We have the situation where there are two nominees on the Electoral Commission, one representing the Government and one representing Opposition parties. It is important that there is not a majority in that area. The bill actually allows that a quorum would consist of one of those people and not necessarily both of them. I think that is important because, over the years, there has been some disquiet about those additional members being on the commission when it is considering the allocation of funding\u2014the State funding provisions. This provision says it is OK if only one of those representatives is there, and that both of them do not necessarily have be there, which in fact may have given the balance of power, as it were, to members who are not on the commission\u2014who are just additional members. Those are areas that I think are significant.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000021\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003EI am also interested to note that, in relation to the allocation of time and money being determined according to whether the parties are registered at a certain time, the cut-off point of 3 months before the election will now disappear, and the date that will now apply from is when the election is actually called. The eligibility cut-off point of 3 months before the dissolution of Parliament can have a retrospective effect when a general election is held earlier than expected, but not so early as to bring an early election provision under section 76C of the Broadcasting Act into effect\u2014in which case, the eligibility date for registered parties is the writ date. I think that what this measure is doing is saying that if a party wants an allocation of State funding\u2014and the provision relates to State funding for political parties\u2014then that party has to be registered at the time, and it has to have made a commitment that it will run in the election. The issue was very vague before, and I think this measure certainly tidies up those provisions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003EThe bill also allows for variation of allocations. I think the Electoral Commission has a responsibility to look at the variation of allocations. Members will be aware that in past elections some of the parties did not measure up, even though they had been initially allocated funding. If they did not meet the criteria set by the commission, then they lost that funding, which was reallocated to those parties that meet the criteria. For the 1996 election and for the 1999 election I was National\u2019s representative in putting our case to the Electoral Commission. Having fronted up to the commission and put our case in those two elections, I know what the criteria were, what was involved, and how detailed one needed to be in terms of putting a case for State funding for a party. The amendments in clause 21 to section 76A of the Act give the commission the power to vary the parties\u2019 allocations if there is sufficient change in the circumstances on which those allocations were based, thus avoiding unfairness and subversion of the allocation process. I think that is a good criterion for the commission to have.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000023\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003EAlthough these changes are technical, the point I made right at the beginning is that there needs to be a complete overhaul of the Electoral Act. We are moving towards another MMP election, and this bill will have only a small effect on it. But the bigger picture is the special review of the Electoral Act that will take place, which, of course, will affect the 2008 election. National looks forward to being part of that review.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f9a94bf3-a948-4410-8413-403a7454114b\u0022 data-id=\u00223346e6df0afb43d495053840a830a13a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000024\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9a94bf3-a948-4410-8413-403a7454114b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223346e6df0afb43d495053840a830a13a\u0022\u003ETIM BARNETT (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central):\u003C/span\u003E I am happy to follow on from Lindsay Tisch, and I welcome the fact that on a lot of electoral issues we actually manage to get some level of unanimity around this House. However, in terms of this legislation, I have to say it is great to see a Government prepared to tackle some of the issues that others saw as either too hard or too complicated, and that, for years, sat as administrative burdens on the Electoral Commission\u2014and, indeed, sat as legislation on the Order Paper prior to the last election. I am glad they will now finally be dealt with in what I expect to be a reasonably uncontroversial piece of legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000025\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9a94bf3-a948-4410-8413-403a7454114b\u0022\u003EWe are developing what I think is a really healthy cycle in Parliament whereby a review of the election is held by the Justice and Electoral Committee after each election. This is the second time that a number of recommendations that arose out of the select committee report have gone forward to become legislation that is passed in time for the next election. The focus between 1999 and 2002 was on electoral administration issues. There were, I believe, 87 reforms to the way in which the election was administered in 2002 compared with in 1999. The general view of the select committee was that the 2002 election ran a lot more smoothly.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000026\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9a94bf3-a948-4410-8413-403a7454114b\u0022\u003EThis time the issues, in a sense, as Lindsay Tisch pointed out, are more major and more mundane. This bill deals with the mundane side of things in the sense that quite a number of the aspects of the broadcasting regime are complicated, are anomalous, and could conceivably lead to the Electoral Commission being in a really awkward position if a combination of circumstances arose. I think the passing of this bill, which, hopefully, will be improved by the select committee, will actually be a way to ensure that the commission can manage most effectively any risk it has for the election next year.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000027\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9a94bf3-a948-4410-8413-403a7454114b\u0022\u003E But there are a number of major issues that the Justice and Electoral Committee inquiry touched on that do require more fundamental examination. One problem with the 3-year cycle is that by the time the select committee, which is doing lots of other business, has dealt with the matters around the last election and produced a report, and that report has been considered by the Government, which might produce a bill, we are within 12 to 18 months of the next election. It is very hard to have fundamental debate on issues completed in that time and have measures in place for the next election.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000028\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9a94bf3-a948-4410-8413-403a7454114b\u0022\u003EThe unique thing that has happened this time is that the report of the select committee into the election, as well as dealing with a lot of the detailed broadcasting matters that are contained in this bill, has also raised the fundamentals, which for a long time\u2014even for too long\u2014have been the subject of partial debate. These are the issues of donation transparency and State funding of party administration. We already have State funding of ongoing party communication, through leaders\u2019 allocations, and we already have State funding of broadcasting, which is obviously relevant to what is in this bill. But the issue of State funding of administration, which was referred to in the Royal Commission on the Electoral System in the 1980s, is unfinished business. In my mind, our finishing it will help to mature our whole electoral and political system as MMP starts to bed in. We need to have that debate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000029\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9a94bf3-a948-4410-8413-403a7454114b\u0022\u003EWhat is interesting, in terms of the debate in the select committee, is that I think there is now general acceptance that there are issues that need to be covered. By beginning that review before, hopefully, the election next year, we will actually be in a position to report back, and to put in place any amendments resulting from it, before the 2008 election.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000030\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9a94bf3-a948-4410-8413-403a7454114b\u0022\u003EThe other issues that need to be covered by that review process comprise a lot of the other anomalies that are appearing in the Electoral Act. I think the citizenship matter is a very good example. It was a fishhook that no one had foreseen; issues arose, the Government had to deal quickly with a situation, and it was dealt with quickly. It took up the time of the House, and it took up a lot of political energy on all sides. What we do not want\u2014and I think it is a statement about our democracy, not a statement about who is in power at the time\u2014is for those kinds of issues to keep arising. By having this legislation, which deals with that citizenship anomaly but also with the commitment by the Government to look at the concept of a select committee - led review of the Electoral Act that reports back in time for reforms to be in place for the 2008 election, I think we now have general consensus on the select committee, between parties, that that process is necessary.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000031\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9a94bf3-a948-4410-8413-403a7454114b\u0022\u003EIn the meantime the Electoral Matters Bill has some urgency attached to it, because we have to get it back in time for changes to be made. I am sure the select committee, with the permission of the House to meet while the House is sitting, will be able to manage that business comfortably, partly because we already undertook a consultation cycle on these matters only about a year ago, and I cannot imagine there are many agencies with new comments to make about these issues. So, essentially, the bill is non-controversial legislation. It reduces the risk attached to the administration of the election next year. I believe that its passage will be straightforward, and I believe that our select committee will do the job very well. On the basis of that, I would like to commend the bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022 data-id=\u00226abfef0e78e04b64ad20409baad4981f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000032\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226abfef0e78e04b64ad20409baad4981f\u0022\u003EDAIL JONES (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E We have had two very interesting speeches on the Electoral Commission aspect of this legislation and the amendments to the Broadcasting Act. I wish to speak to Part 1. I do not wish to refer to the matter that took place last year, other than to show how it is relevant to what is happening today. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000033\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EOne of the issues that arose last year was the advice of the Crown Solicitor expressing concern about a member of Parliament renewing a passport or travel document after becoming a member of Parliament, and the uncertainty relating to whether that placed that member of Parliament\u2019s position in this House in jeopardy. The Government has introduced this bill that now contains a clause inserting new section 55AA, which states: \u201CDespite section 55(1)(b) and (c), the seat of a member of Parliament does not become vacant by reason only of the member\u2014(b) renewing a passport or travel document that was issued to him or her by a foreign State or Power before the member took office.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000034\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EIf at the time this Act was first passed\u2014and we go back many years\u2014members of this House thought that renewing a passport or travel document was something that should debar one from being a member of Parliament, was that a good idea, and should it be continued rather than revoked? I just raise that point and hope we will get submissions on it, because I believe that once one becomes a member of the Parliament of New Zealand, one should be travelling only on a New Zealand passport. That member should not renew any other passport, and should not be travelling on any other travel document. Either one is loyal to this place or one is not. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000035\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EIt is my view that we set the standard. I have indicated that we set a standard in other areas, and here we are setting a standard too. It is the standard we set as the leaders of this country\u2014one that says we can put our nationality on our sleeves and just change our nationality as we wish. Today we could be New Zealanders, tomorrow we could be any other nationality that might apply to this House. I am not picking on anyone; I am saying everyone in general, and it includes, I suspect, members of all parties. I can have the nationality of more than one country, but since I became an adult I have only ever had a New Zealand passport, and I have only ever travelled on a New Zealand passport.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000036\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221772e9f5-5379-4bfe-9d9b-eaffb4c61b02\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c5d5d4b9f98e4ca48fca95ae94c25046\u0022\u003EHon Harry Duynhoven\u003C/span\u003E: Same here.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000037\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e9e57805c55a4f1a8a39ca006cb23226\u0022\u003EDAIL JONES\u003C/span\u003E: I ask that member, and other members, that if they agree with me, why do we have new section 55AA(b) in this bill? Why do we not have a clause that says that if one renews another country\u2019s passport, or travels on another country\u2019s travel document while a member of this Parliament, then that member has placed his or her position in this House in jeopardy, and he or she should resign.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000038\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221772e9f5-5379-4bfe-9d9b-eaffb4c61b02\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002274f47a19c14e4420829c92d3eaa76d6b\u0022\u003EHon Harry Duynhoven\u003C/span\u003E: Let\u2019s get the facts right\u2014neither of those things apply.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000039\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229a14f98fc7be401794c6816b73501004\u0022\u003EDAIL JONES\u003C/span\u003E: No, I am not attacking the member at all. I am just making\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000040\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221772e9f5-5379-4bfe-9d9b-eaffb4c61b02\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022faebba1dcc5249b3b2611b66f39bc213\u0022\u003EHon Harry Duynhoven\u003C/span\u003E: Of course he is!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000041\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227adeb939424b4f968d8e2a168d60753b\u0022\u003EDAIL JONES\u003C/span\u003E: I am not attacking that other member. I wish he were not in the House today and was perhaps watching a replay on television, because this situation could apply to me. I am saying that we are members of this Parliament, we set a standard as New Zealand citizens, we always travel on a New Zealand passport, we never renew any other passport\u2014or we decide that we do not want to be members here. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000042\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EAn interesting situation is now developing in New Zealand. The other day I was having a discussion at a soccer club over a few drinks after the game. One of the people in the conversation, born and bred here and very proud of being a New Zealander, was making comments about being a New Zealander and suchlike. Someone else chirped up and said he had come here 30 years ago and always travelled on his former country\u2019s passport. There was no way that he was going to change, but he was going to tell me, as a member of Parliament, how this country should be run. The New Zealander looked at this other person and said: \u201CIf you\u2019re not going to be a New Zealander, you shouldn\u2019t be telling people how to run this country, even if you have been here 30 years, paid taxes, and will get superannuation and everything else as well.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EWhat I am asking is this: have we reached that stage of maturity in New Zealand where people should start making decisions as to whether they are New Zealanders first and foremost? Should not this House be setting the standard and saying that we are New Zealanders first and foremost, we do not want to travel on other countries\u2019 passports, and we do not want to renew another country\u2019s passport while we are representing this country in the most important way possible? So I hope we will get submissions on that clause. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000044\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EThe other clause that interests me is clause 5(1)(b), which has an interesting little change. Currently, the Act states in section 55(1): \u201CThe seat of any member of Parliament shall become vacant \u2026 if he or she takes any oath or makes any declaration or acknowledgment of allegiance or adherence to any foreign Prince or Power\u201D\u2014which is where the passport one came in as well. But the amendment now goes on to add \u201Cwhether required on appointment to an office or otherwise;\u201D. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000045\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EI am just wondering why we have that, and whether it applies to people who might be consorts\u2014to any person who might be the consort for Monaco, or somewhere else like that. I wonder whether that particular person has noticed those few words being added in, and whether, if this bill is passed in the form it is now, he or she will have to resign that position. I will be interested to hear submissions on that matter, possibly from that member, who is also a member of the Justice and Electoral Committee. Whether he has an interest in the matter, I am not sure, but he may have to remove himself from the committee. I am not being mischievous, but just stating the facts as I see them. I draw this matter to the attention of that member, and I look forward to seeing what this part of the bill actually means.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226e7bfee5-ac9c-4ae2-b85d-7d3b7a785561\u0022 data-id=\u002256e59dd929b84b86805b1219da8879a9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000046\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e7bfee5-ac9c-4ae2-b85d-7d3b7a785561\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002256e59dd929b84b86805b1219da8879a9\u0022\u003EROD DONALD (Co-Leader\u2014Green):\u003C/span\u003E The Green Party will be supporting this bill\u2019s referral to the select committee\u2014indeed, aspects of it are long overdue. I would like to deal with the four aspects of this bill in the order they appear. The first one makes permanent what has become known as \u201CHarry\u2019s law\u201D, and that is a good thing in our view. Members of Parliament should not be forced to resign because of where they were born or whom they are descended from. That is why the Greens supported the changes to the law to protect not only Harry Duynhoven but, I suspect, some other members of this House last year, and that is why we support making it possible for sitting members to review any foreign passport they may already have, and to become a citizen of another country, but only where this is because of their descent or place of birth. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000047\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e7bfee5-ac9c-4ae2-b85d-7d3b7a785561\u0022\u003EThese changes make the law consistent. As we all know, a member can already become a dual citizen by virtue of marriage\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000048\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221772e9f5-5379-4bfe-9d9b-eaffb4c61b02\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220a1bd386afd74093ba221ec07728e20c\u0022\u003EHon Harry Duynhoven\u003C/span\u003E: That was the result of a parliamentary petition, too.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000049\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e7bfee5-ac9c-4ae2-b85d-7d3b7a785561\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224a76e181826c405dad34a7d5c9c999e0\u0022\u003EROD DONALD\u003C/span\u003E: It was indeed. It was the result of somebody who, I think, must have been breaking the law, and the law was fixed up to suit that person at the time. But the changes do not allow an MP to actively seek foreign citizenship for any other reason, and we obviously want to see that situation maintained. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000050\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e7bfee5-ac9c-4ae2-b85d-7d3b7a785561\u0022\u003EThe bill maintains an amendment, originally proposed by the Greens, that requires an MP to resign from Parliament if the MP ceases to be a New Zealand citizen. When we were having discussions on the amendment last year, I found it extraordinary that such a requirement was not already in place. Perhaps that is because of the carry over, whereby people could stand for Parliament if they were New Zealand residents and on the electoral roll on, I think, 12 August 1975 but did not have to be New Zealand citizens. That, of course, has all changed, and it is now a requirement that MPs cannot cease being a New Zealand citizen during their term in Parliament, or they risk losing their seat. It is also pleasing to see that \u201Cforeign Princes\u201D have been removed from our law; they are now referred to as \u201Cforeign States\u201D. Perhaps that is yet another important step towards republicanism. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000051\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e7bfee5-ac9c-4ae2-b85d-7d3b7a785561\u0022\u003EThe second aspect of the bill is the change to the definition of \u201Cappropriate person\u201D in relation to party hopping. It is a significant change, and we support it because it protects the Governor-General from getting involved in grubby politics. But the need for this amendment highlights, yet again, what shoddy legislation the so-called Electoral (Integrity) Amendment Act was\u2014and is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000052\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fe4e08e75ff54311bfbffb26f0e5684b\u0022\u003EHon Ken Shirley\u003C/span\u003E: It was!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000053\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e7bfee5-ac9c-4ae2-b85d-7d3b7a785561\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002283fdbe5f833145b2b98d2b4901f2efbb\u0022\u003EROD DONALD\u003C/span\u003E: I am pleased to hear my colleague Ken Shirley support me on this, because, of course, the ACT party was at the forefront, along with the Greens, in opposition to the party-hopping legislation. As I recall, Stephen Franks drafted an excellent minority report opposing the party-hopping legislation. He pointed out the draconian powers it would give party leaders and how obscene it would be if any party leader chose to exercise the powers contained in those amendments. I know that Mr Shirley also gave an excellent speech opposing giving party leaders those powers. I must say I am very sorry to find that the only party that has tried to exercise the powers contained in that legislation is the ACT party. It is a gross abuse of our democracy, and the sooner that law dies the better. The fact that the courts are now having to rule on its application is another example of the undermining of parliamentary sovereignty. This House should never have allowed that to happen\u2014especially to have inflicted upon itself the opportunity for members, quite rightly in my view, to resort to other courts to maintain their position in this House because they believed that the Electoral (Integrity) Amendment Act was being used in an inappropriate way. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000054\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e7bfee5-ac9c-4ae2-b85d-7d3b7a785561\u0022\u003EI would like to foreshadow that the Greens will propose amendments to this bill to repeal the whole of section 55E, and we look forward to support from all those parties that opposed the imposition of this draconian legislation at the time, so that we can put an early end to this sorry saga in New Zealand politics. [Interruption] Mr Shirley is vacillating now, having opposed it so strenuously before. I am not sure whether he is prepared to have the courage of his convictions now.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000055\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002282e36b25e11541ddaf70105c3397c916\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The member will withdraw that comment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000056\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e7bfee5-ac9c-4ae2-b85d-7d3b7a785561\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002260ba843579af44088bbaa3dc50c508b9\u0022\u003EROD DONALD\u003C/span\u003E: I withdraw and apologise. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000057\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e7bfee5-ac9c-4ae2-b85d-7d3b7a785561\u0022\u003EThe Green Party will also be moving an amendment to the third aspect of this bill. Although we support the amendment to the quorum for meetings of the Electoral Commission so that it can make broadcasting allocations with one of the party political representatives absent, we are absolutely totally opposed to both of those party political representatives being on the Electoral Commission when it allocates broadcasting time and money. It is extraordinary that the National Party and the Labour Party get to sit on a commission and make decisions about the allocation of money to every other party in this House\u2014namely, New Zealand First, ACT, United Future, Green Party, and to any other registered party standing for Parliament. The provision is archaic and should have been abolished when first-past-the-post was abolished. Our amendments will get rid of party political appointments to the Electoral Commission. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000058\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e7bfee5-ac9c-4ae2-b85d-7d3b7a785561\u0022\u003EIn saying that, I do not want to impugn any of those people who have served on that commission. I am merely pointing out that it is impossible for those people to represent all the competing interests in this Parliament and of those parties out in the community who are hoping to win seats in this Parliament. Indeed, the commission has drawn that observation itself in its own reports, and if members want to read the debate we had on the 2002 general election inquiry held a few weeks ago, they will see that I had to say more on that point. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000059\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e7bfee5-ac9c-4ae2-b85d-7d3b7a785561\u0022\u003EThe fourth aspect of the bill that we support relates to some anomalies in the broadcasting legislation as it applies to political parties. The reason I personally support those changes is that I was on the select committee that reviewed the 1996 election, and that is when we came up with most of the amendments that are finally coming back to this House\u2014although I have to say it is not the first time they have come back to this House. So I shall reserve judgment on the Government\u2019s commitment to this bill until we actually see it passed, hopefully later this year, so that the commission does not have to go through the extraordinarily useless process of writing to every broadcaster in this country to see whether they will be offering discounts to political parties. That is a waste of time that has been inflicted on the commission for the last two elections, simply because this Parliament did not get its act together. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000060\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e7bfee5-ac9c-4ae2-b85d-7d3b7a785561\u0022\u003EI remind this House that the amendments in this bill to the broadcasting legislation were virtually all in a bill that was introduced on 29 September 1998. That is when the then National Government recognised the need for change, as a result of the 1996 election review. That bill had its second reading in November, submissions were called for in February 1999, and the select committee finally reported back in May 1999\u2014too late to be of any use for the 1999 election. So already the then National Government had stalled that legislation to stop it getting through. In fact, I managed to come across the speech notes I had prepared for the second reading debate, which I never got to deliver and will not get to deliver today. But I chastised the National Government at the time for dragging the chain. Indeed, on 27 May 1999 the House adjourned 15 minutes early, when the broadcasting legislation was next on the Order Paper. We could have dealt with it then. But, oh no! It was still on the Order Paper at the 1999 election. It was still on the Order Paper on 17 February 2002 when the Labour Government discharged it for no good reason that I can fathom, except that it was, again, already too late to have any benefit for the 2002 election. So I sincerely hope it will have some benefit for this next election. I look forward to the select committee dealing with it because I think there are a few things that could be improved in the bill. There is a ridiculous section now\u2014which is hard enough to understand, let alone apply\u2014which is that the commission will not make payment if it receives a bill from a party no later than 30 working days after the month in which the election was held. Would it not be simpler just to make it 60 days after the election was held? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000061\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e7bfee5-ac9c-4ae2-b85d-7d3b7a785561\u0022\u003EI close by endorsing what the chair of the select committee, Tim Barnett, had to say about the fundamental review of the whole area of donation disclosure and State-funding of political parties. I only wish that the select committee had had what it takes to grapple with those issues here and now, rather than putting it off for some future time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022 data-id=\u0022dce083387b754586b12e3d8254b94eb6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000062\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022dce083387b754586b12e3d8254b94eb6\u0022\u003EHon KEN SHIRLEY (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E The Electoral Matters Bill is the wash-up from the review of the last election, and of the one before it. Mr Barnett claimed that this was only the second review that had ever been undertaken. That, of course, is nonsense. Parliament has reviewed its procedures from elections throughout the ages. That was really a bit of self-congratulatory pap at best, I think. There are ad hoc tinkerings associated with this bill, but it does not pick up all the recommendations of the Electoral Law Committee. That, I believe, is regrettable in itself. I think those recommendations should have been picked up. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000063\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022\u003EIf we look at the amendments to section 55 of the Electoral Act, firstly we see what is being referred to as the \u201CHarry\u2019s law\u201D amendment. I think this Parliament needs to reflect on that, because I do not think Parliament behaved well on that issue. The law may have been unreasonable and may well have been unfair, but nevertheless it was the law, and the very fact that we are making these amendments here today underpins the point that at the time when the Harry Duynhoven issue arose that was the law. Under the current law the Speaker has no discretion, but must act forthwith and declare a vacancy. That did not happen, and I believe that is a constitutional problem that this Parliament lives with. It is regrettable. It most certainly would have been unfair on Mr Duynhoven and it may well have been unreasonable, but it was the law. The difficulty is that when the Speaker does not act when he should act, that creates a precedent. There are many, many very important constitutional matters that do require action. If the situations when the Speaker does or does not act are picked at random, there is a very serious problem, indeed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000064\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022\u003EThe other aspect of section 55E of the Act is the clarification in this bill of the definition of an \u201Cappropriate person\u201D. I agree with Mr Donald that the party-hopping legislation brought to this Parliament by Dr Cullen for overt political reasons is very bad legislation. That has always been the position of the ACT party. It is very bad legislation, and there is a delicious irony in the fact that the only party that may invoke that legislation could well be the ACT party. I have no difficulty with that, and I want to be right upfront on that. I do not believe in a taxation rate of 39 cents in the dollar. I think that is a bad, foolish, stupid law, but I pay it because it is the law. ACT is a law-abiding party. We believe in the rule of law and if the Government makes stupid laws like the party-hopping legislation, then it is the law and it does stand. So that is the situation with regard to that matter. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000065\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022\u003EThe other issue we have is the question of the Electoral Commission and the various broadcasting regimes. I think it is an outrage that the major parties in this Parliament have used the tyranny of the majority to ensure they both have a party representative on the Electoral Commission, which makes the determination of who gets money for broadcasting, and of how much people receive. The two major parties use the tyranny of their majority to put their own people\u2014their own stooges\u2014on the commission, to make sure that they queer the pitch in their own favour. That is wrong in principle. It could be argued that the commission should be independent, but I would take the argument further and ask why on earth we need an Electoral Commission at all. It is totally unnecessary. We do not need the State to dictate to us, and to set up commissions on who can advertise and on how people can promote themselves. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000066\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022\u003EAll sorts of anomalies still exist with that system. We seem to have a fixation that we cannot advertise on radio or television, but we can put unlimited advertising in the newspapers\u2014as indeed we have seen in recent weeks, with the parties who had not organised their affairs very well trying to spend all the taxpayers\u2019 money allocated to them before the end of the financial year. Parties have been engaged in great, wasteful splashes of advertising all over the metropolitan papers, just because they could not organise themselves. When someone in their offices realised there was a big bucket of money and they either had to use it or lose it, they splashed it all out on very expensive advertising. The worst example would have been New Zealand First\u2019s advertisement, with Winston Peters\u2019 photograph and the text of an old speech he had given. Winston Peters had an old speech printed and took up a full page of prime advertising space in the Sunday Star-Times, purely because he realised he had to spend up his allocated taxpayers\u2019 money before the end of the year or he would lose it. He had been so disorganised throughout the year that he had not organised the spending of the budgets appropriately, so he just splashed out on very elaborate advertising. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000067\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022\u003EWhat we have with regard to electoral broadcasting is an unnecessary and foolish restriction. Parties can have unlimited communication through the Internet or through newspapers, but somehow we have a fixation on broadcasting on the airwaves\u2014whether it is on television or radio\u2014and we have to have a big, elaborate State commission that sets out rules and appoints commissioners, and that the two main parties have their own stooges on. It is very bad. As I have said, we could argue that the commission should be independent, but I would go a step further and say we do not need it at all. The commission should be totally abolished; it is totally unnecessary. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000068\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022\u003EOther aspects of this bill concern us. I have outlined one, the \u201CHarry Duynhoven amendment\u201D. It is a tidy-up, but it is also a recognition of a failure to act in a constitutional sense, which is rather important. The \u201Cappropriate person\u201D issue in section 55E only endures for this Parliament. The Electoral (Integrity) Amendment Act was only ever to apply for one parliamentary term, so it is really almost redundant before it even comes into effect. It is after the fact, in essence. The other aspect is the electoral broadcasting regime. I have outlined ACT\u2019s position on that. We are opposed to it, because we do not believe we need it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225caeb43f-d5eb-4780-bddc-0fc23950543a\u0022 data-id=\u00222e46ac3c8c3c48adaa570655b8b3d598\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000069\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225caeb43f-d5eb-4780-bddc-0fc23950543a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222e46ac3c8c3c48adaa570655b8b3d598\u0022\u003EMURRAY SMITH (United Future):\u003C/span\u003E The first part of the Electoral Matters Bill resurrects for us the farce of the legislation that was the Electoral (Vacancies) Amendment Act of 2003. That was a farce and no credit at all to this House and to this Government. It arose because the Hon Harry Duynhoven, a highly respected colleague, confessed that he might have breached the Electoral Act. The Privileges Committee found that was the case, with the Crown Law Office affirming that from an objective point of view. Other members were purported to have probably been in the same situation as Harry Duynhoven, but had failed to disclose it. The Government passed a bill that made a mockery of due process. The Government should have been at pains to demonstrate respect for the law as it stood, but instead in a cynical attempt turned the situation around and covered over a breach of the Act. I know that Harry Duynhoven was embarrassed about that situation, and he indicated that he would rather have had a by-election than that legislation, because of the doubt over it. It was a situation that, as the Hon Peter Dunne said in his first reading speech on that legislation on 6 August 2003, showed a preferential treatment of members of Parliament over ordinary citizens. I would go further than that and say it showed a preferential treatment of members of the Government over members of other parties, given the situation that subsequently arose with regard to Nick Smith. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000070\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225caeb43f-d5eb-4780-bddc-0fc23950543a\u0022\u003EHowever, the real issues with regard to this bill\u2014and it is appropriate that we should review the eligibility criteria\u2014go back to the situation and the intention of the original legislation. That was very well outlined by the Hon Peter Dunne in his first reading speech, when he said: \u201Cone has to go back and look at the intention of the clauses that were passed\u2014going right back to 1852. It is absolutely clear that the circumstances at the time of the passage of those clauses, and their subsequent carry-through, related to a far different world than our world today. At the time of their passage, there was, essentially, the British Empire, hostile Europe, and not much else \u2026 We can even take the situation right through to the outbreak of World War II, and argue with some validity that these provisions were relevant then\u2014certainly in the way in which we detained people deemed to be hostile aliens. But I do not think that anyone could mount a reasonable argument today to suggest that relations with the Netherlands have so deteriorated that any member who takes an action in respect of that country is breaching the intent of the provisions set out in the original bill.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000071\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225caeb43f-d5eb-4780-bddc-0fc23950543a\u0022\u003EThe bill outlines four circumstances when it is suggested that a seat should become vacant. Those are when a person ceases to be a New Zealand citizen, when a person acquires dual or multiple citizenship, except by descent or birth, when a person is appointed to or takes an office that involves the swearing of an oath of allegiance to a jurisdiction other than New Zealand, and when a person accepts nomination or agrees to be a candidate for election to another Parliament. In that respect, there are a couple of points to note. One is that section 55(1)(c) of the Electoral Act is not deemed to be altered. That provision states that if a person \u201Cdoes or concurs in or adopts any act whereby he or she may become a subject or citizen of any foreign State or Power, or entitled to the rights, privileges, or immunities of a subject or citizen of any foreign State or Power;\u201D, he or she vacates the seat. That may well prove to be really too onerous. That was the situation the Hon Harry Duynhoven faced, as well. The situation whereby a person may become a subject or citizen of another country may be wide ranging. Once again, I am not sure whether it is appropriate to put such a harsh restriction on what could be an unintentional default and have a seat vacated. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000072\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225caeb43f-d5eb-4780-bddc-0fc23950543a\u0022\u003EAlso, we should look carefully at the area of whether a seat should become vacant when a person accepts nomination or agrees to be a candidate for election to another Parliament. I can well envisage a situation whereby members of Parliament who had close family connections with Pacific Island communities, such as Samoa, were looking to stand for an office there because they were intending to leave their seats here and go and live over there, or something of that ilk. The fact is that their seats would become vacant if they even agreed to be candidates there in future\u2014there is no time limit here. Such people may say that they will finish up in New Zealand and go over there, and that they would be happy to stand for Parliament in a few years\u2019 time when they get there. That would be an agreement to stand, and could in itself be sufficient to bring this clause\u2014if it passes\u2014into effect, and mean that their seats were vacated, even though they were talking about a time in the future. I think we need to look very carefully at that. I am not sure whether it is entirely appropriate that people who have some affiliations with other countries should, in a lot of instances, be debarred from being in this House, but that is something we can look at in the select committee. I welcome the discussion that will take place with regard to that, and welcome the outcome of it. I am sure it will be an interesting discussion. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000073\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225caeb43f-d5eb-4780-bddc-0fc23950543a\u0022\u003EThe second part of the bill relates to the Broadcasting Act. Certainly a number of things within that Act need to be clarified. These are small, largely technical amendments, and there are some interesting issues there that have given rise to unnecessary bureaucracy in the past. It is just a pity that recommendations for these changes have been around since the inquiries into the 1996 and 1999 elections, as well as into the latest one, and that it has taken all this time to address them. In particular, some of the issues are, firstly, the question of the allocation to political parties of time and funding for election broadcasting when there are by-elections. Given that by-elections are all about constituency positions and not list positions, it is quite appropriate that we remove references to giving party funding in those sorts of instances. Secondly, the bill as drafted also provides for the removal of the need to circulate to all broadcasters an invitation for free time. I know from my experience as secretary of the United Future party, and of the Future New Zealand Party before that, that we used to get a mound of paperwork around election time from all sorts of broadcasters\u2014radio mostly\u2014that had all been invited to say whether they would give free time. They all came back with screeds of paper\u2014we would get those plonks of paper landing on our desks at various times through the election campaign\u2014and basically stated that they were quite happy to provide the time if it was paid for. I think it is quite a good idea to restrict that, and to take away the huge paper war the Electoral Commission has had to handle. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000074\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225caeb43f-d5eb-4780-bddc-0fc23950543a\u0022\u003EI also think, in terms of the whole democratic process, it is quite appropriate that electoral parties can register right up until the dissolution of Parliament, and not up until 30 days beforehand, particularly with regard to a snap election, which can catch some parties on the hop. I think that change is an improvement, in terms of the democratic process. I think that the measure for the resolution of disputes proposed in section 77, inserted by clause 22, is also very positive. A situation can arise during elections called at short notice whereby parties are unhappy with the way that broadcasters are treating them vis-\u00E0-vis other parties, in particular, and a quick mechanism for the Electoral Commission to have the ability to resolve those disputes and give a final decision is, I think, a good thing for everybody concerned. It may be that the outcome is not a happy one, but someone simply does not have the time to go through a core process in the heat of an election and have a dispute meaningfully resolved in a situation in which it will have an immediate effect. Nobody really wants to litigate the thing after the event\u2014it seems to be a mere academic exercise at that point. I think that a quick dispute resolution process is a welcome measure here. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000075\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225caeb43f-d5eb-4780-bddc-0fc23950543a\u0022\u003EUnited Future will support this bill being referred to the select committee, and we look forward to the discussion and debate that will surround these issues.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226de7f1d9-7be9-468a-b27c-06000416b96a\u0022 data-id=\u0022f1de96e1dc0043d29c726da2c80c5e92\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000076\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226de7f1d9-7be9-468a-b27c-06000416b96a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f1de96e1dc0043d29c726da2c80c5e92\u0022\u003EHon JOHN TAMIHERE (Minister of Youth Affairs):\u003C/span\u003E I commend the first reading of this omnibus Electoral Matters Bill to the House. In doing so, I want to make a number of observations about previous speakers. The Green member Rod Donald and the Hon Ken Shirley from the ACT party stood up and proselytised about the Electoral (Integrity) Amendment Act, which is also known as the \u201Cparty-hopping\u201D legislation. Integrity is an interesting term for those two people to refer to, because veritably they have gone boing, boing around this House. They have been in more parties than the honourable \u201Cmember for Courtenay Place\u201D, Winston Peters, and that has to be saying something. Rod Donald has been in so many parties\u2014the Values Party, the Socialist Party, the Green Party, the Alliance\u2014that if we name a party, he has bounced around it. The Hon Ken Shirley is the same. The Hon Ken Shirley gave an opinion with regard to the Electoral (Integrity) Amendment Act. ACT members railed against that Act\u2014they voted against it, they hated it, and they bemoaned it. But ACT is the first, and is likely to be the only, party that seeks to apply it. That is the type of standard that is brought to the House by the ACT party. I regret that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000077\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226de7f1d9-7be9-468a-b27c-06000416b96a\u0022\u003EI want to commend the work of the Justice and Electoral Committee. It is a very fine committee, and the type of report that it brings to this House is excellent. It is also noted that the amendments proposed in the bill in relation to the broadcasting regime are intended to enable the Electoral Commission to allocate funds more effectively. I too regret that more work was not done with regard to the way that parties could be funded, the way that we disclosed the type of funding, and the like. That is a very important debate that must be had at another time. I want to note, though, that parties have spent taxpayers\u2019 funds, allocated to their parliamentary services, in ways that taxpayers really need to have a good think about. National Party members have run huge advertising pages, and have stood up and said all sorts of misleading and wrong things. If that is the way the National Party wants to conduct itself\u2014by inappropriately spending parliamentary funds and money the taxpayer has voted for it\u2014and if it cannot manage its affairs any better than that, then it has to be said that the party is in great difficulty and has great problems. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000078\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226de7f1d9-7be9-468a-b27c-06000416b96a\u0022\u003EI want to conclude by indicating that Kiwis want finality and certainty with regard to the members of Parliament who represent them. To that extent, this legislation indicates quite carefully and clearly why an MP should cease to be an MP. There are four counts: that the MP ceases to be a New Zealand citizen; that the MP has acquired dual or multiple citizenship, except by descent or birth; that the MP accepts nomination, or has otherwise agreed, to be a candidate for election to another Parliament; and that the MP is appointed to an office that involves the taking of an oath, or the making of a declaration or acknowledgment of allegiance, obedience, or adherence to a foreign State or power. I think we all agree that we should bring those matters to some finality and give some certainty to them. I want to acknowledge the role that the Hon Harry Duynhoven has brought to bear in ensuring that in terms of our constitutional processes we now have certainty, clarity, probity, and propriety. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000079\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226de7f1d9-7be9-468a-b27c-06000416b96a\u0022\u003EBill read a first time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022 data-id=\u00226aad47c67521463c822ac16cd2e1a735\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000080\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226aad47c67521463c822ac16cd2e1a735\u0022\u003EHon RICK BARKER (Associate Minister of Justice):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the Electoral Matters Bill be referred to the Justice and Electoral Committee for consideration, and that the committee present its final report on or before 1 November 2004, and that the committee have the authority to meet at any time while the House is sitting, except during questions for oral answer, during any evening on a day on which there has been a sitting of the House, and on a Friday in a week in which there has been a sitting of the House, despite Standing Orders 191 and 194(1)(b) and (c).\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002278d5d5381b144a08b82b77d40b1c52ec\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the motion be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 70\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000081\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022c79d2898ab3c4d9d8d4f82bc4dfb5781\u0022\u003ECriminal Procedure Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000082\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022bafe8530dd7c46aaa55fc47d83683257\u0022\u003EFirst Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022 data-id=\u0022ea03759c44f949149db39f4b7dae663f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000083\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ea03759c44f949149db39f4b7dae663f\u0022\u003EHon RICK BARKER (Associate Minister of Justice)\u003C/span\u003E, on behalf of the Minister of Justice: I move, That the Criminal Procedure Bill be now read a first time. I also intend to move that the bill be referred to the Law and Order Committee for consideration. This bill contains criminal procedural forms that the Government has been working to develop since 2001. It responds to Law Commission recommendations and developments overseas, particularly in the United Kingdom. It includes changes relating to jury trials, exceptions to the double-jeopardy rule, and reforms to preliminary hearings and disclosure. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EI turn to the matter of jury reforms first. This bill proposes to introduce 11:1 majority verdicts instead of the current requirement for unanimity. That is partly to address the problem of rogue jurors who, by refusing to participate in the deliberations, produce a hung jury for reasons that have nothing to do with the merits of the case. Retrials take time and money and prolong the ordeal for everyone involved, including victims and witnesses. Alternatively, sometimes a single juror is pressured by the other 11 to return a verdict against his or her conscience\u2014which can be traumatic for that person. Majority verdicts will allow that dissent to be registered, and therefore produce more honest results. They will also make jury tampering by bribery or intimidation more difficult for organised criminals to achieve. Although the majority verdict reform will inevitably attract comment and discussion, it is not radical. The UK, for example, has had 10:2 majority verdicts since 1967. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000085\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThis bill also provides for trial by judge instead of jury in two circumstances: firstly, when the trial is likely to be complex and longer than a month. Evidence suggests that jurors have trouble coping with very long trials, particularly where there is a large amount of very complicated evidence. There is also provision for a judge-alone trial if there is evidence of jury intimidation, which from time to time has been an issue in gang-related cases. For similar reasons, new restrictions will be placed on the distribution of jury lists. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000086\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003ERecently, the Government announced a $9 million boost to jury fees. This bill contains further measures to make it easier to serve on juries. These include allowing jurors, when summoned, to defer jury service for up to 12 months to a more convenient time of their choice. It also becomes an offence for employers to prejudice the position of an employee by reason of that person\u2019s absence on jury service. At the same time, the penalty for failing to answer a summons will increase from $300 to $1,000. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe bill creates two exceptions to the double-jeopardy rule: tainted acquittal and cases of compelling new evidence. That is consistent with the law in the United Kingdom, and with reforms proposed in Australia. The tainted acquittal exception will apply if an acquitted person is later found guilty of evading justice at the first trial by committing an offence such as perjury or intimidating a witness. That will ensure that those who resort to such tactics cannot benefit from their own wrongdoing, and will therefore remove the incentive to offend in that way. This reform was recommended by the Law Commission and followed the case of Kevin Moore, in which a gang member who was tried for murder persuaded a witness to give false evidence for him and was acquitted. Because Moore could not be tried again, he literally got away with murder. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000088\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe second exception relates to compelling new evidence. The reason for this exception is the importance, particularly for victims, of ensuring that the criminal justice system can achieve the right result for very serious crimes. There have been cases overseas where conclusive evidence of guilt has surfaced, post-acquittal. It is my view that most New Zealanders would be outraged if that situation occurred here and our justice system was unable to bring the offenders to justice. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000089\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe compelling new evidence exception departs from the criminal justice tradition of only one trial. For that reason, it is subject to a long list of safeguards. The exception will apply only to offences with a maximum term of imprisonment of more than 14 years, such as murder, rape, and class A drug dealing. The evidence must have been unavailable at the time of the first trial, so that the police have no incentive to indulge in sloppy practice. The evidence must be reliable and indicate with a high degree of probability that the acquitted person is, in fact, guilty. Consent to proceed in cases of compelling new evidence must be brought at each stage. The police will not be allowed to reinvestigate and acquit a person without consent from the Solicitor-General. The Court of Appeal must in turn be satisfied, following reinvestigation, that compelling new evidence of guilt exists, and that a retrial would be in the interests of justice. The double-jeopardy exceptions are not retrospective, which means that acquittals obtained before the legislation commences will remain intact. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000090\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EI welcome submissions on this issue. I would also like the Law and Order Committee to consider whether a 14-year threshold for compelling new evidence will capture the right kinds of offences, and whether the tainted acquittal exception should apply only when an administration of justice offence has been committed by third parties. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000091\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe third major issue of reform in this bill relates to the preliminary hearings procedure. Preliminary hearings are currently held before jury trials to act as a filter to ensure that improper prosecutions are dismissed at an early stage. However, in practice, police almost always\u2014in about 93 percent of cases\u2014collect sufficient evidence against all alleged offenders to satisfy the court that there is a sound basis on which to proceed. For this and other reasons, the Law Commission concluded that preliminary hearings are largely redundant. Such hearings also require victims and other witnesses to duplicate their court appearances, which is both stressful and unduly demanding. The bill therefore provides that the standard pre-trial procedure will be for parties to present their evidence in the form of written statements, with automatic committal for trial unless either party applies for an oral hearing. Oral hearings will be permitted only in limited circumstances where either party wishes to examine one or more of the witnesses, and a District Court judge agrees that it is appropriate. This will reduce demands on court staff and facilities, and may mean that some cases can be more quickly disposed of. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000092\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EIn the absence of a preliminary hearing, it is important to ensure that adequate and timely disclosure still occurs so that defendants can prepare their cases and determine how to plead. At present, prosecution disclosure before a trial is regulated by a mixture of case law and statutory rules under the old Official Information Act and the Privacy Act. This bill codifies disclosure requirements. Under these procedures, the prosecution is required to disclose to the defence all relevant information unless there is a good reason to withhold it. Defendants also have to disclose obligations relating to alibi evidence and notice of intention to call expert witnesses. In some circumstances, defendants will also be able to obtain information held by third parties such as the Institute of Environmental Science and Research. One issue the select committee considering this bill may wish to explore is whether an equivalent right should be available to the prosecution\u2014for example, if it wished to obtain material used by the defence experts in preparing its brief. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000093\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EOverall, this bill contains numerous amendments to criminal procedure legislation, all designed to ensure that criminal proceedings can be more efficiently managed while ensuring maximum fairness for everyone involved. I recommend that the bill be referred to the Law and Order Committee for consideration. I commend the bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022 data-id=\u002293b3e2322e3b41ac87104464154b434b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000094\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002293b3e2322e3b41ac87104464154b434b\u0022\u003ERICHARD WORTH (National\u2014Epsom):\u003C/span\u003E This is a bill of 100 clauses that has very far-reaching significance. From the perspective of National members, we support this bill going to the Law and Order Committee that has been assigned to deal with it. It will be one of the most important pieces of work, I believe, that will be done in this Parliament. It will attract substantial interest from those who study criminal jurisprudence and, if even only some of these reforms are enacted, the impact on the criminal courts will be truly substantial. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000095\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003EThere are, as the previous speaker has said, a number of substantial changes that the bill proposes. The first, but I do not necessarily think the most controversial, deals with majority verdicts in criminal cases, and I would like to come back to that in a moment if I may. Then there is the issue of trial by judge alone instead of by a jury, where there is evidence of juror intimidation, or the trial is complex and long. Quite clearly, the philosophical issue there is whether we should move away from what has been a hallmark of the legal system in most common law countries, which has seen an accused person tried by his or her peers and not by a judge alone. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000096\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003EThere are provisions dealing with more limited challenges to potential jurors, and in the context of changes to the jury system, increased penalties for failing to respond to jury notices. Then, as the previous speaker has said, there is the highly controversial proposal of the Government, in the context of the qualifications the Minister made, to substantially change the law relating to double jeopardy. I will come back to that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000097\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003EPerhaps two further changes are worth noting: preliminary hearings, where the evidence would be presented in written form unless the judge decides that an oral hearing is required; and, finally, revamped provisions for criminal disclosure. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000098\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003EIt is quite clearly the case that in a number of criminal trials, the defence seeks to catch the prosecution unaware. Where there are issues of guilt and innocence to be determined in the context of an offender\u2019s conduct, it is important that there be no surprises. A surprises strategy can often lead to a miscarriage of justice. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000099\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003EI come back then to the first topic that I said I would return to, which relates to majority verdicts. The present law in New Zealand is that in all criminal cases, the verdict must be unanimous. That is not a statutory requirement, but derives from the common law. There is no statutory requirement for unanimous verdicts. As far as statute law goes, it is simply this. Section 17 of the Juries Act states that: \u201CEvery jury shall comprise 12 jurors.\u201D The Act says nothing about the numerical balance required to support a verdict. While a jury of fewer than 11 jurors is legally possible in New Zealand, a court is prohibited from proceeding with less than that number, unless both the prosecutor and the accused consent. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000100\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003EThere has obviously been much discussion in common law jurisdictions relating to majority verdicts, and I guess the locus classicus of the argument in favour of majority verdicts is based on the judgment of the English Court of Appeal in a case called R v Walhein.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000101\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003EIt was in that decision that the court said: \u201CIt makes for great inconvenience and expense if jurors cannot agree owing to the unwillingness of one of their number to listen to the arguments of the rest.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003EA second justification for majority verdicts would be that such majorities help to prevent jury nobbling. It must be a matter of concern to all politicians, no matter what their political philosophies might be, that the rate of hung juries has continued to rise. The number of hung juries has risen from 3 percent of trials in 1993 to over 10 percent between January and August 1999. Those figures, which come primarily from the Law Commission in its preliminary paper, are the latest figures that I am aware of. In that preliminary paper, the Law Commission said in part that it was of the view that: \u201CIf current rates of hung juries are substantially maintained or increased in the period prior to publication of our final report, majority verdicts should be introduced.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000103\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003EMy personal view is that the Government\u2019s proposals of 11:1 need to be looked at critically, and I would favour a majority balance of 10:2. In the one illustration that the previous speaker gave, he spoke of the United Kingdom arrangements, which are 10:2; and looking at what is going on in common law jurisdictions, the United Kingdom is 10:2, Northern Territory is 10:2, Tasmania is 10:2, South Australia is 10:2, Oregon is 10:2, Hawaii is 10:2, Alaska is 10:2, and so it goes on. I am aware, however, that Victoria has opted for the 11:1 proposals of the New Zealand Government. So on that issue relating to majority verdicts, I would express the hope that the Law and Order Committee will see the merit of a 10:2 proposal. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000104\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003EThe second issue, which I judge to be highly controversial, relates to creating exceptions to the double jeopardy principle. I have to say that in respect of the second exception the Government proposes to embark upon, we are in danger of pursuing criminal adventures for all the wrong reasons. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000105\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003EThe principle of double jeopardy is straightforward. It is to ensure that no person is retried for an offence of which that person has already been acquitted. This bill proposes two changes to allow two exceptions to that well-understood principle. The first exception is where evidence is tainted through perjury or witness intimidation, and if there are to be exceptions made to the principle, then that is probably an area where an exception is justified.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000106\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003E It is in the area of the second exception that I take strong objection. That second principle concerns the case where strong evidence of guilt is established after a person has been acquitted for an offence punishable by imprisonment for 14 years or more. There are a number of problems with creating that exception. It may, perhaps, be justified on a populist basis. The reality, however, is that the legal system is not a perfect system, and balances in the system have to be constantly sought. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000107\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003EDouble jeopardy ensures that the powers and resources of the Crown are not abused, and that prosecutions are brought only where there is clear evidence of wrongdoing against an accused person. To try to justify the exception, the Government has built in a number of protections in the bill. One is when a case has gone to the Court of Appeal, and the Court of Appeal has formed a view that there is compelling evidence of guilt against the accused person. I have a real concern as a lawyer that if that exception is maintained, it will be virtually impossible for an accused person, following that adverse finding of the Court of Appeal, to have a fair trial. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000108\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003EThe injustice of it is apparent, because the Court of Appeal does not see and hear the witnesses. The reality of Court of Appeal hearings is that they are conducted on the papers. We will have a situation in which, without seeing or hearing the witnesses and without an opportunity to test the evidence in any real way, an accused person will have to face the prosecution against the background of an adverse determination of guilt or innocence. We need to look at that exception very critically.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022 data-id=\u002219b1dace25854f58af64ad45bcbcd943\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000109\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002219b1dace25854f58af64ad45bcbcd943\u0022\u003EDAIL JONES (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E This bill has a number of very important issues, from the point of view of criminal procedure. New Zealand First will support it to the select committee, but we do have reservations about it. The National Party spokesman for justice set out a number of issues very clearly. He was especially concerned about the second exception relating to compelling new evidence for double jeopardy. We well know that in a criminal case, people often bankrupt themselves to try to defend themselves against charges. If a person has spent all his or her money to defend him or herself based on the evidence produced by the Crown, and then the Crown says, later on, that it has some new evidence and it wants to go through all that again, that person has no money, and while he or she might get legal aid, he or she might not get the lawyer he or she really wants and might not be able to afford the lawyer who got the person off on the first occasion. So there are problems with the double jeopardy principle, and it will be interesting to see what happens in the select committee. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000110\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EI had hoped that the bill might go to the Justice and Electoral Committee, because there are a number of complicated legal issues involved. Perhaps a Labour member might comment on that possibility. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000111\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EThe area about which New Zealand First is greatly concerned and has objection to is Part 5. The trouble we have today with legislation is that the law drafter is ordered by the Government to throw a lot of issues together, and they all get put in one part, even though one might agree with some and disagree with others. If the areas to which I will refer are not removed from Part 5, then we may have to vote against Part 5 as a whole, but we will look at that situation after hearing the evidence in the select committee. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000112\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EThe area about which we are particularly concerned is the one relating to preliminary hearings. The Government intends to abolish preliminary hearings. The only justification it can come up with is a statement by the Law Commission that found that the main purpose of preliminary hearings\u2014to act as a filter for unmeritorious cases\u2014was not being served, because the lay justices of the peace before whom they are usually held may feel unqualified to put an end to a case. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000113\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EI have appeared in preliminary hearings, or \u201Cdeposition hearings\u201D as we lawyers call them, and I have never had the difficulty, in a deserving case, of having the matter struck out by a justice of the peace on the basis that there is no case to answer. I do not accept the Law Commission\u2019s view. I believe that preliminary hearings must continue as they are today. That is my personal view, and I will be looking at the submitters\u2019 views with interest to see whether people who practice at the bar share the view of the Law Commission. I wonder how many members of the Law Commission have actually appeared in a District Court on deposition hearings. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000114\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EI remember when I got back into practice in 1984 one of my first cases was to have an indictable offence thrown out because of poor evidence against a couple of clients. I have had a deposition hearing tossed out on an arson case, where the police had called out the armed offenders squad, so the witnesses were the police, yet the JPs had no difficulty in throwing out that particular charge. I believe there is a strong place and a strong case for deposition hearings to continue. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000115\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EIf a lawyer tries to defend a case at the deposition hearing and has it tossed out, that saves the Crown a lot of money. It prevents having a lengthy jury trial with a judge\u2014possibly a judge of the High Court\u2014it prevents having to call in 12 jurors, and it prevents the case taking the weeks that a jury trial can take. In deposition hearings that are obviously cut and dried, and where there is a case to answer, on today\u2019s basis most lawyers will hand up the charges and evidence, and that is the end of it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000116\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EBut lawyers may want to check out a witness at a deposition hearing, and it is a useful forum to see whether the Crown\u2019s witnesses really stack up and whether the evidence stacks up. It is often useful for the prosecutor to find out whether the prosecution witnesses can stand the pace of a High Court hearing or a District Court jury trial hearing. So I think for the Crown to dismiss preliminary hearings in the way in which it has in this legislation is an adverse effect of it, and that the matter should be reconsidered. I would have thought that perhaps the Justice and Electoral Committee would be the committee that would best understand what is involved here. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000117\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EThere is clause 88, \u201CDefendant\u2019s right to elect trial by jury where offence punishable by more than 3 months\u2019 imprisonment\u201D. Today, when the defendant goes in the box and fails to enter a plea of \u201CGuilty\u201D or \u201CNot guilty\u201D and how he or she wants to be tried, usually the Crown has to go ahead with trial by jury. Here, the whole situation has been reversed from what has been the norm for many years in New Zealand. I will be interested to see what happens with regard to clause 88. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000118\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EAnother issue is Part 5A, \u201CSpecial provisions relating to standard committal process and committal hearings in cases of sexual nature\u201D. This provision is inserted by clause 92, which is in Part 5. It is an area that we might not oppose, depending on the evidence, but on the face of it, it goes entirely against all the principles of New Zealand justice. It provides that a complainant must not be examined or cross-examined on a statement provided at a committal hearing. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000119\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EThere are all sorts of protections given to complainants these days. So often the evidence, when it comes under scrutiny, falls apart\u2014which is a reason for a pre-trial or deposition hearing. To have a complainant go to a deposition hearing and, through a standard committal process, make a statement without any degree of examination\u2014not even by the prosecutor, let alone by the defence counsel\u2014means that we are going down a dangerous path. Again, as I said, we are talking about the committal process only, and I will be interested to hear what submitters have to say on that aspect. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000120\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EMy colleague Mr Brown, the deputy leader of New Zealand First, will be seeking a call on that in order to speak on an issue that is close to his heart. At this stage New Zealand First supports this bill to the select committee, although we have grave reservations about Part 5.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000121\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285712e72-b25f-4850-b4d9-90035064fde3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a675db5cabc4473dbdc03ee29895e4fb\u0022\u003ENANDOR TANCZOS (Green):\u003C/span\u003E Last night the Green Party split its vote on the Parole (Extended Supervision) and Sentencing Amendment Bill because while we had strong concerns over the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act implications of that bill, most of us felt that the infringement of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act was justifiable. There was clear evidence of an immediate problem that was quantifiable and there was compelling reason for change in terms of the significance of the problem that the bill was trying to address. I mention that bill only as a comparison with the current bill that we are looking at, because in this case I do not think we can see clear evidence of a current problem that needs to be addressed in urgency. Nor do I think we see evidence of the kind of seriousness of the problem that can be compared at all, so because of that, the Green Party will not be supporting this bill through the first reading. That does not mean that we may not be able to support it at a later stage if significant amendments can be made to it, but certainly we do not feel able to support it at this point, because we do not think the evidence is there. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000122\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285712e72-b25f-4850-b4d9-90035064fde3\u0022\u003EThis is an omnibus bill. Of course there are a number of provisions\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000123\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b77a6a23485842459914209317118b9a\u0022\u003EDail Jones\u003C/span\u003E: What is it that you are opposing?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000124\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285712e72-b25f-4850-b4d9-90035064fde3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fc9205ba2f7a4949930212c85858cf1e\u0022\u003ENANDOR TANCZOS\u003C/span\u003E: The bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000125\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229b40bc0b67014950a12ecfbd121e6e2b\u0022\u003EDail Jones\u003C/span\u003E: Entirely?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000126\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285712e72-b25f-4850-b4d9-90035064fde3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ebcc0987a271429f83a341f541602f58\u0022\u003ENANDOR TANCZOS\u003C/span\u003E: That is what my speech is about to outline. The member is quite right\u2014this is an omnibus bill; there are a number of provisions in it, and many of them are actually very good. We support many of these provisions and it is unfortunate that the Government seems to have an increasing tendency to put in omnibus bills, which means there are so many different provisions in there that we are constantly having to weigh up: \u201CIs it so bad, that we cannot support the good stuff?\u201D. That is not a proper way to conduct the business of this House, in our opinion. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000127\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285712e72-b25f-4850-b4d9-90035064fde3\u0022\u003EThe first thing I will speak about in the specifics of the bill is the double jeopardy aspect because it is a serious issue. Unlike the Parole (Extended Supervision) and Sentencing Amendment Bill that we discussed last night, which some claimed comprised double jeopardy but could be seen not so much as double jeopardy but more in the nature of a double punishment, what we are seeing with this bill is quite clearly actual double jeopardy\u2014that is, people who have been acquitted in a court of an offence are being retried for the same offence. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000128\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285712e72-b25f-4850-b4d9-90035064fde3\u0022\u003ENow there is a case to be made in some way and we have some sympathy for some of the things the bill is trying to achieve in this regard. The bill creates two exceptions to the double jeopardy rule. The first one is where someone was acquitted because of committing an administration of justice offence such as perjury or intimidating a witness. And we do have some sympathy for that point of view, if it is clear that someone was acquitted because that person threatened a juror, for example, and that led to a false verdict. That is a problem and does need to be addressed. We looked at whether there were other ways of addressing that problem: should we strengthen the perjury provisions, for example? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000129\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285712e72-b25f-4850-b4d9-90035064fde3\u0022\u003EOf course, it is not possible to come at all of the cases in that way, because, first of all, many of the offences committed to get the acquittal would not have been committed by the person on trial. These offences would have been committed by friends or associates, and prosecuting someone for perjury does not necessarily address the problem of the wrongful acquittal, The other thing, of course, is that if someone is acquitted of a murder charge, to use the perjury laws to get at that person the offender will have to be sentenced to the kind of sentence that he or she would have received had he or she been found guilty of murder. What we are then doing is effectively sentencing such offenders for something that they have not been proven guilty of, and that would be even more improper. So we cannot get at it that way, and we do have some sympathy with that part of the double jeopardy rule. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000130\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285712e72-b25f-4850-b4d9-90035064fde3\u0022\u003EWe have more concerns with the second part where reference is made to compelling new evidence becoming available. We have to accept that technology moves on. It may be that in 5 years\u2019 time some amazing new technology is developed that was not available at the time of the case, and it is able to prove that someone was guilty of the offence, but this provision is not limited to new technology. This provision is actually quite broad in the sense that it contains few safeguards. It just talks about \u201Cfresh and compelling evidence\u201D. Well, what does that actually mean? I think Mr Goff has tried to take some of the concerns seriously and has tried to put some safeguards around it. There is going to be only one trial, the Solicitor-General must consent to police reinvestigation, and then they seek leave to the Court of Appeal to reopen the case.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000131\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285712e72-b25f-4850-b4d9-90035064fde3\u0022\u003E The Court of Appeal must then decide that there is compelling new evidence, and Mr Goff says that the evidence must be unable to have been discovered with the exercise of due diligence. So I think that is an attempt to put in safeguards; nevertheless, the Green Party does not believe that they are adequate to safeguard against the problem that the bill provides a strong incentive for the manufacture of evidence if someone has been committed of an offence. It is not a theoretical thing. We cannot say: \u201COh, the New Zealand Police never do this.\u201D Most officers never do that, but we have examples in the history of this country where evidence has been manufactured, and we have to take that seriously. In the opinion of the Greens we would be wrong as a Parliament to create incentives for the manufacture of evidence. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000132\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285712e72-b25f-4850-b4d9-90035064fde3\u0022\u003EThe other thing is that there is no evidence that this is a compelling problem. Where is the evidence that people are being acquitted on the basis of these things and that we have such a problem with it that a law needs to be passed that contravenes the longstanding principle against double jeopardy? In our opinion the evidence is just not there. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000133\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285712e72-b25f-4850-b4d9-90035064fde3\u0022\u003EThe other thing I would like to talk about that was also very strongly opposed in our caucus is some of the provisions around jury trials. Some of the provisions are actually very good. Some of them simply relate to making juries more effective. For example, we strongly support things like increasing jury district boundaries, increased penalties for failing to answer a jury summons, and provisions to defer service for up to 12 months. I have been called up for jury service twice in my life, once during my university exams and once a couple of days after I had been elected as a member of Parliament. I was quite disappointed because I would have enjoyed doing the jury service. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000134\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a076bae27aa643ddb25070fb398df948\u0022\u003EHon Ken Shirley\u003C/span\u003E: Not eligible.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000135\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285712e72-b25f-4850-b4d9-90035064fde3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fd22e13e28374a298e1af5b2d8af4a22\u0022\u003ENANDOR TANCZOS\u003C/span\u003E: Exactly, not eligible. I saw it as a responsibility as a citizen of Aotearoa to do that. It would have been extremely interesting and informative to take part. When I was doing my exams I would have liked to defer my jury service so that when my exams were finished I could have done it at a later time, but that was not possible. So I think it is good that people can defer service. It is an offence to prejudice an employee by reason of that person\u2019s absence on jury service. The other thing we think is extremely good is allowing the prosecution and defence expert evidence to be heard in sequence where that would better assist jurors to understand the case, so that jurors do not have to follow an extremely complex argument through to the completion of all the evidence, then hear the other side, with the serious possibility of becoming confused about what point was what, and so on. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000136\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285712e72-b25f-4850-b4d9-90035064fde3\u0022\u003ESo there are a number of good things in the bill, but we strongly oppose, first of all, the move to majority verdicts. Notwithstanding the lengthy list of mostly American states that Mr Richard Worth read to the House, we think that majority verdicts will lead to quicker, but not necessarily better, justice. Now when one juror has a strong reservation about a guilty verdict, the jury has to listen to that person, work through the issues, and either convince that person of the correctness of a guilty verdict, or it may well be, and it does happen\u2014and there is experience of this in our caucus\u2014that a single juror says that it is not right, that there is something wrong, and manages to bring around a majority of the jurors to conclude that a not guilty verdict would be appropriate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000137\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285712e72-b25f-4850-b4d9-90035064fde3\u0022\u003EThere is no incentive to do that with majority verdicts. The majority of the jury will just go: \u201COh well, we will wait 4 hours, then it is all over. We don\u2019t have to listen to you.\u201D The Greens think that that is a bad move and we do not think we should go that way at all. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000138\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285712e72-b25f-4850-b4d9-90035064fde3\u0022\u003EThe other thing we are extremely concerned about is the ability to have trial by judge alone, in long and complex cases and where there is evidence of jury intimidation. Jury intimidation is when there is evidence that there is, has been, or may be, jury intimidation. That is extremely broad. We think that this issue is a real problem and that this is not the way to deal with it. We think the changes to depositions are something we should support. So overall it is a mix of things. It is unfortunate that we have to oppose the good things because of the things we do not support, but we will not be supporting this bill through its first reading.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022 data-id=\u00220b422e5edb664d14af67a855690d03da\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000139\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220b422e5edb664d14af67a855690d03da\u0022\u003EHon KEN SHIRLEY (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E The ACT party will be supporting the Criminal Procedure Bill. However, the first observation I would make is to ask why we are debating this bill under urgency. There is nothing urgent about it. It has some relatively minor and quite significant points, but it could have been dealt with in the normal procedure of the House. I also observe that the Government pulled the plug early yesterday for the lunch break in urgency. It could not go through to 1 o\u2019clock, because it did not have enough on the agenda. Last night it tried to pull the plug early, at about a quarter past 11, but the ACT party denied it leave to do that. If the Government is to put the House into urgency, it should do so because it is serious and it actually has a backlog of urgent matters that need to be cleared. Clearly, the Government is in disarray in terms of its procedures. It brings matters of minor consequence to the House and then throws them into urgency, for no good reason. That is just bad management by Government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000140\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022\u003EThe other observation I would make in relation to this bill\u2014and it has already been made, but I reinforce the point\u2014is that Part 5 has a wide range of ad hoc matters, some of which are reasonable, but others are quite unpalatable. The point is that there has been a tendency in drafting, particularly with this Government, to group and amalgamate a whole range of matters into one part, and then under urgency debate the bill part by part to try to save time. I believe that that truncates the right and obligation of the Parliament to debate those issues, many of which are stand-alone issues that should not be amalgamated in that way. Perhaps the reason this Government is ramming this stuff through in urgency is that it does not want to stand up to the scrutiny of those detailed matters. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022\u003EThe ACT party certainly does have concern with the proposal to replace unanimous jury verdicts with majority verdicts. We believe that that could well erode safeguards against wrongful convictions. We welcome some of the changes, but others could well erode key rights that protect defendants, if the establishment decided to gang up on them\u2014and regrettably, it does.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000142\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226fc29d8630e445aea7fde6c53201fd1b\u0022\u003EJudith Collins\u003C/span\u003E: Like Nick Smith.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000143\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223e2355d54d25422b920a2393b16a59a9\u0022\u003EHon KEN SHIRLEY\u003C/span\u003E: That may well be a case in point. Often the establishment does want to protect its patch, and it will gang up. There are some disgraceful examples where the establishment has ganged up. That is the point of having jury trials where peers can stand in judgment, and the establishment can be exposed if it is colluding and ganging up in the way in which it presents the case for the prosecution. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000144\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022\u003EThe other concern\u2014and it runs in parallel\u2014is the prosecution\u2019s ability to get a judge-alone trial, instead of a jury trial, by alleging a threat of intimidation; this is the mechanism the Crown can use, and it is an ability that could well be misused. That is the concern. The establishment could well push for a judge-alone trial, bypassing that judgment by the peer group, which goes to the very foundation of our justice system. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000145\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022\u003EThe issue has been raised with regard to intimidation. On many occasions in this House the Minister has given the example of the person who literally got away with murder on the basis of intimidation. But there are other ways that we could have dealt with that. One good way would be to make the penalty so severe that it is simply not worth it. The risk would outweigh any benefit associated with that sort of behaviour. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000146\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022\u003EIf the Minister of Justice, Phil Goff, were truly serious about dealing to offenders who corrupt justice, he would have to get rid of the so-called right to silence that lets criminals make their lawyers peddle fanciful theories and they are safe from being cross-examined. We put to the Minister of Justice, Mr Goff, that if he were truly serious he would do away with the provision that allows a defender to declare silence and then his or her lawyer just puts up a whole range of fanciful scenarios\u2014knowingly fanciful, in the knowledge that in those circumstances a defender cannot be cross-examined on the veracity of the issues being put up. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000147\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022\u003EThe risk with majority verdicts is worth running. In complex and lengthy cases, and where the prosecution alleges threatened intimidation, the end to the right to a jury trial will be tempting for justice authorities where they think that a jury might refuse to convict. Jury trials have been a safeguard with unpopular law, or where the jury thinks the Government is abusing prosecution powers. Those possibilities are justification for protecting the ancient right to a trial by one\u2019s peers. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000148\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022\u003EI have expressed a number of concerns the ACT party has with this legislation. However, we are prepared to see it proceed to a select committee where we hope that full scrutiny will be given.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225caeb43f-d5eb-4780-bddc-0fc23950543a\u0022 data-id=\u00222ba8b7391aa04789ba1f1da070127c72\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000149\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225caeb43f-d5eb-4780-bddc-0fc23950543a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222ba8b7391aa04789ba1f1da070127c72\u0022\u003EMURRAY SMITH (United Future):\u003C/span\u003E It may come as a surprise to members to learn that the New Zealand legal system is not founded on the pursuit of truth. In other words, the New Zealand legal system is not founded on the necessity for our courts to determine, as far as they can, whether a person actually committed a crime, before determining what punishment, if any, is appropriate; or in a civil dispute, everything relevant that happened between the parties, before deciding who is in the right. Whether people are surprised by that statement depends on how close an involvement they have had with our courts. The statement will not surprise lawyers, judges, and most people who have been required to participate in our justice system. Those who earn their living from participation in the courts system are well aware that the discovery of truth is no more than a hopeful by-product of the justice system, and not central to it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000150\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225caeb43f-d5eb-4780-bddc-0fc23950543a\u0022\u003EMany New Zealanders who have appeared before courts, either as defendants in criminal or civil cases, or in seeking to obtain the assistance of the court to enforce their rights, have come away frustrated and disillusioned at the inadequacies of the court system, solely because they had an expectation that the court would make a decision that was based on the truth. But instead, they have found that that decision has been based on half-truths, impressions, sympathies, and above all else, a rigid adherence to the semantics of legislative wording. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000151\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225caeb43f-d5eb-4780-bddc-0fc23950543a\u0022\u003EOn 3 August 1994, TV3 aired a documentary in its Inside New Zealand series that looked at the criminal jurisdiction of the District Courts. In the course of the programme the then Chief District Court Judge, and now Ombudsman, Anand Satyanand, stated: \u201CIt is not my role to discover the truth.\u201D Rather, he said that the judge\u2019s role was to consider the evidence that was placed in front of him or her and decide whether the evidence was sufficient to prove the commission of an offence, in terms of a strict analysis of the wording of the relevant statute. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000152\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225caeb43f-d5eb-4780-bddc-0fc23950543a\u0022\u003EIn other words, the dispensing of justice in the criminal court system is a technical exercise in which the prosecution is required to prove each ingredient of an offence and the defence counsel role is, in essence, to show that the prosecution has failed to do so. For that reason no one is ever found innocent\u2014that is, found that he or she did not commit a crime. He or she is found not guilty. This is an important difference. \u201CNot guilty\u201D means that whether he or she did it or not, guilt has not been proven. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000153\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225caeb43f-d5eb-4780-bddc-0fc23950543a\u0022\u003EAccordingly, in the very first criminal case that I was involved in as a defence lawyer, my client was accused of hunting without a licence. The regional authority that was prosecuting him overlooked presenting evidence to the court that the land on which my client was found with his gun was public land\u2014an essential ingredient of the offence. I moved for the charge to be struck out on the basis that an essential ingredient had not been proven. That was granted, and my client was free, irrespective of whether he had actually hunted without a licence. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000154\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225caeb43f-d5eb-4780-bddc-0fc23950543a\u0022\u003EAccordingly, it is quite consistent within our adversarial system for a person to be acquitted of a crime, even though he actually \u201Cdid it\u201D. In fact, the concept of \u201Cdid it\u201D suggests that he was guilty of committing a crime, and he is not guilty unless the police can prove he \u201Cdid it\u201D. If they cannot, he is \u201Cnot guilty\u201D and is acquitted\u2014that is, freed or released from charge. As I said, our system never declares a person innocent.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000155\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225caeb43f-d5eb-4780-bddc-0fc23950543a\u0022\u003E So when we come to this bill, we see that the Government is tinkering with a criminal justice system that has much more fundamental problems. In our criminal justice system, everybody has the goal of seeing people who commit crimes getting convicted, and people who are wrongly accused getting acquitted; also, they want the system to run efficiently, both in terms of time and cost. This bill seeks to make some adjustments to our flawed system in order to try to improve those things. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000156\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225caeb43f-d5eb-4780-bddc-0fc23950543a\u0022\u003EIn terms of juries, the bill addresses the problems we have of a reluctance of people to serve as jurors and also the problem of the rogue juror\u2014the one in 12 who, for whatever reason, apparent or hidden, will not agree with the other 11. Chiefly, in that regard, the bill provides for majority verdicts, for dispensing with jurors in cases of complexity, for increasing the catchment area for jurors, for increasing penalties for jurors who do not turn up, for allowing jurors to go home at night during trials, and for allowing jurors to defer jury service. Those things are mostly non-contentious. The dispensing of jurors is a contentious point, but, as I said, the Government is really just tinkering in that sort of area. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000157\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225caeb43f-d5eb-4780-bddc-0fc23950543a\u0022\u003EWith regard to deposition hearings, the bill provides for a speeding up of the trial process and for a freeing up of court time. Deposition hearings will be conducted on the papers instead of having the current situation whereby oral evidence is presented, unless a judge agrees otherwise. Currently, depositions serve as a bit of a test run as to the reliability of the Crown evidence, and that goes back to the fundamental comment I made, that a person is entitled to an acquittal if the police cannot prove he or she \u201Cdid it\u201D\u2014whether it actually happened or not. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000158\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225caeb43f-d5eb-4780-bddc-0fc23950543a\u0022\u003EHowever, defence counsel have at times found that the presentation of oral evidence\u2014in particular, the ability to cross-examine intended Crown witnesses\u2014has revealed information that should have been disclosed by the police but was not. For example, I have been cited a case where a defence attorney said to the Crown\u2019s witness: \u201CWhat did you do next?\u201D, and he said: \u201CWell, I made some notes and gave them to the police.\u201D The question has then been: \u201CWhat notes?\u201D, because the police have not disclosed what was absolutely critical information in terms of notes made at the time. So that has been an area where oral evidence has managed to serve to elicit factual information that should have been disclosed to the police. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000159\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225caeb43f-d5eb-4780-bddc-0fc23950543a\u0022\u003EThe bill does provide some help for the defence in that regard. However, under the bill the police will have to disclose all relevant evidence. At present the police have to disclose only what they are asked for, and it is actually a technical and key exercise for defence counsel to make sure that they provide a broad request to the police so that the police actually give them everything relevant to the case. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000160\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225caeb43f-d5eb-4780-bddc-0fc23950543a\u0022\u003EHowever, there are still times known where the police have conveniently lost, or simply denied the existence of, evidence that is later proved to exist. Therefore, at least a compulsion on the police to disclose all evidence, although that will add to a lot of time and cost on the part of the police, will, to some extent, redress what we are taking away from the defence in the area of oral depositions. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000161\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225caeb43f-d5eb-4780-bddc-0fc23950543a\u0022\u003EThe area of double jeopardy has been dwelt on already by previous speakers. Certainly, in terms of tainted acquittals, United Future is happy that if a person corrupts the system, he or she should not benefit from having done so; and it is legitimate to look at a situation of retrying the process because of the corruption that has been demonstrated to have occurred. The \u201Csubsequent evidence\u201D rule, however, is problematic, and we have some real doubts about that. But we are happy and willing to listen to the submissions that come, and we will do that with interest before we make a final decision in that regard. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000162\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225caeb43f-d5eb-4780-bddc-0fc23950543a\u0022\u003EI come back to the point, that we really need to look at the root causes of our justice system, and in particular at the whole adversarial system we have constructed. United Future believes\u2014and I in particular believe\u2014that we need to move more towards an inquisitorial type of system, as we have already done in terms of inquiries, tribunals, and even Family Courts. The Care of Children Bill is a case in point. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000163\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225caeb43f-d5eb-4780-bddc-0fc23950543a\u0022\u003EThere are three effective things I think we can do in order to move towards that. First, we should make establishing the truth a priority of both judges and courts\u2014refocusing the judges, and thereby the system, on what they ought to be doing. Secondly, I think we should strengthen judges\u2019 ability to call for evidence to be presented so that judges can, when they see a gap in the evidence, take more positive steps towards ensuring that all the evidence that ought to be presented before the court is presented, in order that they can get to the truth. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000164\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225caeb43f-d5eb-4780-bddc-0fc23950543a\u0022\u003EThirdly, I agree with the ACT party\u2014and I am very pleased to see its members supporting what I have been arguing for a number of years\u2014that we should require defendants to give evidence and allow a negative inference to be taken if they do not do so. I think that would dramatically speed up our process. We would have a lot fewer situations whereby defence attorneys run a case, even though their client \u201Cdid it\u201D, just to see whether the police can actually prove it. There would be a lot less of that happening, saving considerable time and expense. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000165\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225caeb43f-d5eb-4780-bddc-0fc23950543a\u0022\u003EUnited Future will support the first reading of this bill and enable the select committee to examine the issues contained in it. However, until we stop tinkering with the system and take a radical look at its fundamentals, we will never get to a stage where we can confidently say that people who commit crimes will invariably be convicted, and that those who are wrongly accused will invariably be acquitted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022 data-id=\u00223b591c59e0e94e94bd8bff746b953ce4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000166\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223b591c59e0e94e94bd8bff746b953ce4\u0022\u003EJUDITH COLLINS (National\u2014Clevedon):\u003C/span\u003E The National Party will support this bill through to the select committee. However, we understand that the Government wants to send it to the Law and Order Committee\u2014am I right, Minister?\u2014rather than to the Justice and Electoral Committee. We are a bit concerned about that, because we believe it should go to the Justice and Electoral Committee. This is an issue of juries and judges. It is absolutely appropriate that the bill go to that committee rather than to the Law and Order Committee, which deals with police issues and things like that. The choice of committee is wrong. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000167\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EI have an idea how we can get time in the Justice and Electoral Committee to deal with this bill: we will swap this bill for the Civil Union Bill, because if it is appropriate to send the Criminal Procedure Bill through to the Law and Order Committee, then I am sure it is just as appropriate to send it the Civil Union Bill. I can hear \u201CHear, hear!\u201D all around from members of the select committee\u2014except for Mr Barnett. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000168\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EMr Worth has very correctly pointed out that we are quite supportive of having majority verdicts in jury trials. We are concerned to make sure that people do not nobble juries\u2014that juries do not have a rogue element that will not be convinced either way and simply not look at the issues. But I am confidently assured by many of the people who practise in the criminal law area\u2014as lawyers, hopefully, not as criminals\u2014that the ability of juries to look through all the gloss, the spin, and everything else and at the substance of what they are hearing is often underrated. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EI think that we in New Zealand perhaps underrate juries significantly, and to our peril. In most cases, people come to juries wondering what they will find and what will come from the experience. They are very concerned to do the right thing. I have been told by those who are involved in this area that juries invariably come to the right decision, and that they take their roles very seriously. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000170\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EI note the comment made by the Green Party member, who said he had two examples of when he could have been on juries, but that examinations and his coming into Parliament unfortunately prevented him from doing so. I think that jury service must be very much like a conscience issue in Parliament, where everyone is trying to do the right thing according to what they think is right, and not according to any party line. We do underestimate the role of juries and their abilities in most cases to come to a verdict. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000171\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EMr Worth pointed out that there has been a substantial increase in the number of hung juries, and that is perhaps something to do with the fact that police resourcing is not as good as it should be, that there is a genuine concern that the police are not always producing the right standard of forensic work, and that there is some sort of concern in the community that the police are not as highly valued and viewed as they once were. There has been a general downgrading of police morale, and perhaps that can be seen in what happens with these verdicts. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000172\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EWe understand that there is a concern over gang-related crime. I can recall at least one crime that occurred in Taranaki where a person literally got away with murder because of intimidation of witnesses and a jury. Of course, that one instance does not mean to say that this happens all the time, so therefore we need to tread very, very carefully with that issue. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000173\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EWe are concerned about the double-jeopardy provisions in the bill, as Mr Worth said. We are particularly concerned with the second exception. In relation to the second exception, the explanatory note states:  \u201C\u2026 compelling new evidence. It will apply to persons previously acquitted of very serious criminal offences if reliable evidence is subsequently discovered that was not available at the time of the first trial and indicates with a high degree of probability that the person is in fact guilty.\u201D That says to me that if anyone is prosecuted using this exception any jury or judge will know from the start of the prosecution that there is reliable evidence, and a judgment has already been made that the evidence is reliable, which is a judgment that is best made by the jury. So that judgment is being taken away from the jury. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000174\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EThe second thing is the fact that the bill states: \u201C\u2026 indicates with a high degree of probability that the person is in fact guilty.\u201D So a judgment is already being made before the jury gets to look at it. The jury is placed in the position of looking at this instance and saying: \u201CIf I don\u2019t think this person is guilty, clearly I am wrong.\u201D I can see this as a State-sanctioned form of jury tampering\u2014in fact, a bullying of the jury into not going with its own reactions and feelings on what it is seeing. For instance, if jury members see a prosecution witness giving evidence, and in their opinion the person is telling a barefaced lie, under this sort of provision people would be saying to themselves: \u201CPerhaps I\u2019ve got it wrong. Perhaps that person is not telling a barefaced lie. Perhaps the body language does not indicate that.\u201D, when the jury member should rightly be going with his or her own feelings on the matter. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000175\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EAnother comment in the explanatory note states: \u201CThe basis for the compelling new evidence exception is the importance in the interests of justice (and particularly victims\u2019 interests) of achieving factually correct verdicts in very serious cases...\u201D. Those of us who have been around the legal profession for a long time know that there are at least as many sides to a story as there are people to tell it. What is a fact is very much a subjective matter, because it depends very much on how someone sees it. We have consistently shown over the years that the evidence of people identifying someone from a particular crime scene, or saying: \u201CI know that that was the person. I saw him or her\u201D, is incredibly unreliable. After a period of time, most people do not remember quite what they think they saw, and that is something we need to be very careful about. That is where DNA testing has been able to really improve the situation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000176\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EIn essence, I am pleased to be able to support this bill through to a select committee. I make a last-minute plea to have this bill transferred to the Justice and Electoral Committee\u2014in my opinion, the appropriate committee to examine this bill\u2014and that the issues the National Party has raised are taken into account in a serious way.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022 data-id=\u00229db0655af72a4c249dc86468fb70bee3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000177\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229db0655af72a4c249dc86468fb70bee3\u0022\u003EPETER BROWN (Deputy Leader\u2014NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E I apologise for being a little slow to my feet, but I expected a Government member to get to his or her feet. It disappoints me that on a bill that has so much meat in it, we have had only one contribution from a Government member\u2014the Minister. As my colleague made clear earlier, New Zealand First will support this bill to select committee. We believe that there is some good stuff in this bill that, at the very least, needs to be aired in public and to receive public submissions. Having said that, the Minister has the wrong select committee. I agree totally with my colleague Dail Jones that this bill should go to the Justice and Electoral Committee, not to the Law and Order Committee. This is a technical bill about law, and it should more appropriately be put before the Justice and Electoral Committee. I sometimes wonder how the Government makes its decisions along those lines. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000178\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EI also agree with my colleague, as do all New Zealand First MPs, who expressed concerns about the abolishment of deposition hearings. I am not a lawyer, but I realise\u2014certainly after listening to Dail Jones in caucus in particular\u2014that they play a very prominent and significant part in a fair criminal trial procedure. We have major jury reservations about that. I tend to agree with the Hon Richard Worth, who said that a majority verdict would be better if it was 10:2, rather than 11:1. We are following the British very much in this bill, and my understanding is that the British have gone to a majority jury verdict of 10:2, as against 11:1. That is my personal view, but, again, I welcome that issue being addressed by the select committee. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000179\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EThere are certain elements in this bill that really please me no end, and I think my colleague alluded to them earlier. There are three areas of concern to me\u2014two are included in the bill, but I cannot find one of them. I have had an interest in British justice for quite some time and have been following it through newspapers and the Internet. After the completion of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association conference last year I took a week\u2019s leave and spoke with justice officials in the UK about various aspects of law and order that the British were looking at. One issue the British were looking at was the exception to double jeopardy. On my return here I produced a member\u2019s bill, called the Crimes (Criminal Justice) Strengthening Amendment Bill, which addresses that issue and a couple of other issues. I am firmly convinced that the exception to double jeopardy should be introduced. This bill provided for it, as indeed did my member\u2019s bill. It should be introduced for serious crime only. We are not talking about petty thieves or the person who has done something relatively minor. We are talking about people who could get a prison sentence in excess of 14 years. It is serious stuff. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000180\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EParliament has an obligation to ensure that people who commit serious crimes are apprehended and do the time. The old saying: \u201CDo the crime; do the time\u201D is appropriate. One of the two areas that would allow for the exception to double jeopardy to click in is \u201Ccompelling new evidence\u201D. I suggest that basically we are talking about compelling new scientific evidence, such as DNA. It is appropriate to use that evidence, even if the person got off the charge before it was available. Obviously, as Judith Collins stated, it has to be used fairly and honourably, but if we can get compelling new evidence against a person who has committed a serious crime, then the State has an obligation to use it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000181\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EMurray Smith referred to corruption of the system\u2014that is, where a juror, a witness, or someone else has been bribed or perjury has been committed. It is only right and proper that that issue is addressed. First of all, of course, the police and the prosecution will have to prove that the person was guilty of perjury. They can then use that evidence against the \u201Cmain criminal\u201D, for want of a better term. So I am pleased that that is in this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000182\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EI am also pleased that this bill provides for the full disclosure of evidence, both from the prosecution and to a larger extent from the defence. I am not a lawyer but it appears to me, and I know it appears to many members of the public, that there have been too many people\u2014lawyers and accused people\u2014who get off charges because of what I would term the smart alec use of the law. This legislation, I believe, will go some way towards closing that off. I do not know whether it will do it totally, but I think it will close it off to some significant degree. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000183\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EA third aspect that is in my bill\u2014but I cannot find it in this bill, although I hope it is there somewhere\u2014is that in certain trials the judge should be able to divulge to the jury the relevant criminal history of an accused. The British are looking at that\u2014in fact, they are introducing it as I understand it, and I think it is appropriate that we bring it in here. I believe that this is a good opportunity to tighten up our justice system and to do our very best to ensure that those who are guilty of crime, particularly serious crime, pay the price. I believe that we have to get it right one time over. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000184\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EJudith Collins referred to the morale of the police. She implied that the low morale suffered by the police is because of the criminal justice system. That may be true in part, but equally true is the fact that the police are suffering from low morale because far too often far too many of them have to go out on the road and get a quota of guilty motorists, for want of a better term. They have to go out and fine motorists. I know that the police are getting very, very poor feedback from the public. If we are going to tidy up the law, I think we should tidy up that particular area of it. We in New Zealand First believe that traffic duties should be carried out by a separate force, administered by the Land Transport Safety Authority, or whatever.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000185\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b1b5881-3b86-4894-ac77-72905f786141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223ba5f447b3c44a78a414bd8c6aaeb88d\u0022\u003EHon Judith Tizard\u003C/span\u003E: Why did Winston Peters vote to amalgamate the traffic police and the police?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000186\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002280cbda01e912471494523cc21a9d069e\u0022\u003EPETER BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: The honourable member asks me a question. I was not here at the time, but I can tell her\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000187\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ee3c2a8e44554f40b7f85abd79c3ef8b\u0022\u003EHon Rick Barker\u003C/span\u003E: Ask your leader.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000188\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002278779a18dc304f6bafafb0a2a56636b9\u0022\u003EPETER BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: I am trying to answer the member\u2019s question. I think it is a fair question. If the honourable member did do that\u2014and I am not doubting the member\u2019s word\u2014he was a member of the National Party at the time. But since late last year we have surveyed many people, and we are told that that is the wrong way to go. We want to relook at the issue and split the police from the traffic officers, but it will not be done in this bill. I do not really want to encourage debate on that issue during the debate on this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000189\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EThe point I am making is that this bill tightens up our legal system, and we need to tighten it up fully, including in relation to our concerns about aspects of policing in this country. New Zealand First will support this bill\u2019s referral to the select committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022a9c634746f564e4aa184711ba2b7ae2e\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party votewas called for on the question, That the Criminal Procedure Bill be now read a first time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 109\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 9\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party 9.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill read a first time, and referred to the Law and Order Committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000190\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022c02cbcdd042046fa9037514a0c53e543\u0022\u003EAnimal Products (Dairy Products and Other Matters) Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000191\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022fff1fd28a68146f584cf3fefa9bc4b79\u0022\u003EFirst Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022 data-id=\u002271e2130aec4a435c9254614c274bd8a6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000192\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002271e2130aec4a435c9254614c274bd8a6\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Associate Minister of Health)\u003C/span\u003E, on behalf of the Minister for Food Safety: I move, That the Animal Products (Dairy Products and Other Matters) Bill be now read a first time. This bill provides for the regulation of the dairy industry under the Animal Products Act and repeals the Dairy Industry Act. The dairy industry is New Zealand\u2019s largest industry. For the year ended 31 May 2003, dairy and casein exports were worth $5.81 billion to the New Zealand economy. There are over 14,000 dairy farm suppliers, 188 registered dairy factories, 285 registered stores and transporters, and 473 registered dairy premises. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003EThe safety and trade of dairy products currently comes under the Dairy Industry Act. That Act does not provide an adequate legislative framework for ensuring product safety outcomes or an adequate legislative framework to facilitate trade in a risk-based management environment. The prescriptive and inflexible style of the Dairy Industry Act is inconsistent with the enabling style of legislation that has been used in modern risk-based legislation, such as the Animal Products Act. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000194\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003EThere are two overarching public policy objectives for the bill: firstly, to manage risks to human and animal health from the consumption and use of dairy products; and, secondly, to facilitate the entry of dairy products to overseas markets. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000195\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003EThe proposals in the Animal Products (Dairy Products and Other Matters) Bill were first made available for public consultation in July 1999 with the release of a public discussion paper. It was distributed to a wide range of stakeholders, including dairy producers, exporters, manufacturers, farming groups, consumer groups, M\u0101ori, and Government departments. A further discussion paper was released in February 2001, and consultation meetings were held during March 2001. Consultation has been ongoing since then on transitional and implementation matters. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000196\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003ECurrently the Animal Products Act exempts material or product that is dairy produce. The bill removes the exemption of dairy produce, along with making a series of amendments that reflect the current risk-based management requirements under the Dairy Industry Act. These include adding definitions of dairy processor, dairy material, and dairy product, and providing that, unless exempted, all dairy processes must operate under a risk-management programme. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000197\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003EThe bill will provide for a seamless transition between the Dairy Industry Act and the Animal Products Act. It provides for a new legislative framework that is consistent with the enabling style of legislation used in modern risk-based legislation. It will deem all product safety programmes under the Dairy Industry Act to be risk-management programmes under the Animal Products Act from the date of commencement, which I anticipate will be 1 January 2005, not 1 July 2004 as stated in the bill. This will mean that all dairy processes\u2014from the milking shed, the farm dairy, up until the dairy product is exported or sent to retail\u2014will now operate under a risk-management programme. This will ensure that product safety outcomes in the dairy industry are provided for in the risk-based management environment. On these grounds there will be little change for operators in their day-to-day business functions. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000198\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003EThe bill also enables the Governor-General, by Order in Council, to exempt dairy material, dairy product, or dairy processes from all or parts of the Animal Products Act if certain criteria are met. Exemptions would be given only when the risks are managed under other legislation, such as the Food Act or the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Act, or where the known risks are negligible. There would be minimum compliance costs associated with the bill. For the majority of the industry the technical requirements will remain the same, and this will mean very little change in costs. The bill provides for other matters that amend the operation of the Act. These include amendments to export requirements, the conditions that can be applied to risk-management programmes, and the requirements for multibusiness risk-management programmes. It is also my intention to introduce a Supplementary Order Paper that further amends the export requirements, to correct a deficiency that has recently come to light. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000199\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003EI propose that the Animal Products (Dairy Products and Other Matters) Bill be considered by the Primary Production Committee. Although I have not spoken to each provision of this bill in any detail I believe I have indicated that it is a logical step forward in the development of generic legislation rather than industry-specific legislation. The bill repeals outdated legislation and provides a flexible means for managing current and potential risks posed by dairy material and dairy product. I commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022ac23eedf-0a53-4d88-a49b-d5b440483616\u0022 data-id=\u002258de3e4666b64cf38d69786a707563c9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000200\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac23eedf-0a53-4d88-a49b-d5b440483616\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002258de3e4666b64cf38d69786a707563c9\u0022\u003EDr LYNDA SCOTT (National\u2014Kaikoura):\u003C/span\u003E The Animal Products (Dairy Products and Other Matters) Bill is one of food safety, which is why I am speaking on it today. The National Party will be supporting this bill. As the Minister has just said, wide consultation has been undertaken, and that consultation began under the National Government in 1999. The dairy industry is supportive of the changes that are being made that change the regulation by repealing the Dairy Industry Act, and bringing the regulations of the dairy industry under the Animal Products Act. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000201\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac23eedf-0a53-4d88-a49b-d5b440483616\u0022\u003EI suppose it is interesting to look back at the history of food safety when it relates to dairy industry products. If we turn our minds back to the past and to the fact that cattle and dairy products can pass on TB, we recall that it was back in those days that we began the pasteurisation of milk. TB in animals is a major cause of disability and death for people in many parts of the world, and those parts of the world that do not have pasteurisation, which was one of the first steps in improving food safety, still have the spread of TB via that role. So we must not forget how important it is to have good risk-management processes and the types of processes that will ensure our dairy products can reach international markets. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000202\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac23eedf-0a53-4d88-a49b-d5b440483616\u0022\u003EThere was a scare last year over retroviruses. It is very damaging to New Zealand\u2019s reputation when such misinformation occurs. Retroviruses can be found in cattle, but they do not infect humans. They are killed by pasteurisation and processing. So to maintain our $5.8 billion export market we do need to have appropriate risk-management programmes. Milk is a highly nutritious food, but it is also an excellent growth medium for bacteria. Raw milk has the potential to transfer zoonotic diseases, and milk handling procedures must minimise the associated health risks, and we must not forget that. Milk will contain residues of veterinary medicines if the milk from treated animals is not appropriately withheld, and quality assurance programmes must address the quality issues and the risks presented by pathogens and residues. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000203\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac23eedf-0a53-4d88-a49b-d5b440483616\u0022\u003ESafety and quality assurance programmes for milk and dairy products must cover the whole dairy chain from the farm to the table, and this new legislation will be looking at that. Processing and proper subsequent handling are the most critical steps to ensure safety of products. The processing of milk into a range of dairy products, which usually involves heat treatment, improves both shelf life and safety, while acidification retards growth of most bacteria. Some pathogens can survive in fermented milks made from raw milk, and can present a risk to human health. Fresh cheeses made from raw milk present similar risks, but hard cheeses made from raw milk and stored for periods in excess of 1 month are normally free of pathogens. New Zealand does have a markedly growing cheese manufacturing industry, and I have to say that I am sure all of us in this House have enjoyed some of the wonderful new cheeses that are available from all parts of New Zealand. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000204\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac23eedf-0a53-4d88-a49b-d5b440483616\u0022\u003EPost-processing handling and packaging procedures must avoid post-pasteurisation contamination. So from the dairy shed through to our export markets, it is essential that we maintain our world standing and the billions that we do make in export. It is important that hormones, antibiotics, and pesticides that can contaminate our milk products are handled appropriately and do not pose a safety risk. This bill will be supported by the National Party.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022fc82cea8-c84d-4ab7-8597-31916dbedc43\u0022 data-id=\u0022a41efc7444224bcb9c3e82aff5002515\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000205\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc82cea8-c84d-4ab7-8597-31916dbedc43\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a41efc7444224bcb9c3e82aff5002515\u0022\u003EEDWIN PERRY (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E I am speaking on behalf of my colleague Mr Doug Woolerton, who is a very effective member on the Primary Production Committee, and has a lot of expertise within this area. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000206\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc82cea8-c84d-4ab7-8597-31916dbedc43\u0022\u003ENew Zealand First is supporting the referral of this bill, namely the Animal Products (Dairy Products and Other Matters) Bill, to the select committee. Bills Digest No. 1116 gives a clear overview of this bill. This bill needs to be passed without any constraints so the industry can get on with its business. The dairy industry, I must say, in the Wairarapa plays a major role in keeping the rural sector going, and the urban sector, obviously, by producing income and employment in those rural areas. We have just heard from the Minister that the national income of the dairy industry is $5.8 billion, which is\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000207\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cfdabe42-521a-4dca-afab-3e781731a130\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e6497e3ef3404d4c965af09e13cba74b\u0022\u003EDr Paul Hutchison\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s just for cheese.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000208\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc82cea8-c84d-4ab7-8597-31916dbedc43\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226bb319c8adda47c9b290cb1ebd1d63cc\u0022\u003EEDWIN PERRY\u003C/span\u003E: I thank my colleague from the National Party for that comment\u2014an abbreviation of the income. Now let us look at some of the key points of this bill. Bills Digest No. 1116 states: \u201CPurpose: The main aims of the Bill are to provide for the: regulation of the dairy industry under the Animal Products Act 1999 (Animal Products Act or Act) and to repeal the Dairy Industry Act 1952 (Dairy Industry Act); management of the risks to human and animal health from the consumption and use of dairy products; and facilitation of entry of dairy products to overseas markets by providing the controls and mechanisms needed for market access and the giving of official assurances.\u201D I would like to look at what is stated under heading \u201CBackground\u201D. This states: \u201C \u2018The Animal Products Act applies to all animals, animal material, and animal product unless they are excluded. Dairy produce is currently excluded from the Animal Products Act. This Bill will remove that exclusion\u2019. All dairy processors will be required to operate under a risk management programme unless they are excluded or exempt from all or part of the Animal Products Act. \u2018The Bill also provides for amendments to be made to the Animal Products Act which amend the operation of the Act. These amendments will include amendments to the export requirements, the conditions which can be applied to risk management programmes and the risk management requirements for multi-business risk management programmes. A range of other, essentially technical, amendments will also be made.\u2019 \u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000209\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc82cea8-c84d-4ab7-8597-31916dbedc43\u0022\u003EUnder the main heading \u201CMain Provisions\u201D in the Bills Digest is the paragraph headed \u201CCommencement\u201D, and I will cover just one point here. That paragraph states: \u201CThe Bill will come into force on 01 July 2004 except for the amendments made to the Food Hygiene Regulations 1974, which come into effect on 01 July 2005 (Clause 2; Part 2, Clause 32(1)(e), Schedule 3, in relation to the Food Hygiene Regulations 1974).\u201D Then, stated under the heading \u201CDefinitions\u201D: \u201CThe Bill inserts new definitions to incorporate the dairy industry in the Act. These definitions include \u2018dairy material\u2019 (\u2018animal material\u2019 that is milk extracted from a \u2018milking animal\u2019 and any material derived from that material), \u2018milk\u2019 (the \u2018mammary secretions of milking animals\u2019), \u2018dairy processing\u2019 (all processing activities in relation to dairy material),\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000210\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc82cea8-c84d-4ab7-8597-31916dbedc43\u0022\u003E I shall deal quickly with the paragraph headed \u201CPower to exempt dairy material from Act\u201D, in the Bills Digest, and I think this is important. It is stated there that the bill enables the Governor-General by Order in Council to exempt dairy material, dairy product, or dairy processors from all or parts of the Animal Products Act if certain criteria are met. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000211\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc82cea8-c84d-4ab7-8597-31916dbedc43\u0022\u003EIt is further stated that: \u201CA transition period of 12 months will apply to all dairy processors operating at the time of commencement and who are not operating under product safety programmes. Those that operate under the Dairy Industry Regulations will be able to continue operations under those regulations for the period of the transition. By the time that year has expired they will be required to operate under a risk management programme or a food safety programme.\u201D, which, I think, is the key part of this bill. There is a lot of common sense in this bill, and New Zealand First recommends it and supports its referral to the select committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cfdabe42-521a-4dca-afab-3e781731a130\u0022 data-id=\u00221a5c9b1d2f094528aa014ad5f8c9b0f1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000212\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cfdabe42-521a-4dca-afab-3e781731a130\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221a5c9b1d2f094528aa014ad5f8c9b0f1\u0022\u003EDr PAUL HUTCHISON (National\u2014Port Waikato):\u003C/span\u003E I am very happy to support this Animal Products (Dairy Products and Other Matters) Bill on behalf of the National Party. We hear that this bill is going to the Primary Production Committee, but I am supporting it in the context of its huge importance to the food industry, and in the context of the huge importance of the dairy industry to New Zealand\u2019s primary products.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000213\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cfdabe42-521a-4dca-afab-3e781731a130\u0022\u003EUndoubtedly, according to the explanatory note: \u201CThe policy objectives of the bill are: management of the risks to human and animal health from the consumption and use of dairy products; and the facilitation of entry of dairy products to overseas markets by providing the controls and mechanisms needed for market access and the giving of official assurances.\u201D There is no doubt that dairy products are of immense importance to New Zealand, and the safety and quality of those products are absolutely vital to our export industry.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000214\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cfdabe42-521a-4dca-afab-3e781731a130\u0022\u003EI remember my old microbiology professor in Dunedin pointing out that he regarded milk as \u201Cbacterial soup\u201D. Clearly, it has the propensity to deteriorate if not kept in ideal conditions. That is the whole reason this bill imposes a series of risk-management processes that have flexibility\u2014from the cow\u2019s teat right to the export market. I note the agricultural department\u2019s emphasis on the reasons behind the vital need for product quality and safety. It points out just how highly nutritious milk is as a food, but how it is also an excellent growth medium for bacteria. Raw milk, indeed, has the potential to transfer a whole variety of diseases: bacterial, viral, and zoonotic. As the primary producers of the Waikato are always keen to point out to me, it is hugely important that milk is collected in ideal conditions, and transported within 24 hours before it deteriorates.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000215\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cfdabe42-521a-4dca-afab-3e781731a130\u0022\u003EThat chain of action, through to large dairy factories and then on to exporters, shows that at every stage it is vital to have in place safety and quality assurance programmes that are consistent with international best practice. The emphasis on quality assurance and risk management has shifted from end-product testing to certification of processes in approaches such as the hazard analysis critical control point system, and appropriate guidelines and training programmes have been developed by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and other agencies to address product standards and specifications for milk and milk products, emerging issues like sanitary and phytosanitary standards, and the technical barriers to trade in the area of international trade. It is vital that New Zealand is at the forefront of that area.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000216\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cfdabe42-521a-4dca-afab-3e781731a130\u0022\u003EI note that in the development of this bill its genesis actually goes back to July 1999 when the previous National Government released a discussion paper. It was distributed to a wide number of stakeholders, including dairy producers, exporters, manufacturers, farming groups, consumer groups, M\u0101ori, and Government departments. Time was given for consultation and six submissions came back\u2014all in favour of a risk-based management approach. I have spoken to both Federated Farmers and Fonterra, and they are supportive of that approach. Further discussion papers were produced in 2000, but we note that the commencement clause in the bill suggests enactment on 1 July 2004. The genesis of this very important bill dates back to 1999, so one wonders why this lumbering Labour Government\u2014or maybe slumbering Labour Government\u2014has taken so many years to finally bring it to the House. It does make one concerned as to where the Government\u2019s priorities are. Nevertheless, the bill is finally here and that is a good thing. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000217\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cfdabe42-521a-4dca-afab-3e781731a130\u0022\u003EI do note, according to Rural News on 17 September 2002, that: \u201CBringing the dairy industry under the Animal Products Act is a top priority says the New Zealand Food Safety Authority, in its post-election ministerial briefing.\u201D Even in the worst or the best-case scenario, the Labour Government has delayed this very important bill for 2 to 3 years. The Government was expecting it to be law at least a year ago. What has happened? All this is consistent with the way this Labour Government has put priorities into social engineering and not into the highly important area of our primary produce\u2014our exports\u2014to ensure that the standards surrounding them are in the best interests of our country.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000218\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cfdabe42-521a-4dca-afab-3e781731a130\u0022\u003ESo here we have an important bill, fundamental to one of our key industries\u2014the dairy industry\u2014yet the Government has been sitting on it for several years. The bill is about putting in place international best-practice, risk management programmes, from the teat of the cow to the export market. National supports it going to the select committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022 data-id=\u0022702cd818d1994dc486d639bcaa587f08\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000219\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022702cd818d1994dc486d639bcaa587f08\u0022\u003EJUDY TURNER (United Future):\u003C/span\u003E I stand on behalf of United Future to support the first reading of the Animal Products (Dairy Products and Other Matters) Bill. This bill is about rescinding the Dairy Industry Act so that the dairy industry can be included under the existing Animal Products Act, and it is about amending the Animal Products (Ancillary and Transitional Provisions) Act. Its policy objectives are clearly defined and extremely prudent. They are: to manage the risks to human and animal health from the consumption and use of dairy products, and to facilitate the entry of New Zealand dairy products to overseas markets through improved quality assurances. Those objectives are outcome-based and less coercive than previous legislative-led intentions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000220\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022\u003EThe bill applies to all aspects of the dairying process, from the cowshed to the retailer, and is focused on identifying and managing health and hygiene risks throughout the process. All dairy processes will be required to operate under a risk management programme, unless they are deemed to be better regulated under another Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000221\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022\u003EThe need to repeal the Dairy Industry Act is apparent. It is a 51-year-old Act that fuses a mixture of laws, some dating back to 1892. The Dairy Industry Act is rigid and prescriptive, and it is time indeed for a revamp. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000222\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022\u003EThis animal products legislation reflects current industry and legislative practices, by using a risk-based management approach to control hazards. It also uses the regulatory model for verification in the use of recognised agencies. As someone who was raised on a dairy farm, it is fascinating for me to see how much a primary industry can evolve over time. The range of value-added products now marketed worldwide, compared with the humble cream can sitting on the stand by the gate waiting for collection, is a credit and testimony to those who manage, direct, and participate in this vital industry. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000223\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022\u003E The bill sets out to manage the fact that multiple business interests have handled many products by the time they reach consumers, so that confidence needs to be consistent at each stage. The risk to business of the poor performance by one contributor to the process is immense, and internationally recognised risk management is vital. It is pleasing to note that there were efforts to consult industry members about the underlying issue the bill seeks to address. As with any proposed legislation that affects the livelihood of stakeholders, both large and small, participation in the process\u2014and, hopefully, buy-in\u2014brings integrity to the bill and adds value to its intention.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000224\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022\u003EConsultation on that proposal has included discussion papers and the invitation to stakeholders to make submissions. Support was forthcoming, which included support from a dairy reference group established for the purpose of representing the interests of the dairy industry. Several options were considered when looking at the proposal, and the decision was to opt for an approach that was as future-proof as possible in allowing for the ongoing development of this industry.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000225\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022\u003EThe guiding principles of this bill deserve recognition. Change is minimised where possible, to allow for as little disruption to the practice as possible. Harmonisation is specifically sought to further allow for the ease of transition. There will be no technical change without the consultation of affected parties, and documents, language, and processes will be clear and concise. Those principles, inherent in the bill, help to ensure best practice and best results. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000226\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022\u003EThe regulatory model used for this bill is judiciously risk-based and outcome-focused. It will afford industry more responsibility for producing safe food, and give the necessary flexibility to achieve desired outcomes. The functionality of the model is commendable. It will add value to industry practice and procedure, and help to ensure ongoing success and best practice. We are very pleased to support this first reading.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022 data-id=\u002298589473e80645fb9e1e2a2ecae44ecc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000227\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002298589473e80645fb9e1e2a2ecae44ecc\u0022\u003EGERRARD ECKHOFF (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E Before starting on the bill I would like to make a slight observation, as I made yesterday in this House when speaking on the Meat Board Restructuring Bill. It is that it is a real pleasure to stand in the House and speak on a bill that we are in total unanimity on. I ask members to reflect on why that is. Here we have a farming industry that has no Government handouts or subsidy, and only a very little light-handed regulation if and when required. Does that not produce a great result in the House? That is what the people, whether they are up in the gallery or listening on the radio, want to see in this place\u2014the Government and the Opposition working together for the betterment of this country, rather than indulging in party politics. That is rather nice to see, and I am delighted to take a call on this bill and support it going to the Primary Production Committee, as every other party is doing. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000228\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003EI do so for a very sound reason: it is New Zealand\u2019s reputation as a country\u2014New Zealand Inc, if you like\u2014that is at stake if or when we ever, and I trust it will not happen, send food products overseas that are not safe. This bill is designed to ensure that the standards we apply to our consumable goods, whether meat or milk, or whatever, are the highest possible that technology can allow us to determine. So, as I said earlier, it is an issue that is met with a high degree of unanimity. We must therefore accept that we need a light-handed Government standard to give what could be described as a stamp of approval, because \u201CMade in New Zealand\u201D does mean an awful lot overseas. I am sure we are all very well aware of that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000229\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003EThere are one or two issues that we need to flag, especially within the dairy industry\u2014and indeed the wider agricultural industry\u2014and that is the use of antibiotics, which, of course, testing will pick up. I saw a programme recently on television about the use of antibiotics overseas and the abuse of this miracle product. Although we use antibiotics in the dairy industry, and indeed in the orchard industry\u2014I am not sure that many people realise that we spray orchard trees with amoxyl to kill certain bugs\u2014they must be used in a very sensible and restrained way to ensure that resistance does not occur. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000230\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003EI thought that programme was something we should all take a great deal of note of. I am sure that the people within our dairy and meat industries understand the need for very judicious use of antibiotics whenever necessary. Certainly, farmers understand the need for antibiotics at very limited times, and we now have the technology to pick up the overuse of antibiotics in our milk products. So that all goes to show that we are getting it right. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000231\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003EFrom time to time an odd shipment of cheese causes concern\u2014one went just recently that contained, I think, leptospirosis\u2014and that has a profound effect on the confidence overseas countries have in our product. Thankfully, it was recalled and to a large degree the damage was, if not eliminated, certainly curtailed to some degree. It illustrates that we need to keep a very close watch on ensuring that the high standards that New Zealand is famous for are met at all times. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000232\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003EThat is not to say that we cannot, except in smaller or cottage industries, allow for cheese to be made in its natural and normal state\u2014even without pasteurisation. I am told that in France, for example, the \u201Creal\u201D cheeses are made that way. They have a certain taste, although I personally cannot recall ever eating any of those sorts of cheeses. I think it would be a shame if we closed our minds totally to ensuring that those who, in a small way, wish to produce these sorts of foods for consumption in New Zealand, which would not compromise our export industries, could do so. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000233\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003EGlobal trade is an absolute reality, and as a trading nation where over 90 percent of our dairy products leave our shores, we have to be eternally grateful for that. As I said earlier, that imposes the realisation that we need to ensure that standards are met. It places real constraints on the dairy industry to get everything right, so this Animal Products (Dairy Products and Other Matters) Bill is probably a little bit overdue\u2014as one of the National Party people alluded to\u2014but at least we are getting there. I look forward to this bill coming before the Primary Production Committee, which is recognised in the House as probably the most sensible\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000234\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc82cea8-c84d-4ab7-8597-31916dbedc43\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a93ead7770ba41f798e9a0313f566938\u0022\u003EEdwin Perry\u003C/span\u003E: Common sense. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000235\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e5f810a899b24599bd64c1110b7ca93a\u0022\u003EGERRARD ECKHOFF\u003C/span\u003E: It has common sense, as Edwin Perry says. It is the select committee that looks at an issue, rather than at the politics of an issue. That is the way it should be, so we are quite delighted that that should happen. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000236\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003EThis bill really is about risk management and making sure that the standards are met, and none of us would oppose that. As a member of the ACT party, I am not in favour of unnecessary rules, regulations, and legislation, but from time to time we have to accept that to get our products into countries overseas it is necessary for the Government to step in and ensure the safety of the products, impose standards, and let the industry get on with the job of meeting those standards. That is what the industry has done. It is an industry, as I said yesterday in debate on the Meat Board Restructuring Bill, that I as a farmer am enormously proud of. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000237\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003EWe will meet the requirements of New Zealand into the future\u2014there is no question about that. All we need to do is open the trade up. Only 10 percent of our meat products are chilled at this time. Once we have 100 percent, or get close to that figure, the opportunities for our agricultural country will be enormous. That is something we can look forward to with some considerable relish. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000238\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022295c9ca3-0f0a-4af6-b1bd-32c916cca579\u0022\u003EThat is about all I wish to say at this time, other than to reiterate that I am delighted to see that the House has supported this bill in its entirety to the select committee, where, no doubt, it will get the committee\u2019s proper consideration.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022 data-id=\u002292c507a433404288a960247808259a17\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000239\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002292c507a433404288a960247808259a17\u0022\u003ESUE KEDGLEY (Green):\u003C/span\u003E I seem to be the last speaker in this debate, but I am very pleased to join the total consensus in the House to support the Animal Products (Dairy Products and Other Matters) Bill. As the Minister who introduced it said, I think it is a fairly straightforward bill that basically is about applying risk management to the dairy industry. As others have pointed out, that is absolutely essential for the health and well-being of New Zealanders, and for the protection of our exports. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000240\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EI think that we in New Zealand are fortunate in that we have very high standards of safety in the dairy industry. I think we are fortunate too that our cows roam in paddocks and are not kept in concrete feedlots, as they are in some countries overseas. We are fortunate that we do not do things like inject our cows with a genetically engineered growth hormone, as is done in America. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000241\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EIf I may digress for 1 minute, I was delighted to hear that Gerry Eckhoff watched that very interesting programme on antibiotics the other night. He talked about how important it is that we use antibiotics in a sensible and restrained way because of the concern about resistance that that programme documented. I am sure Gerry Eckhoff is aware that antibiotics are used reasonably judiciously in the dairy industry to treat mastitis, but I am afraid to tell him that in other industries\u2014as I am sure he is aware\u2014they are used most injudiciously. I am referring in particular to the poultry industry, where antibiotics are fed continuously to chickens in their feed and water. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000242\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EWhen Gerry Eckhoff talked about the need for judicious and restrained use of antibiotics, I became very hopeful that he will take up in the Primary Production Committee\u2014the committee he has praised so heartily\u2014the most injudicious, indiscriminate way that antibiotics are fed in New Zealand to literally 80 million or more chickens on a continuous basis, raising the spectre of huge resistance. I am sure that members are aware of surveys showing that 50 percent of the chicken flock is contaminated with vancomycin-resistant bacteria. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000243\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EThe Minister of Consumer Affairs is looking perplexed, as if she does not believe me, but I would be very happy to supply her with all the studies that show this very regrettable aspect of our chicken industry. Fortunately, we do not have this problem in the dairy industry. Antibiotics are not used indiscriminately, and the industry has a very good and well-deserved reputation. I think this very straightforward bill, and this risk-management approach will hopefully enhance and strengthen that reputation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000244\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EGerry Eckhoff talked about how New Zealand\u2019s reputation as a country is at stake if we do not properly manage the risks to our dairy industry, etc. He is absolutely right. I think there are some concerns that the dairy industry needs to address to make sure they do not become more serious ones that could damage our reputation, as Gerry Eckhoff mentioned. The first one is DDE residues being found in dairy products. We have already had examples of testing in England, which found DDE residues in butter from New Zealand. I think that is a very real issue that the dairy industry needs to look at. I think the dairy industry needs to look at the whole controversy around A2 milk. I think there is a feeling that the whole issue has been seen as a threat, and there has been a lot of controversy. I think we should look at it with a very open mind, and do as much research as possible into claims that the various proteins in milk could affect our health. I think the industry needs to look very seriously at that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000245\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EAlthough for the most part we have very good animal welfare practices in the dairy industry because our cows roam free, nevertheless there are some practices that I think we need to mention. They could be the sorts of things that could raise concerns, and animal welfare is becoming a concern internationally. We give cows various hormones and drugs to induce their calves to be born up to 3 months earlier, simply for the convenience of them all being milked at the same time. The inducing of calves in very substantial amounts is a practice that is causing concern internationally. There are concerns around whether that is acceptable, and around the treatment of male calves that cannot be used for dairying. I think the treatment of calves in general is something the Dairy Board needs to look at. Finally, there is the whole issue of effluent from the industry that is contaminating our rivers, streams, and lakes and causing a very serious environmental issue. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000246\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003ENone of the issues I have raised are dealt with in this bill\u2014at least, not that I can see. That is a concern, because I think the Dairy Board needs to address all of those issues if it is to retain its excellent reputation, both internationally and here in New Zealand. However, it seems that the major policy objective of this bill is really to facilitate the entry of our dairy products into international markets. In most areas of food safety, we find that the focus is actually on our exports, rather than on protecting New Zealand consumers, and it would appear that this bill has the same focus. I notice that when the Minister talked about whom he had consulted, most of them were in the industry. He did mention that some sort of consumer had been consulted, but generally I think there is too much focus on protecting our international reputation and industry. I have no problem with that, but not at the expense of protecting the New Zealand consumer. I think we see that reflected in this bill, as well. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000247\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003ENevertheless, like all the other parties in the House, the Greens will support this bill, and we are very happy to do so. It will go to the Primary Production Committee, and I am sure that some of the concerns I have raised will be raised by the Green Party when it considers the bill in that committee. We will therefore be happy to join the consensus in this House in supporting this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000248\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EBill read a first time, and referred to the Primary Production Committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000249\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022431aae387af14ece9edc4a9eacb9f116\u0022\u003EMercenary Activities (Prohibition) Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000250\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00220f459f7352764994a7964643be82a0a6\u0022\u003ESecond Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000251\u0022\u003EDebate resumed from 11 May.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022 data-id=\u0022ee5e1ef5e1fe4b09b211dc5a15216354\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000252\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ee5e1ef5e1fe4b09b211dc5a15216354\u0022\u003EMadam DEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Keith Locke was speaking. He is not here.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000253\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002262e66a6b839644ad89924a4274c289ca\u0022\u003ESue Kedgley\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Speaker\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022 data-id=\u0022bf825e27069d47adade1a3badf6c0d8d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000254\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bf825e27069d47adade1a3badf6c0d8d\u0022\u003ELINDSAY TISCH (Junior Whip\u2014National):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. If the member wishes to take another member\u2019s call, then she has to seek leave to take up the remaining time available.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000255\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226c231d490b8748919138e69dcc88bc46\u0022\u003EMadam DEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Yes. Sue Kedgley, you need to seek leave from the House to take the remaining 8 minutes of your party\u2019s call.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022 data-id=\u002232baa3e3649448349feedf8c82b5fe8a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000256\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002232baa3e3649448349feedf8c82b5fe8a\u0022\u003ESUE KEDGLEY (Green):\u003C/span\u003E I would like to do that. I seek leave to complete Keith Locke\u2019s speech.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000257\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222f69c586ebf14b9fb042fa25964f5b19\u0022\u003EMadam DEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Is there any objection to that? I call Sue Kedgley.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022 data-id=\u002235e2aa5d697a4a49b4309288ed1a51e7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000258\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002235e2aa5d697a4a49b4309288ed1a51e7\u0022\u003ESUE KEDGLEY (Green):\u003C/span\u003E I speak on behalf of Keith Locke, who was speaking when the debate was interrupted. The Green Party supports this bill so that we can help to get rid of the scourge of mercenaries\u2014soldiers of fortune who kill people for personal profit. This bill will enable New Zealand to implement the International Convention against the Recruitment, Use, Financing and Training of Mercenaries. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000259\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EThe disastrous situation in the Congo today has its origins not only in Belgian colonialism, but also in the use of mercenaries immediately after independence by Western political and business interests. The mercenaries overthrew the radical Lumumba Government and slaughtered thousands of people. Thankfully, political developments in Papua New Guinea prevented Sandline International mercenaries from going into Bougainville, so instead we were able to have peace negotiations there and a peace settlement. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000260\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EToday there is much discussion about whether any of the 20,000 foreign contract bodyguards and security officers in Iraq qualify as mercenaries under this bill, and whether any of them are New Zealanders who could be prosecuted under it. The bill states that a mercenary is one who, for private gain, takes part in hostilities, and that mercenaries\u2019 remuneration should be substantially in excess of that of locals, unless they are involved in a concerted act of violence, in which case they need be rewarded only with significant private gain. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000261\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EClearly, foreign bodyguards in Iraq earn several times as much as Iraqis\u2014anything up to $3,000 a day\u2014so on that count they would be classified as mercenaries under this bill. Some of them take part knowingly in hostilities with what is deemed to be an enemy force. A good example of real mercenaries are the commandos of the US firm who on 4 April were involved in an intense firefight around the US Government headquarters in Najaf against Shiite militia, and who used company helicopters to bring in more ammunition and ferry out a wounded marine. At the other end of the scale, a Kiwi with a sidearm who was escorting around a BBC cameraperson would not qualify as a mercenary under this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000262\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EOne of the ruses that Governments use to try to hide mercenaries is to say that soldiers are really just a part of a national army. However, the test is not just the amount of money that hired foreigners earn, but whether they are independent of the command structure of the local army and not subject to the same discipline and rules of engagement. Real mercenaries have that degree of autonomy. Mike Hoare\u2019s mercenaries in the Congo in the 1960s and mercenaries in Papua New Guinea in the 1990s were never part of the local army in a real sense. In fact, a common-sense reason why Governments hire mercenaries\u2014and often they do it covertly\u2014is basically to get them to torture people and to do the dirty fighting that is outside the Geneva conventions. They can then say that it was not their soldiers who committed the terrible atrocities. Another ruse that people have used to try to get around the anti-mercenary convention is to define those taking part in hostilities only as direct combatants with weapons, when clearly everyone in the command structure of a mercenary unit can and should be defined as a mercenary.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000263\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EThere certainly may be New Zealand mercenaries in Iraq. We know that six former members of the police\u2019s Special Tactics Group have gone there, as have former SAS people, and they should know that when they do, they may have trouble with this law if they use arms in military hostilities in Iraq. Their Kiwi recruiters need to be aware of that too. Companies like Red Key Security are advertising in New Zealand papers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000264\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EThe Green Party is disturbed about the complicity of the New Zealand Defence Force in that recruitment. For example, Brigadier Southwell provided a testimonial for a Defence Force sergeant who resigned last year to operate in Iraq. The brigadier wrote that he had no hesitation in recommending the sergeant as a leader of a close protection team in even the most severe of security situations. If this bill had been passed at that time, Brigadier Southwell could arguably have been caught up in its provisions and ended up before the courts, if that close protection team had been proved to be a mercenary unit. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000265\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EJust because our Defence Force is operating alongside the Americans and the British in Afghanistan and Iraq\u2014unfortunately, in the opinion of the Green Party\u2014that does not give New Zealand Defence Force officers the right to recruit mercenaries for the American or British authorities in Iraq. Hopefully, this bill will put a stop to that sort of behaviour and, for that reason, the Green Party strongly supports the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022 data-id=\u002233f6ca733ddc4dbe817014eb33f446a0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000266\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002233f6ca733ddc4dbe817014eb33f446a0\u0022\u003EJUDY TURNER (United Future):\u003C/span\u003E I will take a very brief call on the second reading of the Mercenary Activities (Prohibition) Bill. This bill, according to its commentary, contains provisions required to be implemented in New Zealand law to enable us to comply with the International Convention against the Recruitment, Use, Financing and Training of Mercenaries. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000267\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022\u003EThere was some concern about the small number of parties that have so far ratified that treaty, and questions were raised as to whether New Zealand should, for that reason, tarry in terms of signing it. I think the point made at the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee, which is reflected in the commentary, is that New Zealand should make up its own mind and not necessarily always wait for the actions of other countries. We should be autonomous in our decision making in that regard. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000268\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022\u003ESo the key issue is whether New Zealand is willing to subscribe to the particular obligations the treaty imposes. United Future believes that that is an appropriate action\u2014mainly because we think this bill needs to act as a deterrent, so that New Zealanders who may be contemplating becoming mercenaries would give it a second thought. We would never want New Zealand to be considered a safe haven for those kinds of activities. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000269\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022\u003EIt is kind of interesting, too, that over the years we have heard reports, which we often put down to urban myths, of private armies training in obscure parts of New Zealand. I have always had huge amounts of doubt, but in the new climate in which we now find ourselves, with the rise of terrorism, I think we would be foolish to neglect this issue and to think that somehow, because of our distance from other countries, we are somehow excluded from the possibility of New Zealand being a place where mercenaries may want to set up and conscript people to work for their cause. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000270\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022\u003EThere are also some interesting facts listed in the commentary about the definition of a mercenary. It is interesting that the scope of this legislation has been very specifically targeted to definitions that are based on provisions in the Geneva convention. There has also been an attempt to look at definitions that define the difference between people who take part in coups and terrorists attacks, and those who take part in other events that may fail to reach the definition of being full-blown wars but nonetheless are aggressive acts, the forces for which are supplied by mercenary armies. I finish by saying that United Future is very pleased to support this bill, for the safeguards it will provide. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022 data-id=\u0022622449cddd1940fba7c4d14625445041\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000271\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022622449cddd1940fba7c4d14625445041\u0022\u003EDr WAYNE MAPP (National\u2014North Shore):\u003C/span\u003E National is opposing this bill, and there are particular and deliberate reasons why we do so. In fact, the set of circumstances set out by the Green Party tells us why the bill as it has come back from the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee fails to meet the requirements necessary for National to support it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000272\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003ENational did vote for this bill to go to a select committee, and we do recognise that there is a category of people\u2014the private army, if one will\u2014whose activities should be prohibited. A number of people from across various parties have referred to cases in, particularly, Africa, where persons are recruited who would never form part of the armed forces of a particular nation but who are there, effectively, to create mayhem. They are not in the category of bodyguards and they are not contracted to assist\u2014as, for instance, occurred in Iraq, where Mr Bremer had privately contracted bodyguards\u2014but they are there in the classical sense of the mercenary. They are a private army undertaking armed conflict, creating havoc, death, destruction, and instability, and often overthrowing legitimate Governments. If the bill was limited to that and precisely aimed at that, National would have absolutely no doubt that to support it was the right thing to do, and I believe that every party in the House would have shared that view.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000273\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EI guess the benchmark is this\u2014and I will refer to the situation of my colleague Ron Mark, because it has been referred to in the past. As he has stated many times in this House, he was contracted to join the Sultanate of Oman\u2019s army. It was largely arranged through the British Government, so he was in a sense an instrument of foreign policy. There would be no doubt, and it would be common knowledge, that people recruited in those circumstances were paid more than local citizens; that was never in any question. Yet this bill would capture someone in the situation that Ron Mark was in in 1990.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000274\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EThe action of people with particular skills joining the army of a legitimate Government in order to provide those specialist skills is a long tradition, and is commonly used by many countries\u2014often with the blessing of many democratic countries, because it is designed to reinforce stability in those countries, and, in fact, has done so. If the select committee had used its wit and wisdom to ensure that the situation Major Mark was in was excluded, then there would have been no doubt that National would support the bill. But to find a definition set out carefully in clause 5 that was fully considered by the select committee, and that still effectively covers that situation\u2014the Greens say it does, and so does the Government\u2014tells us that the bill is wrong. Surely the Government should have taken on board the countries that are not signatories: Britain, the United States, Australia, and Canada. Those are countries from which highly skilled military professionals are often recruited by, particularly, Middle Eastern nations to form part of their armed services. Those people are under the normal chain of command; they are not a private army or anything of that nature.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000275\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EFor this bill to capture them is, I think, a case of New Zealand essentially trying to have an expression of political correctness. The idea of prohibiting mercenary activities sounds reasonable on the face of it. What person would want to support a mercenary in the classical sense? The answer is that very few people would. But the way that this convention was pulled together, and the way that the select committee did not then do a proper job of limiting the application of the bill, show that the Government was not serious about the convention, but, rather, simply wanted to have a record of being some kind of model citizen. I wonder whether the New Zealand Government would ever prosecute in that situation\u2014because I cannot imagine that it would\u2014and if it does not intend to do that, then what is the point of passing law like this?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000276\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EThe reality is that this bill should not be passed in the form it is in. The select committee had the opportunity to come up with a sensible definition, but it failed to do so. One has only to look at a number of situations in the Pacific, and I am not talking about the Sandline International situation. For instance, if any Pacific nation decides to employ a New Zealand helicopter pilot for quite legitimate reasons, and to have that person in its armed forces, who almost certainly will be paid more than the local people\u2014let us be realistic about this\u2014then such a person is likely to be caught by the convention. That, frankly, is ridiculous. It is bad law to sign up to conventions that are there for the warm glow of it, if one will, rather than to take a reasoned and sensible approach to prohibit the genuinely egregious behaviour of the private army operating outside the normal military conventions. The British Government, the United States Government, and many other European Governments have said this kind of convention simply does not take account of the real world.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000277\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EThe issue of Iraq has been mentioned recently\u2014and so it should be; it is an important issue\u2014and there are literally thousands of people there who are highly skilled and undertaking a wide variety of tasks. I mentioned the case of Mr Paul Bremer. His immediate security was privately provided. I absolutely guarantee that those security personnel were earning more than a Private First Class in the United States army.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000278\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002208e49c34445840f39fe739abd86fde69\u0022\u003EPeter Brown\u003C/span\u003E: You think so?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000279\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ffbf3b313e4c42e8a8e9c181f95e4905\u0022\u003EDr WAYNE MAPP\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, I hazard a guess that they were earning a little more than a Private First Class. Yet that activity, which clearly has approval at the highest levels of the United States Government, would be caught by this convention. Does New Zealand really think it is right for such people to be caught by the convention? I would not be at all surprised if the Prime Minister, either knowingly or unknowingly, had the benefit of such protection herself when she visited Iraq. Surely she is not suggesting that those people should be at risk of prosecution, yet that is how this convention is worded. It is wrong to pass conventions that are so poorly drafted as to capture a wide class of people whom we would think are doing a good job\u2014helping peace, preserving security, and providing countries with the ability to get ahead\u2014just in order for Mr Goff to go on some sort of international stage and say that New Zealand is a party to the International Convention against the Recruitment, Use, Financing and Training of Mercenaries. We do have to take a more critical approach to the precise wording, work out precisely what we are really against\u2014and it is clear what that is\u2014and also work out what we say is OK. This bill, as presented to the House, simply does not meet that threshold test.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022 data-id=\u00229c0327f682614f93846309a4b7e65a1c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000280\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229c0327f682614f93846309a4b7e65a1c\u0022\u003EHon KEN SHIRLEY (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E That was a very compelling speech from Captain Mapp, and I have certainly taken on board the very many good points he made and I concur with them. I think the key point he made is that the International Convention against the Recruitment, Use, Financing and Training of Mercenaries is nothing other than UN feel-good pap that this Government, again, rushed out there to sign up to without scrutinising and thinking it through. The convention has not been signed by our traditional allies Britain, the United States, Canada, and Australia\u2014not one of them signed this convention. Why did the New Zealand Government rush off and sign this convention, and why now, today, does it want to legislate to give it effect? This is a classic example of what this Government does\u2014and now Major Mark has joined the debate, and I hope members also hear from him shortly. The Kyoto Protocol is another classic case of UN feel-good pap. We know that it will not work and that it is ineffective, but bureaucrats and officials rush off to those meetings, sign up, and commit us to it. In this instance, we know that the United States, Canada, Australia, and the United Kingdom have not signed the mercenaries convention. They disagree with it, so why on earth should New Zealand sign that convention and, here today, try to legislate for it?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000281\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022\u003EThere have been some very good examples of our getting into very serious problems with definitions. Modern military activity is not just a matter of a bunch of foot soldiers being issued with muskets and lining up against each other; it engages an incredibly high level of technology and support services, in terms of the weaponry and the deployment. The example was given of whether a private helicopter pilot who was assisting Papua New Guinea, Fiji, or Tonga would come within the definition of mercenary in this instance, and it seems that that pilot would. But the bill then goes on to state that a computer consultant looking at the computer systems and information technology that control weaponry would certainly come under the definition of a mercenary. So it is bad legislation. We do not support it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000282\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022\u003EAn example was also given of the Iraq situation. Tens of thousands of people who are assisting in the post - Saddam Hussein reconstruction would fall within the definition of mercenary in this bill. It would be foolish to expose them to prosecution and to the provisions of what is very bad legislation. So the ACT party will not be supporting this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000283\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022\u003EThe example was also given of Major Ron Mark, who was a mercenary. I have his attention now.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000284\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226c5b1819b8c946cbb38fc649346debf7\u0022\u003EDr Wayne Mapp\u003C/span\u003E: No, he wasn\u2019t a mercenary.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000285\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a25299f6a39b41a2b1d1647b3a4ab77d\u0022\u003EHon KEN SHIRLEY\u003C/span\u003E: He was a mercenary, and he should be proud of it. He did a very good job for the Sultan of Oman. The other classic example is the Gurkhas, who have a very proud tradition within the British army. They are actually paid less, not more, than the normal British troops, which has been a real problem for them for some time. They would clearly be defined as mercenaries within this bill, even though they have done a very good job in many areas and theatres of conflict around the world.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000286\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022\u003EI see no redeeming features in this bill, whatsoever. I ask the Labour Government, for goodness\u2019 sake, to look at things as an independent sovereign State, rather than just signing up to UN pap. That is what it has done with this example. It should not be signing up to and implementing this convention. It is foolish, and the ACT party will be opposing it strenuously.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022 data-id=\u0022afc5cb7ea3f045cf972e9a09a60b549c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000287\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022afc5cb7ea3f045cf972e9a09a60b549c\u0022\u003EJUDITH COLLINS (National\u2014Clevedon):\u003C/span\u003E The National Party has made it very clear\u2014particularly in the succinctly put speech by Wayne Mapp\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000288\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f632e747c71a440488085387374d75d4\u0022\u003EHon Ken Shirley\u003C/span\u003E: Captain Mapp.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000289\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022682da2d5205048a78ddd4162ec124bc2\u0022\u003EJUDITH COLLINS\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014who I note was a captain\u2014that we are not in favour of the activities of mercenaries, as the Green Party was certainly speaking about before. What we are in favour of is accepting reality. People in the circumstances of Ron Mark\u2014who is now a member of this House\u2014when he was with the Sultanate of Oman would be caught by this bill. Quite clearly, that is ridiculous.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000290\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EWe have talked a lot today about the fact that none of our traditional allies\u2014when we had allies\u2014and friends have signed up to this treaty, but I think it is really important to take a moment to remind the House who has signed it. It is stunning. I will read them out: Azerbaijan; Barbados; Belarus; Belgium, which was so good against the Germans, did members not find; Cameroon; Costa Rica; Croatia; Cyprus; Georgia, and I remind members that that is the country not the State; Guinea; Italy, which at least is well known; Libya\u2014how about a bill on terrorism; no, that is right; the Libyans have now sorted themselves out\u2014Maldives; Mali; Mauritania; Qatar; Saudi Arabia; Senegal; Seychelles; Surinam; Togo; Turkmenistan; Ukraine; Uruguay; and Uzbekistan. The stunning comment we make here is that the vast majority of those nations did not exist 20 years ago. The only reason they do exist is the breakdown of the cold war, and the work that the Americans and the other Western countries did to free them from the yoke of socialism.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000291\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224e814de900454e92bab5c951ceb7a146\u0022\u003EJohn Carter\u003C/span\u003E: Communism.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000292\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eba0ee25fb3e46e8b10c3dcbed9bd91e\u0022\u003EJUDITH COLLINS\u003C/span\u003E: Communism, as Mr Carter quite correctly says. There is not much difference, I say to Mr Carter. That is what we are signing up to. We are in great company with that lot, are we not?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000293\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002229152a86cc294a0f8d0124d8d5d49190\u0022\u003EDr Wayne Mapp\u003C/span\u003E: Lots of democratic countries.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000294\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002277e46dbd7f8d4ce7b4752bae79c05e73\u0022\u003EJUDITH COLLINS\u003C/span\u003E: There are lots of democratic countries, as Mr Wayne Mapp says! That is what we are signing up to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000295\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EI was concerned by what Mr Shirley said about the situation of the Gurkhas, and I would like clarification from a Minister that the Gurkhas would not be included in the legislation, because their deeds are legendary. Their courage, their stamina, and their loyalty to the British Crown have been utterly legendary. We need to take that into account.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000296\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EHaving read the bill and looked at the definition of \u201Cmercenary\u201D, I am concerned as to whether the Papal State might have a bit of a problem. Does it not have the Swiss Guard? Is the Swiss Guard not in fact a private army that is made up of mercenaries\u2014that has always been made up of mercenaries? Every Catholic person in this Parliament should consider that he or she is about to outlaw the Swiss Guard.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000297\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EThe comment was made in the House that the Prime Minister, when she was in Iraq for her photo opportunity, might in fact have been protected by some of these dreadful contractors who are paid more than the locals for doing their jobs. Frankly, I can understand why they might need to be paid more than the locals to do their jobs\u2014in more ways than one. Those people might have protected her. Did she not travel through Italy in a car at 200 kilometres an hour to visit the Pope, and was she not looked after by the Swiss Guard at those times? Was that not so?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000298\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002273eccae137674bf79fd6285d289577fd\u0022\u003EHon Ken Shirley\u003C/span\u003E: She wore a dress!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000299\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002231f1fb10fc99475cbc06861fa8f20ae1\u0022\u003EJUDITH COLLINS\u003C/span\u003E: I think it was a skirt, I say to Mr Shirley; we should get it right. I think so. So, really, will that not be a problem\u2014the fact that the Papal State might have an issue with the legislation? Is that not a problem?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EWhere is the great call for the legislation? Where is the great need? Is it not all about the fact that some New Zealanders have gone to Iraq to help out the Iraqi people in their liberation? Is that not what it is all about? The Prime Minister is brassed off that they can earn more money there\u2014and they should, as they are in great danger and have shown the way to a lot of other people who would like to see that happen, as well. They are doing some really good work.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EOccasionally I wonder about people who go on about peacekeeping. Who do we think makes the peace? It is the people who put their lives on the line, day after day. I heard the Green member speaking about mercenaries and war. She talked about \u201Cclean war\u201D. My dear old dad, who is long departed now, spent 4 years overseas in the Second World War as an engineer. He was in the front line, as engineers were. He always said to me that the people who say war is fun and glorious were not there. The people who say there is such a thing as \u201Cclean war\u201D were not there. The fact is that not only do mercenaries commit acts of barbarity against each other and others, but so do armies generally. That is the way it works in war. War is hell, it has never been any different, and it never will be.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000302\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EThere will always be war when there are people who will not accept the democratic process and will not accept that people have the right to determine their own result for their country. That is what happens. If we do not stand up for democracy, we will be calling on mercenaries ourselves. One of the things that is really obvious in the bill is that it will not allow our people to be able to make their own decisions about where they want to be and what they want to be doing. I wondered whether this bill would have applied\u2014if it had been in place 60-odd years ago\u2014to the American servicemen who went over and served with the British before Pearl Harbor. Of course, if they were paid more than the locals, then, yes, it would have. Those people risked their lives fighting against fascism, and in this House today we are condemning them, provided that they were, in fact, paid more. We need to be able to accept that some people have specialties\u2014Mr Mark obviously had a specialty, which he took to the Sultanate of Oman. We are condemning them for using that, for going into harm\u2019s way without someone demanding that they do so. Because they exercise their free will they are condemned.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000303\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EI completely support the comments made by my colleague Mr Mapp, and I say that this bill is an unnecessary piece of feel-good rubbish that is being put together by this Government so that we can hang out with the likes of Qatar.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00228ed595fb1d634af78c5ab35c669c5073\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendments recommended by the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee by majority be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 70\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EQuestion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002203ccfc73968c40d68f6523d3137e2fbb\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the Mercenary Activities (Prohibition) Bill be now read a second time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 70\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill read a second time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000304\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022aef0d04992a94facb3b3372ef45f444c\u0022\u003EInstruction to Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223b1b5881-3b86-4894-ac77-72905f786141\u0022 data-id=\u002282e11a71a1e04b99af7a05c1f95aed65\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000305\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b1b5881-3b86-4894-ac77-72905f786141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002282e11a71a1e04b99af7a05c1f95aed65\u0022\u003EHon JUDITH TIZARD (Minister of Consumer Affairs)\u003C/span\u003E, on behalf of the Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade: I move, That it be an instruction to the Committee of the whole House on the Mercenary Activities (Prohibition) Bill that it take the bill part by part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002292a11c58bfa74779830d81978bd757af\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the motion be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 70\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000306\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022cef2ead1c36042758965fa5214afc84f\u0022\u003EIn Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000307\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00221b430e4b444f48ea953a9c6989262d5a\u0022\u003EPart 1  Preliminary provisions\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022 data-id=\u0022b9996f186c82451788019f1ff6469a9e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000308\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b9996f186c82451788019f1ff6469a9e\u0022\u003EDr WAYNE MAPP (National\u2014North Shore):\u003C/span\u003E The core part of our whole concern in relation to this bill is contained in clause 5, which relates to the definition of \u201Cmercenary\u201D. As I and other colleagues like Judith Collins have indicated, our concern is the way the definition would attack perfectly legitimate activities\u2014activities that if the Government actually thought about them, it would see it is not in its own or New Zealand\u2019s interest to try to prohibit. In fact, as I suggested in my speech in the second reading, probably our Prime Minister has experienced some advantage from such activities in her visits to Iraq particularly, and perhaps also to Afghanistan. The problem is that clause 5(1) states that a mercenary is defined as any person who is, first, recruited within New Zealand, and, second, whose primary purpose is to take part in hostilities, and, third, who is paid more than persons of a similar rank or functions in the armed forces. I guess it is fundamentally that third part of the definition that is the problem\u2014paid more than combatants of similar rank and functions in the armed forces. That means that the provision then covers people who are members of the host State\u2019s armed forces. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000309\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EI will use the example of Major Mark, because it is one that people understand. There are many other people whom I have known over the years who have served in various Middle Eastern armies in specialist roles. Many of those people know perfectly well that they will be engaged in hostilities. They are at a time of life when there is a certain sense of adventure, if I could put it that way, so that has its own attractions, and, of course, they get paid more in the host State. But they are nevertheless part of the legitimate army of that nation. In short, they are not a private army. Yet under clause 5 such a person is deemed to be a mercenary. If the Government had thought about it, it surely would not be its intention that that sort of activity be caught. That is the first category. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000310\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EA second category is the increase in the numbers these days of private contractors. I am aware that clause 5(2) does exempt persons who are involved in domestic policing duties or other lawful activities of a similar kind involving the protection of individuals or property. But again, let us be realistic. A lot of those people are doing a little more than policing activities. They are certainly working under the authority of, in the case of Iraq, the occupying powers\u2014both Britain and the United States\u2014but one has only to observe the level of equipment they have to know that they are not conventional police officers. They have experiences that take them well beyond that. Of course, that is the reason they are chosen; they are incredibly highly skilled, in a very dangerous environment. Sometimes they are involved in rescue missions, and so forth. The question becomes whether it is intended that they be caught as well by the Government. Surely that cannot be the case. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000311\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EFor both those reasons, National was opposed to the bill as it came out of the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee. If it had been confined to the private armies that have been the scourge of so much post-colonial activity in Africa, we would say yes, the convention had a legitimate goal. But the fact that Britain, Australia, the United States, and Canada have all chosen not to sign it is because they know it catches the very activities that those four Governments and, frankly, many New Zealanders, have been involved in. Thus the bill is badly conceived.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022 data-id=\u0022421fd5a312324c59919207f3eb9cef7d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000312\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022421fd5a312324c59919207f3eb9cef7d\u0022\u003ERON MARK (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E I rise to congratulate Dr Wayne Mapp, a former serving officer in the New Zealand Army, on his insight into this legislation and what it means. I congratulate the National Party and the ACT party also. It seems that only members on the Opposition side of the Chamber understand the realities of maintaining international law and security, and the responsibilities\u2014and sometimes the price\u2014that seem to come with those rather challenging tasks. Is this Government not interesting! It is so concerned and interested in this bill that its members have private little chit-chats all around the Chamber. They do not even take calls, and that is what the country gets as good governance. I am astounded at that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000313\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EIf members of the Government were to read the bill and pay some attention to it, they might like to consider clause 4, \u201CInterpretation\u201D, and in particular, clause 4(1)(a). [Interruption] Mr Barker may like to call me mercenary, but I was quite\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000314\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a06181ee54d24c80b61a1f7d77d0d870\u0022\u003EHon Rick Barker\u003C/span\u003E: I never said that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000315\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e9751a301bb44b9fbfe7adfeeb159d32\u0022\u003ERON MARK\u003C/span\u003E: Those members were quite happy to have me stand as a candidate for them straight after I came back from Oman. They did not have any problems with that then. They knew full well my military service background, yet they selected me. If those members interject, then they deserve a slap. Mr Hughes should read clause 4(1) and consider this point: a \u201Cconcerted act of violence means an act of violence designed to (a) overthrow a government or otherwise undermine the constitutional order of a State; or (b) undermine the territorial integrity of a State\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000316\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EI ask the Government whether we should stand idly by, and not protect the world from chaps such as Saddam Hussein, Tariq Aziz, and \u201CChemical Ali\u201D Hassan al-Majid, who appeared on page B1 of  the Dominion Post this morning. Are they the sorts of people this Government does not want to see overthrown? The question is this. When the Governments of States decide that it is time to do something, because there is a rogue State\u2014a nation that jeopardises the security of the rest of the world\u2014traditionally, they have used both covert and overt means to achieve that end. New Zealand has sat as a partner in many alliances and accepted that and agreed with it. Let us take the East Timor situation. How many mercenaries were involved behind the scenes in helping East Timorese fighters to fight for their freedom? They were people whom Keith Locke and Matt Robson championed. How many mercenaries were hired behind the scenes to help to overthrow Pol Pot? Those were people whom Keith Locke championed and people whom Matt Robson said he abhorred. How many people would have been hired\u2014or could have been hired\u2014to help to alleviate the situation in Rwanda, because the legitimate States were sitting on their hands, doing nothing? How many clandestine, covert operations have been sanctioned around the world involving the use of contract personnel in order to enhance the security of the greater free world? There have been tens of thousands, and that is the truth. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000317\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EMembers should think of the Congo, and of Afghanistan in the 1980s. Whom did Britain, the United States, and, by implication, the entire British Commonwealth, sanction to go into Afghanistan? I look at the United Future member who will vote for this legislation. Everyone tells me that he or she absolutely detested the Taliban. Who were the people who helped the mujahideen  to chuck the Soviet Union out of Afghanistan? For one, there were legitimate defence forces, such as the SAS and the CIA. But a large number of contract personnel were also put in there, and sanctioned and approved with the knowledge of legitimate States such as the United States and the UK.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223b1b5881-3b86-4894-ac77-72905f786141\u0022 data-id=\u0022ab9b443c413342569f16c7d1571c07da\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000318\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b1b5881-3b86-4894-ac77-72905f786141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ab9b443c413342569f16c7d1571c07da\u0022\u003EHon JUDITH TIZARD (Minister of Consumer Affairs):\u003C/span\u003E Just for the sake of clarity, I suggest that the Committee looks carefully at clauses 4 and 5 where the nature of mercenary activities and of mercenaries is defined. For a person to come within the bill and the convention, he or she would need to take part in hostilities in an armed conflict. The focus is on those people actually taking part in hostilities in a combative role. Many of the examples given by Mr Mapp today seem very unlikely to fall within the definition of the bill. For example, the security guards for the Prime Minister would clearly fall outside the definition of a mercenary. Clause 5(3)(d) specifically states that people participating in \u201Cdomestic policing duties or other lawful activities of a similar kind involving the protection of individuals or property\u201D are not mercenaries. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000319\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b1b5881-3b86-4894-ac77-72905f786141\u0022\u003EIn addition, persons who are providing assistance with reconstruction, and with the training of local armed forces, provided they were not undertaking a combative role, would not be covered. Of course, a person who would be defined as a mercenary also has to be recruited within New Zealand or elsewhere in order to take part in hostilities and armed conflict, has to be taking part in hostilities for private gain, and has to be promised or paid, by or on behalf of a party to the armed conflict, material compensation substantially in excess of that promised or paid to combatants of similar rank and functions. So to work with another armed force if that was in the normal course of, for example, working in Oman, would be perfectly legal and would not be defined as being a mercenary. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000320\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b1b5881-3b86-4894-ac77-72905f786141\u0022\u003EThere is a lot of nonsense being talked by members of the Opposition. That is their job, but I wish they would stick to the legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022 data-id=\u0022e7b4d471c6ae4ea9aa9b8cc6cdbeeb2b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000321\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e7b4d471c6ae4ea9aa9b8cc6cdbeeb2b\u0022\u003EDEBORAH CODDINGTON (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E I ask the Minister what is wrong with fighting. What is wrong with being paid to fight? What is wrong with being paid more to fight than those of equal rank in the armed forces? The mentality of this legislation shows up the Labour Government members for the \u201Cpeacenik\u201D lefties they are, stuck in the time warp of the 1970s. A lot of us also marched against the Vietnam War, but we grew up. We got real. We realised that we do not live in a benign environment and that if people want to have peace they should prepare for war. Where will it end? Will we be passing domestic laws that prohibit private security guards\u2014the people we pay to protect our homes and property because this Government has let the police force down so badly that they can no longer do the job that our taxes pay them to do? This legislation will have the effect of downgrading the armed forces.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000322\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b1b5881-3b86-4894-ac77-72905f786141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227291720c973644019f6fefd6229da813\u0022\u003EHon Judith Tizard\u003C/span\u003E: Rubbish!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225ec2fbddf41e451b959ae675ccf9143e\u0022\u003EDEBORAH CODDINGTON\u003C/span\u003E: The Minister says \u201CRubbish!\u201D. If members look at the definition of a mercenary, they will see that a mercenary is defined as someone who is paid compensation substantially in excess of that promised or paid to combatants of similar rank and functions in the armed forces of that party. This is eliminating competition. What incentive is there on any State\u2014take New Zealand\u2014to improve the pay of its armed forces if there is not the risk that they will be lured away by a private contractor who can pay them substantially more? What does the Minister think? Does she think that people should just go to someone like Pol Pot and negotiate? Does she think they should just sit down at a little meeting? What is wrong with someone being recruited to overthrow a Government or undermine the constitutional order of a State when we are dealing with evil like Pol Pot? Does the Labour Party think we should just sit down and have a meeting with them, hold hands, and have a little chat, and send in the peacekeeping forces?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000324\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b1b5881-3b86-4894-ac77-72905f786141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a22f67afed7f4b90899db6238ff2c573\u0022\u003EHon Judith Tizard\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, that is what happened with Pol Pot.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000325\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002236b4439fade94e349167d12d460c5e48\u0022\u003EDEBORAH CODDINGTON\u003C/span\u003E: I suppose the Minister thinks it is funny that six million people died under that regime\u2014people like that Minister. People were killed just for wearing glasses or being able to read. That is what earned one a death under that regime.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000326\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003E We go on and on ratifying conventions because the leaders of that Government love swanning around the world and being photographed as they sign us up to these international conventions\u2014conventions and treaties that our traditional allies will not go near and will not have a bar of. But New Zealand decides to sign up to them. What happens when we sign up to them? Absolutely nothing! We sign up to international laws and pass our own laws to ratify them, including laws allowing us to prosecute child sex offenders overseas. Since 1999, have we prosecuted one of those people? No. Have we, despite the matter being brought to the Government\u2019s notice, even chased any New Zealand sex offenders who have disappeared overseas, jumped bail, or absconded from charges? No.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000327\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b1b5881-3b86-4894-ac77-72905f786141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022af5f96a3593b4a35b99498b6a28e620b\u0022\u003EHon Judith Tizard\u003C/span\u003E: Yes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000328\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022720ca1dfa5734cde89a092380ee89e05\u0022\u003EDEBORAH CODDINGTON\u003C/span\u003E: The Minister should read the replies to my parliamentary questions to see what the exact situation is. Nothing has been done. It is all window dressing. The Labour Government thinks that signing up makes New Zealand look good and enables us to get a place in the UN\u2014that talkfest, that huge bureaucracy. It is a shameful situation here. All patriotic New Zealanders who believe in the protection of the State, believe a country has a role to protect its own citizens, and believe what is in their own hearts should have the right, if they see something bad going on in another country, to go there and do something about it, even if they do get material gain from doing so. So what if they get material gain from doing so! What is wrong with that? This is just a disgrace.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022 data-id=\u0022f6f02d92d14a4c6eb44bb5617da89a54\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000329\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f6f02d92d14a4c6eb44bb5617da89a54\u0022\u003EJUDITH COLLINS (National\u2014Clevedon):\u003C/span\u003E I want to return to the issue of Mr Ron Mark\u2014or, as he was, Major Mark\u2014in terms of the definition of \u201Cmercenary\u201D. I cannot understand why the Government wants to outlaw someone with Mr Mark\u2019s skills from being able to be recruited through the British Government to go and assist the Sultan of Oman in a military-like capacity. What is wrong with that? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000330\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EWe in the National Party do not want to see private armies around, and clearly, as a centre-right Government, we would not at all condone that. But this legislation goes too far. Dr Mapp has prepared an amendment to this particular provision that would make it plain that Mr Mark\u2019s situation would not be covered by this bill. I ask the Minister in the chair, Judith Tizard, to look at his amendment. It is a sensible one and it would go a long way towards helping this bill make some real sense. Dr Mapp\u2019s amendment proposes to amend clause 5(2) by adding new paragraph (c), which states: \u201CWithin the meaning of subsection (1)(a) if he or she is employed directly within the armed forces of a party to the armed conflict whether or not they are paid more than any other persons of similar rank or specialty.\u201D So that says that if a person is part of the army of a particular country\u2014whether it is Oman, Azerbaijan, or whatever\u2014he or she will be protected from this legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000331\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EWe know that this legislation, after many years of sitting where it should be\u2014which is in somebody\u2019s filing cabinet\u2014has come about solely because some New Zealanders have had the courage of their convictions and have acknowledged that because of their specialist skills they can go and work in Iraq to help it in its liberation and rebuilding. They say: \u201CI can do that, and I can make some money. Good on me!\u201D, and they have done that. And that is what this is all about\u2014the Prime Minister has been on television telling those people that they should not do that. Of course, if they are actually going to be earning money, they do not want to have it all taken off them by the dreadful tax rates we have here. [Interruption] That is what this is all about. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000332\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003ETomorrow I will visit our SAS troops, who will be thrilled to know what this Government thinks of them\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000333\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d6fcfa39a86348a7a3159bec15d252f2\u0022\u003EDr Wayne Mapp\u003C/span\u003E: Because many of them want to do a job.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000334\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222ce01748a3674d5eab72318683ca759a\u0022\u003EJUDITH COLLINS\u003C/span\u003E: Exactly. Many of those SAS troops would like to know that, at some stage, they can go off with their specialist skills and assist in this way. There are not very many jobs out there for people who happen to have certain specialist skills in this area. There are not an awful lot of those jobs in the legitimate workforce in New Zealand. The fact is that we say to those people at age 50, 55, or whatever that we do not really value their skills any more, and I think that those people are, as specialists, entitled to use their skills to train others and to be involved in places where they are needed\u2014and good on them. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000335\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EWe should be proud of the fact that they have skills and that they are sought after. We are not talking about private armies. We are not talking about people who go into other countries and rape and pillage and kill indiscriminately; we are talking about the people\u2014and Mr Mark is representative of them\u2014who use their skills, particularly in a legitimate way, and are rightly proud of their service, and I say good on Mr Mark for doing so. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000336\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EThis Government is not only soft on crime, it is soft on defence. It is tying us up with little-known countries, most of which did not exist 20 years ago. We are being aligned with them. We no longer have allies. We have some friends. What we are doing now is aligning ourselves with countries that, by and large, are not ones we would ever want to be aligned with in a crisis. We would never want to have to stand up and say: \u201COK, New Zealand, armies are coming to attack us, but don\u2019t worry, we have Azerbaijan coming to help us.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022 data-id=\u002245881b2b95cb4936a00e89ba0b074757\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000337\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002245881b2b95cb4936a00e89ba0b074757\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022 data-id=\u0022f9f2bbbd0d1c40318da9d93935c6a02a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000338\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f9f2bbbd0d1c40318da9d93935c6a02a\u0022\u003ERON MARK (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E First, I want to give a bouquet to the Minister in the chair, Judith Tizard, because she has taken a call and attempted to answer some of the questions put to her, which is a little unusual in the Committee of the whole House, and I appreciate that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000339\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EI have again gone through article 1 of the Convention against the Recruitment, Use, Financing and Training of Mercenaries, on which the definition is based. I can deal with this blow-by-blow. Article 1.1(a) provides that a mercenary is a person who: \u201CIs specially recruited locally or abroad in order to fight in an armed conflict;\u201D\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000340\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b1b5881-3b86-4894-ac77-72905f786141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022472c17dbb5ba49e1aa78d2715f965bed\u0022\u003EHon Judith Tizard\u003C/span\u003E: And read on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000341\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223beb0104f988499486219139ec8444f9\u0022\u003ERON MARK\u003C/span\u003E: I will come to each one, in turn. I note with interest that countries that have signed up to this convention, such as Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Italy, and Libya, are countries that have employed, and still do employ, mercenaries. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000342\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EA good friend of mine was second in command of a Baluchistani mercenary battalion on the border of Oman, and opposing him across that border were Pakistani mercenaries\u2014in Saudi Arabia. So straight away I would question the commitment of one of the signatories to the convention\u2014a convention that New Zealand has signed up to. As for Qatar and Libya, well, everybody knows that Libya not only employs mercenaries but also dispatches them. It is an absolute nonsense. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000343\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EHow does one get around this provision that refers to people who are \u201Cspecially recruited locally in order to fight in an armed conflict\u201D? It is by getting recruited into a command appointment where one does not have to physically, personally, fight; rather, one commands a battalion and simply issues the orders and instructions. In a court of law I could argue that I was not there fighting; I was simply administering resources. That is my argument. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000344\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EWhen I was in the Middle East, one of my jobs was to go to India and Pakistan to specifically recruit former defence force personnel from those countries to take them back to the Middle East. I was looking for people with specific trades and technical skills, but alongside me were my colleagues who were going to recruit people like Gurkhas. We needed Gurkhas in our unit to provide specialist security tasks that were mainly oriented towards looking after us, just in case things got very awkward with our local Arab friends. That was one of the things one had to do. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000345\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EThose people were employed on a normal day-to-day basis. They did base security and personal security, and they never ever had to engage in combat. But they were there to do so should they be called upon.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000346\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003ESitting suspended from 1 p.m. to 2 p.m.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000347\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a64e8c20692e4a0f9434c75ac42ad237\u0022\u003ERON MARK\u003C/span\u003E: Before we lifted for lunch I was referring to the definition of \u201Cmercenary\u201D, which is based on article 1 of the convention, and particularly article 1.1(a). \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000348\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EI now move to article 1.1(b), which provides that a mercenary: \u201CIs motivated to take part in the hostilities essentially by the desire for private gain and, in fact, is promised, by or on behalf of a party to the conflict, material compensation substantially in excess of that promised or paid to combatants of similar rank and functions in the armed forces of that party;\u201D. The reality is that even an Indian soldier recruited to serve in the Omani army would be paid more than many of the people alongside him.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000349\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227cff3a564ec44b0bae86cdb87f998365\u0022\u003EStephen Franks\u003C/span\u003E: Especially if they are conscripts.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000350\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022444e6429062141598781c67c8d6326bb\u0022\u003ERON MARK\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, especially if they are conscripts. The idea and notion that a professional officer of the New Zealand Army or Air Force, or the British army or air force, would go all the way over to Saudi Arabia, Oman, or Iraq to help rebuild a nation and do it for nothing, or for the same wages that the locals would be paid, is a nonsense. The very reason that person would be asked to accept a contract to go over there to work for those armies is that person has professional skills of a very high standard that those armies want, and they know that they have to pay to get the skills. The men or women are setting themselves up to leave their homes, families, and children back here in New Zealand, and they will not do that for peanuts. To make them mercenaries by this definition is wrong, and it is not helpful. At the end of the day, other ways exist to deal with those unsavoury characters of the ilk that the Government is quite legitimately trying to deal with. The ways around this also exist.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000351\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EI go to article 1.1(c), which provides that a mercenary: \u201CIs neither a national of a party to the conflict nor a resident of territory controlled by a party to the conflict;\u201D. Can anyone answer me this question? Of all those expatriates who went into Afghanistan to fight the Soviets and help the mujahideen\u2014because it was a sensible thing to do in those days\u2014none of them were nationals of parties to the conflict, but they did us a service.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022 data-id=\u00220e3ebccd68eb47fbbe228cdfec3b3e02\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000352\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220e3ebccd68eb47fbbe228cdfec3b3e02\u0022\u003ESIMON POWER (National\u2014Rangitikei):\u003C/span\u003E Part 1 raises very quickly the heart of the opposition to this Mercenary Activities (Prohibition) Bill. Nobody on this side of the Chamber wishes to condone mercenary activity in any way, shape, or form, but this bill creates a whole lot of uncertainty around the definition of mercenary. During the second reading I said that the most extraordinary thing about the way this legislation has been put together is that when members look at clause 5, where mercenary is defined, they will see that the definition of what is not a mercenary is larger than the definition of what is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000353\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b1b5881-3b86-4894-ac77-72905f786141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229ccbdb4ef0b24c0b8cb88bc417fa7647\u0022\u003EHon Judith Tizard\u003C/span\u003E: Why is that surprising?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000354\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d94327a278a44534b7a5fc08dbf597e4\u0022\u003ESIMON POWER\u003C/span\u003E: It is surprising because it is very bad law when the definition of mercenary is unable to capture the essence of the legislation in a way that secures certainty for those interpreting it. I say to the Minister that it matters because the only way this legislation can be clarified is to include an extensive definition of what is not a mercenary. If that principle were applied to all the interpretation sections of all the bills that went through Parliament, one can imagine the chaos that would ensue in interpreting law. It is not good enough to have a definition at the crux of the legislation that has to be corrected and clarified by defining further on in the interpretation section what a mercenary is not. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000355\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003EFor example, if we were to use a parallel piece of legislation around\u2014to pluck a subject out of the air\u2014Auckland roading, we would then find ourselves, on this principle, defining what is not a road, instead of what is a road, to make sure the definition of a road is clear. That is an entirely unsatisfactory way for this House to pass legislation. It is evidence of the fact that, in the end, the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee and the Government were unsure about the meaning of mercenary and how to define the concept of a mercenary, and were convinced, I believe, by the number of concerns that were raised during the select committee process that their definition of mercenary as presented was nowhere near good enough. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000356\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003EThe only way to fix that, obviously\u2014using the collective wisdom of the select committee, the Government, and the officials\u2014was to tell the world what a mercenary is not. That is wholly unsatisfactory when it comes to interpreting law, wholly unsatisfactory when it comes to applying law, and wholly unsatisfactory if one happens to be a mercenary. Mercenaries now find themselves in a position whereby not only do they have to not satisfy one test, but they have to also satisfy the other test to ensure they are not captured by this legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000357\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003EThis is sloppy legislation. This is a sloppy definition, and we on this side of the Chamber say that the Government should do a better job of defining what evil or wrongdoing it wishes to capture, as opposed simply to defining what it is not, in order to capture that perceived wrongdoing. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000358\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003EThe UN itself has had difficulty with this concept. It has had a series of reports presented to it that state: \u201CThis is really hard, and we don\u2019t know how to define what a mercenary is. We accept that the current arrangements are unsatisfactory.\u201D So how does the New Zealand Parliament resolve that? It says: \u201CIt\u2019s all a bit tricky, so we will say what a mercenary is not.\u201D That is totally unacceptable.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000359\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003EDebate interrupted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000360\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022d5734b826dc845f0b24ca017509f9134\u0022\u003EVisitors\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000361\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00222eec6913f8e04cec9779e41e2e22b28f\u0022\u003EAustralia\u2014Deputy Speaker, Parliament of Victoria\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022 data-id=\u002271c1b8eee6454f13b609b7a63b6a7417\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000362\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002271c1b8eee6454f13b609b7a63b6a7417\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: It is my pleasure to inform members that Mr Peter Loney, Deputy Speaker of the Parliament of Victoria, Australia, is within the precincts of the Chamber. I am sure members would like to welcome him.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000363\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022e53f5f207753421e964d65fa25d1562e\u0022\u003EMercenary Activities (Prohibition) Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000364\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002269299e6838e64461bbe60c49223638b5\u0022\u003EIn Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000365\u0022\u003EDebate resumed.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000366\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022f9fafc8122d4415c8dcb4718086fa6c5\u0022\u003EPart 1  Preliminary provisions (continued)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222a849ed4-a817-45a7-8b86-dbc9dd210193\u0022 data-id=\u0022ad64487acc8d48299c1f58ab7702796c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000367\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222a849ed4-a817-45a7-8b86-dbc9dd210193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ad64487acc8d48299c1f58ab7702796c\u0022\u003EJILL PETTIS (Senior Whip\u2014Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022 data-id=\u0022b2c1628a5e904f6ab93592e9f0a5bd38\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000368\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b2c1628a5e904f6ab93592e9f0a5bd38\u0022\u003EDr the Hon LOCKWOOD SMITH (National\u2014Rodney):\u003C/span\u003E This Mercenary Activities (Prohibition) Bill, and, in particular, Part 1 that we are speaking to now, is really important, and should not be treated lightly by this Parliament. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000369\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EThere are a number of things that trouble me about Part 1. The first is that clause 3, \u201CPurpose\u201D, does not tell Parliament or New Zealand when the mercenaries convention was concluded or drawn up. It states: \u201CThe purpose of this Act is to implement in New Zealand law New Zealand\u2019s obligations under the Mercenaries Convention.\u201D I think it is relevant to New Zealanders to ask: is this a convention that was drawn up in 2003\u2014last year? I do not think it is, is it? Is it a convention that was drawn up in 2000? Was it drawn up in 1999, perhaps? That would make it 5 years old. Maybe if it were 10 years old it might still be relevant, but if it were 10 years old, that would mean it had been drawn up in 1994. But I do not think it was drawn up then. I think it was drawn up in 1989, if I remember rightly. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000370\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EThe question that has to be asked of this Labour Government is: what on earth has suddenly provoked it to implement a convention drawn up in 1989 that none of our allies and partners has actually implemented? That was 15 years ago. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000371\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229d51361043b444808a29d46342301583\u0022\u003ESimon Power\u003C/span\u003E: I was in my second year at university then.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000372\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022765ae02dc6fc46de90c93d329487f438\u0022\u003EDr the Hon LOCKWOOD SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: My good colleague Simon Power tells me he was in his second year at university in 1989. In 1989 Dr Cullen had the chance to implement it. He was the Deputy Minister of Finance in the then Labour Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000373\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022de6e1deda25948c9bed62cabe18bbb0c\u0022\u003EHon Dr Michael Cullen\u003C/span\u003E: I was not. Wrong again.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000374\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c2ac6d71d03f465c8e4ecea3f7261c32\u0022\u003EDr the Hon LOCKWOOD SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: He was. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000375\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223d202c86d330428fb0f65dcedc016116\u0022\u003EHon Dr Michael Cullen\u003C/span\u003E: I was the Minister of Social Welfare in 1989. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000376\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022044bb24c464e4895aa0ebfc5c15985f5\u0022\u003EDr the Hon LOCKWOOD SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: It was probably 1990; I beg the member\u2019s pardon. He was a senior member of the Labour Government that could, if it wanted, have implemented this in 1989 or 1990. What has happened 15 years later that has suddenly provoked the Labour Government to implement this, when clearly it is tricky legislation? Members should look at the countries that have actually implemented it: Azerbaijan, Barbados, Belarus, Cameroon, Costa Rica, Croatia, and the list goes on. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000377\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EI do not want to spend too much time on that because there is some important detail here that we need the Minister in the chair, Judith Tizard, to answer, and I realise we may not get many more calls. What I would like the Minister to respond to is this. The Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee put a lot of time into looking at the definition in clause 5. We heard from respected academics in this field of international law who advised us on the definition and on how the UN saw the definition, and as to what other countries are trying to do about this issue. At the final analysis, when the select committee was considering this legislation, I asked the expert advisers to the select committee whether the definition would enable people who had not sworn an oath of allegiance to the country for whom they were involved in hostilities to be defined as a mercenary. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000378\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EThis is an important issue, and I would like the Minister in the chair to advise the Committee on it. Even with the changes made at the select committee to the definition of a mercenary, is it correct, the way the definition now remains, that if a person in the employ of a country\u2014a sovereign nation\u2014to assist in resolving hostilities in that nation has not sworn an oath of allegiance to that nation, that person would be caught up in this definition of a mercenary? I can tell the Minister that on 25 March this year, which is the date of the last notes I have from the select committee on this very issue\u2014clause 5, the definition of a mercenary\u2014I asked specifically what would be required to make it quite clear that someone is employed to be involved in hostilities, as distinct from someone who is an automatic part of the armed forces of a sovereign nation involved in hostilities. The answer I got was that the person really would have to have sworn an oath of allegiance. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000379\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EThere have been cases in history\u2014in fact, we were advised that even the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Kofi Annan, considered sending mercenaries to deal with the disaster in Rwanda. This definition is hugely important and we deserve an answer from the Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022330c030b-99be-4461-8aaa-9a10ee5bd889\u0022 data-id=\u002282539a34f936468fba8f2dc05d24b5a4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000380\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022330c030b-99be-4461-8aaa-9a10ee5bd889\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002282539a34f936468fba8f2dc05d24b5a4\u0022\u003EHon DAVID BENSON-POPE (Minister of Fisheries):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022 data-id=\u0022ef5622d4cb9d483ba710dd4e20d55d9d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000381\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ef5622d4cb9d483ba710dd4e20d55d9d\u0022\u003ESTEPHEN FRANKS (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E I look at the definitions in Part 1 with some curiosity. Having started my political career from the left, we had a number of heroes. We believed that the people who went off with the International Brigade to fight Franco in Spain were heroes. Later I learned about the Flying Tigers, who were the only help for the Chinese against the Japanese. I could name many others who had an honourable tradition, an honourable career, as mercenaries\u2014right back to our Scottish forebears who fought for most of the kings in the Hundred Years War and the Thirty Years War in Europe. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000382\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EBut now that we are in the Committee stage, I look at this as a technical matter. The definition seems to say that it will be OK for New Zealanders to fight in rich countries\u2019 wars but not in poor countries\u2019 wars. If they are in a rich country\u2019s war, the amounts they will receive, and be happy to receive, might be less than those received by the locals. It seems to say that it will be all right for Fijians to go, because they will take small amounts of pay, but not for New Zealanders. It seems to say that the status quo can be preserved, but not those who oppose a barbaric or dictatorial status quo. Curiously enough, if a party that is fighting does not have any combatants and makes all its combatants mercenaries, then that too seems to be OK, because there will be no one else to be adversely compared with. This is a piece of legal nonsense as far as I can tell. The compensation test seems to me to be made for avoidance, and made to suit the interests of those who are in power\u2014the establishment\u2014wherever this might be applied. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000383\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EHas the Minister considered whether there is a distinction between private gain and collective gain? For example, it seems to me quite possible that we could make sure that payment goes out collectively and avoid the intended purpose of this provision, if mercenaries are worried about what New Zealand is going to do to them. How will this Government distinguish the situation of the pilots and the engineers who go off to help a group like the Flying Tigers the next time such a group is needed somewhere in the world to protect desperate people from a barbaric enemy? Will they have to rely on the Attorney-General, trying to commit in advance, saying that they will not be prosecuted? What about when it is the Government\u2019s own interests\u2014as indeed President Roosevelt had in having the Flying Tigers operating in support of the Chinese, who otherwise would have been left facing a barbaric invasion by the Japanese completely without international support? Why would a Government pass something like this bill in advance when it has absolutely no idea to whom it might apply and whether it will serve its interests? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000384\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EWhen I look at these definitions, I see that they are badly drafted. I had a look to see which lawyers might have been responsible, and I see that our committee membership seems to have been dominated by that worthy Peter Dunne, with the assistance of Tim Barnett, Keith Locke, Martin Gallagher, and the Hon Matt Robson\u2014international statesmen all of them, and all of them with great knowledge of how despotism has been beaten back in the past! We need an explanation from the Minister in the chair as to why those people would have decided to assist Helen Clark\u2019s retirement plans. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000385\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EWhat possible reason is there for subjecting ourselves to a United Nations obligation like this, when in the Pacific we have no idea of what we may need to support ourselves over the next 5 or 10 years? It may well be that it is in New Zealand\u2019s interests to ensure that there is mercenary support if we do not want to have open conflict with whoever is supporting the other side in our backyard. If, for example, we fear that Indonesia is causing trouble somewhere and we do not want to take them on directly, of course we will want mercenaries to be in there making sure it is not a walkover. Yet for the sake of her retirement job with the United Nations, we sign up to this kind of tripe. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000386\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EI say to the Minister that we need an explanation of what lies behind bad drafting, and behind definitions that are so palpably oriented to support the status quo. I would like to hear from a politician why the left, which used to stand up for people in trouble, now wants to help the enemy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226f6e1ae1-8aa5-4f71-8e73-30bb378026c4\u0022 data-id=\u0022c0d6e9ad08d9481da3ec91e23bd9094d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000387\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226f6e1ae1-8aa5-4f71-8e73-30bb378026c4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c0d6e9ad08d9481da3ec91e23bd9094d\u0022\u003EGEORGINA BEYER (Labour\u2014Wairarapa):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00226204b4ced9e94e6cbc54ba758d2b6627\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 70\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000388\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Dr Wayne Mapp to clause 5 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000389\u0022\u003Eto add to subclause (2) the following paragraph:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000390\u0022\u003E(c)\twithin the meaning of subsection (1)(a) if he or she is employed directly within the armed forces of a party to the armed conflict whether or not they are paid more than any other persons of similar rank or specialty.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00221a70cefbaf2446f28538c0b65cfc7626\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 70\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000391\u0022\u003EThe question was put that Part 1 be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00222596e8624fd945e485a87d14c91e03e4\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That Part 1 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 70\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 1 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000392\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022ec3127678a184f3899ce1974f324ac34\u0022\u003EPart 2  Mercenary activities\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022 data-id=\u0022467e1223a6d94d91ad83c91b1c3791ab\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000393\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022467e1223a6d94d91ad83c91b1c3791ab\u0022\u003ESIMON POWER (National\u2014Rangitikei):\u003C/span\u003E I look forward to this being the first of my three calls on Part 2, because this is the part of the bill where we get to discover, as a Committee of the whole House, the actual, I guess, detailed impact of the disgraceful and sloppy drafting we saw in Part 1 relating to the definition of \u201Cmercenary\u201D. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000394\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003EPart 2 contains issues relating to recruitment\u2014which I know my colleague Ron Mark from New Zealand First is very keen to cover in some detail in one of his three calls on this part\u2014as well as the financing of mercenaries. I know my colleague Dr Wayne Mapp is also going to spend extensive time this afternoon working his way through those particular clauses. I also know that my colleague Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith is very keen to walk the Committee through the training of prospective mercenary clauses, and the effect that those clauses will have. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000395\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003EIt is clause 13 though, and the issues surrounding jurisdiction, that most interests me. The reason for that is to return to the commentary on the bill by way of a link from the jurisdiction clauses contained in Part 2 and look at just how widely subscribed to this convention, and therefore this legislation, is. My colleague Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith got part-way through taking the Committee through those countries that have ratified this convention. At this stage of the debate, it is worth asking the question that the National and New Zealand First members of the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee included in their minority report, and it is this: why would we bring in domestic legislation, which is ill-defined and sloppily drafted, that gets us ahead of those countries that we would normally involve ourselves with at the point of armed conflict or the like, in particular, the US, the UK, and Australia, that have not signed or ratified the convention? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000396\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003EBut we can all breathe a sigh of relief because although the US, Australia, and the UK have not signed this particular convention, Costa Rica has. What a great relief it is for the New Zealand public to know that we will be signing up to legislation, which, fortunately for all of us, Uruguay has considered important enough to sign up to! We simply ask this question, and perhaps we could ask the question directly of the Minister: why would we as a country ratify sloppy legislation when the UN itself has said that the definition involved is inoperable, cannot be used, and is unworkable? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000397\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003ESo what do we do? Well, the Labour Government might believe that this is political leadership. It also thought that telling the world that we lived in a benign strategic environment was political leadership. Well, it got that one pretty badly wrong. I suggest that we now find ourselves signing up to a particular piece of legislation that no equivalent country to New Zealand has signed up to, and that no country with which we have traditional and historic links has signed up to. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000398\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003EThe question for the Minister in the chair is simply this: why would we sign up to and pass domestic legislation for an ill-defined concept of mercenary at the same time that countries like Azerbaijan, Barbados, Belarus, Cameroon, Costa Rica, Georgia, Libya, Mali, Togo, and the Ukraine have signed up to it? This is just ridiculous. The Minister sitting in the chair needs to take the opportunity to get on her feet and answer these questions. Why is New Zealand ahead of its traditional friends and allies on this issue?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022 data-id=\u0022a8fb05bb51574667a5ff58f9bf3231c5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000399\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a8fb05bb51574667a5ff58f9bf3231c5\u0022\u003ERON MARK (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E I have the only answer to Mr Power\u2019s question\u2014which quite clearly the Government does not want to answer. It is that this Government truly does see New Zealand as being part of the Third World, banana republic community. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000400\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003ELook at us! Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith pointed out that this agreement, which we are now legislating into our books, was actually drafted and signed on 4 December 1989, and that one of the signatories to that agreement was Libya. Members should stop and think for a moment. How much credibility does one place on a piece of legislation, outlawing mercenaries, that was signed by Libya, when on 21 December 1988 that country blew an aircraft out of the skies over Lockerbie? Yet here we are\u2014accepting the Libyan signature as some sort of badge of honour and as something we should aspire to represent. I would say: \u201CYou are joking; you are seriously joking!\u201D And on 17 April 1984 Police Constable Yvonne Fletcher was shot dead by Libyans. So I am expected to stand here and accept Mr Gadaffi, with his administration, as my guiding light and mentor, and as the architect of this legislation\u2014which I should endorse because he complies? We are not serious, surely! This legislation is a piece of politically correct nonsense. It is unenforceable.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000401\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003ELet us go through clause 7, \u201CRecruiting person to be mercenary\u201D. Does this Government seriously believe that those recruiters who come to New Zealand\u2014looking to recruit former members of the police\u2019s Special Tactics Group to go and work in Iraq\u2014will front up to the Customs Service and say they are here to recruit people \u201Cfor the purpose of taking part in hostilities in an armed conflict\u2014\u201D? Of course not! Recruiters will say they are here to recruit people to go and do some security work, and if those people happen to be tied up in armed conflict, then so be it. But no one will admit to it; everyone will lie. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000402\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EBut the real tragedy is that the work those members of the New Zealand Police are currently doing in Iraq is dangerous, good work. If we expect the Iraqi people to come out of that horrible mess, which we witness every night on television, then it will be through the hard work and dedication of men and women in uniform, and of other men and women\u2014international citizens\u2014who are prepared to put their lives on the line for the free world and for democracy, and who are paid to do so. I take huge offence at the bunch of trendy-wendy, pathetic liberals who stand in this Chamber and criticise those people, yet who have never once in their entire lives ever\u2014or ever intended to\u2014put on uniforms, picked up rifles, and gone out there to do the very same work that guarantees them the freedom to sit in this Parliament and pass the stupid sorts of nonsensical laws they pass. [Interruption] \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000403\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EMr Benson-Pope tries to interject, but I challenge him as to why he has never put on a uniform or served his country in a conflict. Mr Nandor Tanczos laughs. He enjoys the freedoms espousing his rather interesting views on life, because the opportunity to do that was given to him with the blood and on the backs of men and women whose names are represented by the battle honours around the walls of this Chamber. I say to Mr Benson-Pope: \u201CDon\u2019t preach to me about wanting to serve New Zealand. Your track record is one of pacifism and peacenik activism.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000404\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EThat is what this legislation is all about. It is nothing to do with protecting New Zealand\u2019s security interests. It is about politically correct nonsense\u2014something that will make sure Helen Clark is a front contender for Kofi Annan\u2019s job when the position becomes available, because she will be able to go out there to campaign and say: \u201CLook at all the wonderful legislation I passed in New Zealand when I was Prime Minister.\u201D This bill is truly nonsense and rubbish from the Dark Ages. Yes, we want to get rid of the Mike Hoares of the world and there are ways of doing that. I give the Government a clue: it should go and look at what the British Government is doing in respect of regulating the international industry that provides contract officers and personnel.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222a849ed4-a817-45a7-8b86-dbc9dd210193\u0022 data-id=\u00228cf7936d05ce42cab079ac087c69d94e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000405\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222a849ed4-a817-45a7-8b86-dbc9dd210193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228cf7936d05ce42cab079ac087c69d94e\u0022\u003EJILL PETTIS (Labour\u2014Whanganui):\u003C/span\u003E This bill is called the Mercenary Activities (Prohibition) Bill. Every day in Parliament we commence with a prayer, although that is not so at the moment because we are in urgency and there is a slightly different format to the usual start at 2 o\u2019clock. Part of the prayer includes the phrase: \u201Cputting aside all personal interests\u201D\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000406\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226f1aef93b9e148a49564ff0989410aa8\u0022\u003EDr the Hon Lockwood Smith\u003C/span\u003E: Private and personal.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000407\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222a849ed4-a817-45a7-8b86-dbc9dd210193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c1a08fd3d069484bbfcccf8b4a572094\u0022\u003EJILL PETTIS\u003C/span\u003E: I am sorry: \u201Call private and personal interests,\u201D\u2014and I say to Mr Mark, who has just resumed his seat, that I am sorry we did not have the prayer today. The reason I have stood to speak on this bill is that I have to tell Mr Mark I suspect the speech he has just concluded was so loaded with personal interest it has to have some sort of response made, in order to achieve some sort of balance. This bill is quite simply\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000408\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228eb549a12b93443ea9755d2b0a03221a\u0022\u003ERon Mark\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Chairperson. I take that comment as a personal slur on my integrity, and I do not mean to sit here and allow it to go unchecked. I demand an apology from that member now, through you. I have taken deep offence at that; it is outrageous.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000409\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220c0c916e4ce7454e9b179709785c1bc6\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: The member has taken personal offence. I think the matter has been debated quite widely, and the member himself has made reference to it. However, the member has taken offence so I ask the member on her feet to withdraw that implication.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000410\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222a849ed4-a817-45a7-8b86-dbc9dd210193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223d5f5a9f36854918a4c1f2b13e816ebe\u0022\u003EJILL PETTIS\u003C/span\u003E: I am very happy to withdraw it. I have to say though that I suspect that the speech the member has just given bears very little relevance to what is actually in the bill and a lot more to his personal experience. This bill quite simply states that it is an offence to recruit, use, finance, or train mercenaries, or to participate in a war or act of violence as a mercenary. I was a nurse. I have a great passion for health issues. That member was a mercenary. He has said so himself in this Chamber. He has a great and passionate interest in issues military to do with mercenaries. If he takes offence at that, I have to say there is something wrong with him. I did not do anything as a nurse that I am not proud of. I was proud to be a nurse, and that is why I talk about issues to do with health with great passion and honesty\u2014and no guilt.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000411\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222a849ed4-a817-45a7-8b86-dbc9dd210193\u0022\u003EI also have to say that this bill focuses on the types of mercenaries who participate in wars and those who participate in concerted acts of violence, including acts designed to destabilise Governments, with the common thread being that the persons involved are motivated primarily by profit. My father, and lots of my father\u2019s generation, went to war, I believe\u2014if there is a right reason to go to war, and I think sometimes there is\u2014with the motivation primarily to achieve peace; they did not go for profit.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000412\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222a849ed4-a817-45a7-8b86-dbc9dd210193\u0022\u003ENew Zealand has long opposed the use of mercenaries. There is nothing new in that, at all. It is part of New Zealand philosophical belief. The involvement of mercenaries\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000413\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002254e5bf4c6e874dcb9eb9401e6f93eb24\u0022\u003EStephen Franks\u003C/span\u003E: What about von Tempsky?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000414\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222a849ed4-a817-45a7-8b86-dbc9dd210193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221782369bc32341bfbfc1ba38b4814ac1\u0022\u003EJILL PETTIS\u003C/span\u003E: That is just a bit before my time\u2014as an additional party to a conflict is rarely, if ever, conducive to that conflict\u2019s peaceful resolution.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000415\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222a849ed4-a817-45a7-8b86-dbc9dd210193\u0022\u003EI remind that member that when he gets up on his high horse\u2014or as someone said this morning: \u201CHe is more hack than horse.\u201D\u2014he should remember that some of the things he says are not necessarily objective. This bill is an objective, long-term look at the situation. It is very good legislation, and I ask that member to shuck off his hair shirt for a moment and look at this bill in the way it is intended. It is a good bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022 data-id=\u0022c327a34473c04f04abe88b044f5221cf\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000416\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c327a34473c04f04abe88b044f5221cf\u0022\u003ESTEPHEN FRANKS (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E I have three questions for the Minister in the chair, the Hon Judith Tizard. The first is about clause 7. There is an offence there of recruiting a mercenary, but it does not use the definition of \u201Cmercenary\u201D. It seems, therefore, to have none of the benefits of the exceptions in that definition. It seems, for example, that someone who recruits a mercenary to work for the United Nations is still caught by the offence\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000417\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b1b5881-3b86-4894-ac77-72905f786141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c74ed7b06c4846b39669ec4ffe1f8a7b\u0022\u003EHon Judith Tizard\u003C/span\u003E: United Nations!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000418\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022508dcbed8d6e4433bafb1c8bc1a8d8e6\u0022\u003ESTEPHEN FRANKS\u003C/span\u003E: If the Minister would take a call and answer, that would be great, but if she cares to look at clause 7, she will see it actually does not use the defined term. It restates the offence as recruiting \u201Cfor the purpose of taking part in hostilities in an armed conflict\u201D for profit, and it seems not to provide for the exceptions that have been provided in clause 5. Clause 5, very importantly, says that someone is not a mercenary if the work is with the United Nations or a peace support mission, humanitarian aid, the detection of unexploded mines, and so forth. Why have we left it an offence to recruit someone to go and explode mines, but it is not an offence to go and explode them?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000419\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EI do believe that this is another instance of the hopeless work of the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee, chaired by Mr Dunne and dominated by the \u201Cnutty lefties\u201D, who are so blinded by their hostility to the profession of arms that they do drafting like this. I ask that the Minister seek the advice of her officials, because it seems to me quite anomalous that recruitment is an offence to which the exceptions do not apply. It is quite possible that I have mistaken it, and I would be glad to be told that I have, because otherwise it seems ludicrous.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000420\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EI am also concerned to have an answer on extraterritorial jurisdiction, to know whether it is possible that under the extradition treaty invoked in Part 3 someone can oblige the New Zealand Government to exercise its extraterritorial jurisdiction for the purpose of actually seizing and delivering someone who otherwise would not be taken. If this country is to be a haven for the sorts of freedom fighters whom in the past we have supported\u2014the kinds of people who have stood up against despots and tyrants\u2014we need to know whether, under this United Nations treaty, someone can force New Zealand to use the authority it is so foolishly asserting over its own people to pursue actions overseas that were not offences at the time or in the area where they occurred. It may be that there is a simple answer to that\u2014I do not know.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000421\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003ENow that I have got out those two questions I will go back to the bill. It is interesting that the offences of training a mercenary, financing a mercenary, and using a mercenary all relate to the defined term\u2014clauses 8, 9, 10, and 12 all refer to the defined term\u2014but not the offence of recruiting a mercenary. I suspect there has to be some explanation for that. It is very odd for it not to be qualified by the defined term. It may be that it was an accident of drafting, or is due to haste. This measure has been brought in under urgency, when it has been sitting around, after being reported back by the select committee, for nearly 6 months. Obviously, urgency has struck. Does someone have to make a speech at the United Nations shortly? Does someone need an excuse to go there and shake hands at a cocktail party? What possible urgency does this bill have? Are we frightened that there might be some New Zealanders about to head off, and we need to head them off?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000422\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EThat would be the third question: why is this bill being dealt with under urgency? Why is it going through these stages under urgency? Is there some rational explanation or is it simply the Labour Government\u2019s version of macho? When one does not believe in the armed forces, one bullies people in Parliament\u2014as the Labour whip attempted to do to Mr Ron Mark.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000423\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228b35d4c3230e49e2b0664008a1fdaa5d\u0022\u003EDr Wayne Mapp\u003C/span\u003E: A special cocktail party.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000424\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221a67314b07ad4bee90a263efd2be546c\u0022\u003ESTEPHEN FRANKS\u003C/span\u003E: It would be a very special cocktail party, but the people would be mainly ugly. The member can console himself with that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022 data-id=\u0022d3ceb33cf546475faec8c235d0f4d6d2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000425\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d3ceb33cf546475faec8c235d0f4d6d2\u0022\u003EDr WAYNE MAPP (National\u2014North Shore):\u003C/span\u003E As the previous speaker quite accurately indicated, I guess in the next few days we will see a cocktail party hosted by our legation in New York. Those people who will be attending this fine cocktail party\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000426\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e427fbb3eba2494fbc7538e13ffdd7b9\u0022\u003ESimon Power\u003C/span\u003E: Will the member be there?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000427\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e80e0997a616417392d4be4eb9780114\u0022\u003EDr WAYNE MAPP\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Goff is likely to be there, I suspect. The representatives of Azerbaijan, Surinam, Togo, Turkmenistan\u2014in fact, many of the \u201C-stans\u201D\u2014will also be there. These places are, of course, great bastions of democracy. I have been reading extensively about the cult of personality that is becoming a feature in the \u201C-stans\u201D\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000428\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002217e0d10974604cebb76ef165179e2d0a\u0022\u003EStephen Franks\u003C/span\u003E: They will have to say thank you because we are not going to send our mercenaries to overthrow them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000429\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f33b1027305d43fca9df8a1e98f591c9\u0022\u003EDr WAYNE MAPP\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, indeed. This bill is an example of political correctness. The Minister in the chair took a call on the last part. I carefully noted when she said that the convention would not have applied to Mr Mark because he was in a support role. He was a company commander in an engineering role in the Sultanate of Oman. That is essentially what she said. She implied that he was not in a combat role, and thus would not have been affected. But the reality, as everyone knows, is that the Sultanate of Oman, Saudi Arabia, and many other countries in the Middle East have had a practice of recruiting from the West\u2014actually, in collaboration with the British Government, the French Government, and other Governments\u2014highly qualified specialists many of whom actually do fight directly in the front line, because they are uniquely qualified. It is those people who are now affected. Everyone who follows these issues knows that it is a great concern of highly qualified special forces of Western armed forces that their personnel are being recruited, essentially, by these other countries, often with the support of the foreign affairs departments of Western countries. Surely it is not sensible that the legislation applies to them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000430\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EI know that the Government will say it does not apply if a person is a member of the armed forces. The problem\u2014and this is our fundamental dilemma with the bill\u2014is that there is ambiguity or conflict. On the one hand the bill states a person is a mercenary if he or she is recruited, engaged in active hostilities, and paid at a greater rate than other members holding the same rank. but one can hold the same rank only if one is actually in the armed forces. If one were in a private army, then this issue would not apply. So the exclusion\u2014that the bill does not apply to members of the armed forces\u2014is contradicted by the inclusionary words. That is a point that Mr Power raised. There is a tension between who is a mercenary and the set of definitions of who is not a mercenary. The problem is that the two groups of definitions are actually in conflict.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000431\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EThat is precisely why I put forward the amendment in the last part\u2014to ensure that someone recruited into the armed forces of a nation but paid more than the locals could not be deemed to be a mercenary. That is our critical issue. Frankly, the way that the legislation is now drafted, and the way that the Government voted against that amendment, leaves that fundamental issue in doubt. We on this side of the House have been consistently saying there is a very good reason why Britain, the United States, France, Australia, Canada, and Germany\u2014many of which countries supply military specialists to the armed forces of Middle Eastern nations and others\u2014have not signed the convention. Because of the way that the convention is drafted, it affects precisely that activity.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022 data-id=\u0022fc278ef6cb6642a29b7afb6f2c3a1929\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000432\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022fc278ef6cb6642a29b7afb6f2c3a1929\u0022\u003EDr the Hon LOCKWOOD SMITH (National\u2014Rodney):\u003C/span\u003E In speaking to Part 2 of the Mercenary Activities (Prohibition) Bill there are a couple of serious matters on which I would appreciate the advice of the Minister in the chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000433\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EFirstly, in Part 2 there are several clauses. The first, clause 7, relates to recruiting a person to be a mercenary, and I guess that is something. But clause 10 makes an offence of training a prospective mercenary. I would like the Minister to advise how on earth that can actually work. If someone in New Zealand is involved in training people for security work, at that stage he or she has no idea whether the trainees will end up in armed hostilities that are defined by this bill as mercenary activities. I would appreciate the Minister\u2019s advice on how on earth that is meant to work. If someone involved in\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000434\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222a849ed4-a817-45a7-8b86-dbc9dd210193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227c58383f79934896b7b715fd32f2103d\u0022\u003EJill Pettis\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s like saying \u201CI shot him by accident.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000435\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223d5e7eb5c1b84f2ea777fe5fcee145de\u0022\u003EDr the Hon LOCKWOOD SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: That is pretty dumb, and about what I would expect from a Labour whip who is involved in making legislation like this. One has to ask oneself why such junk legislation is being passed by the Government under urgency. The only logical explanation I have heard came from Ron Mark, who reckons that it is to help Helen Clark get the job as Secretary-General of the United Nations. Why else would the New Zealand Government be passing this junk?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000436\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EBut I come back to the specific issue, which is how legislation can contain something like clause 10, which makes it an offence to train a prospective mercenary. People involved in the legitimate business activity in New Zealand of training security forces have no way of knowing whether a trainee will end up involved in mercenary activities. If trainees do end up in mercenary activities, a charge could be brought against the person who trained them, because in training people who are now involved in mercenary activities, he or she has committed an offence. How does that make sense? The person doing the training was doing perfectly legitimate security training.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000437\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EI am sure Ron Mark could name several such international businesses. Members should not forget that under clause 13, \u201CExtraterritorial jurisdiction\u201D, this training could involve a New Zealander working overseas. If a New Zealander with an international company is involved in training perfectly legitimate people to be involved in security activities internationally\u2014for example, training people to be employed by the United Nations\u2014yet some of those people end up in mercenary activities, then that New Zealander is involved in training people for mercenary activities. As I read this legislation, such people could be charged under clause 10 with training a prospective mercenary.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000438\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EI believe that Parliament deserves to know where the protections are. It does not make any sense at all to have a perfectly legitimate training business caught up in this legislation; we should not blame that business if a trainee chooses to get involved in mercenary activity. Members should not forget that mercenary activity is extraordinarily difficult to define. We know that from the attempts in Part 1 to define it. Members of Parliament may not be aware, but the select committee heard that the kaiser charged the New Zealand soldiers fighting in World War I with being mercenaries. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000439\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222a849ed4-a817-45a7-8b86-dbc9dd210193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002274d8376d34a3445c8d5fa83080529339\u0022\u003EJill Pettis\u003C/span\u003E: Well, he would.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000440\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dc6c94e7f7b14f07b8c3f738fc0d3b89\u0022\u003EDr the Hon LOCKWOOD SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: The Labour member said that he would, but that is part of the problem of defining what is mercenary activity. When it comes to clause 7, mercenary activity has been used to try to bring peace to war-torn parts of this world. I invite the senior Government whip to have a look at what happened in Sierra Leone, because mercenaries were involved there to try to bring some stability to that place. World pressure against mercenaries caused them to be withdrawn, and what happened? The place broke down into civil war. The Secretary-General of the UN himself looked seriously at bringing in mercenaries\u2014clearly defined mercenaries\u2014to try to help with the huge suffering in Rwanda, which none of the members of the UN were prepared to do anything about. None of the members of the UN had been prepared to go into Rwanda or Somalia, and it was going to take mercenary activity to do something. Part 2 is nonsense. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022 data-id=\u0022479ff94361b2465b85440337bfbc585e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000441\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022479ff94361b2465b85440337bfbc585e\u0022\u003ERON MARK (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E That was an excellent speech, and I really wish the Government would accept that what we are arguing is that the definitions in this legislation make it unenforceable. It is not workable. It is feel-good. We all know what the Government is talking about. We have known about people like Mike Hoare for years. Yet there are ways in which countries can deal with those issues. In passing this legislation, with all the ambiguity that is contained in it, we scoop up into this net men and women who are doing excellent work\u2014men and women whose morals, virtues, and integrity cannot be questioned. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003ELook at the training. Take, for example, an officer with 20 years\u2019 service in the New Zealand Army, who was decorated for his service in Vietnam on behalf of his country, served with the British defence forces, and became internationally renowned as a specialist officer. He is recruited into a Middle Eastern country that is struggling to contain its internal security and border security problems. He is recruited, along with a number of British personnel, as a contract officer to train, teach, and command the Middle Eastern soldiers, and soldiers who are recruited from other parts of the world. So he goes to Pakistan, Nepal, and India, puts his net out amongst the wider community within those Middle Eastern countries, and recruits people whom he then trains. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000443\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EThe moment they become actively engaged in combat, he is a mercenary. Despite all the good work he is doing to enhance the security of the situation in the Middle East, and to help relationships between his country and the host country\u2014the country that his company has been contracted to support, with the knowledge of the British and New Zealand Governments\u2014suddenly he is a mercenary, and therefore is liable on conviction to face 14 years in jail. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000444\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EWe have to get our heads up and look at the situation. The world has moved on. We know what the Government is talking about when it uses the very stigmatised term, \u201Cmercenary\u201D. Those are people who will go out and do despicable acts, who are brought in only by money and greed, who do not care about the ideological causes or about sovereignty, and who go in for one purpose and one purpose alone. They do not care who their masters are; they just want to earn the big money. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000445\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EMy message is that, today, those people are increasingly a very small minority. The vast bulk of the people employed as private defence contractors and security personnel are in legitimate companies that are well known and, indeed, are utilised by Western powers. The problem with this legislation is that it is so ambiguous that it scoops up all those people into the one basket, thereby putting them in a situation whereby they can be prosecuted for the good work they have done because someone has slapped a label on their forehead and deemed them to be horrible, nasty mercenaries of this type. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000446\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EI ask this Government to reflect on the quality of men and women that it trains, and ask itself seriously whether it believes that suddenly, overnight, those men and women who take private contracts, leave the shores of New Zealand, and go to work for private British companies based out of Hong Kong or the Isle of Man, have suddenly had a brain change. Have they suddenly become nasty, horrible, immoral people who only soldier for money? The truth is that no, they have not. They go out to do something they know they can do to make the world a better place for other people, and they do a jolly good job of it. That is why they are so widely sought after. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000447\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EWe are throwing out a net with this legislation and its poorly defined clauses that will take in all these people. All it needs is for some malicious person to lodge charges, or to lay a complaint, and suddenly we will have people out there who have been doing very good work for the past 5 years\u2014maybe in Iraq, Kosovo, Cambodia, or Sierra Leone\u2014suddenly facing criminal charges and a possible 14-year sentence. It does not matter where I look through this legislation, it is impossible to enforce, easy to circumvent, and so ambiguous that it should not be passed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000448\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Phil Goff to clause 7 be agreed to: \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000449\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003Eto insert in paragraph (a) of subclause (2), after the words \u201Ca party to the\u201D, the word \u201Carmed\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00225262d34ae3ae4b228db2c6b267c0dc31\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 70\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000450\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022e4728f8fe2e94e088ff57a5e9bc3fd28\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That Part 2 as amended be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 70\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 2 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000451\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a8468cb397d94d8ba9acafadd12ee1f9\u0022\u003EPart 3  Miscellaneous provisions\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022 data-id=\u00229dded010ed9b466cb8204e847053bd44\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000452\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229dded010ed9b466cb8204e847053bd44\u0022\u003ESIMON POWER (National\u2014Rangitikei):\u003C/span\u003E I do wish to take a short call on Part 3, because there is a consistent thread running through this legislation of abysmal drafting and of ambiguity over interpretation. It is worth saying that not only do we have this continued debacle with the definition of mercenary and the non-definition of mercenary but under Part 3 we have what I have to say is one of the most hilarious clauses I have read in my time in this Parliament\u2014short though it has been. That clause is clause 14, relating to the \u201CCertificate as to States Parties under Mercenaries Convention\u201D. It is worth reading that, because it provides good humour after a day and a half in the Chamber under urgency. For listeners, it is worth getting a sense of the complete waste of time that legislation like this is, when this clause is read through slowly. So, here goes: \u201CA certificate that appears to be signed by,\u201D\u2014I do not know what that means\u2014\u201Cor on behalf of, the Secretary of Foreign Affairs and Trade and that states that a State is, or is not, a State Party to the Mercenaries Convention is sufficient evidence of that matter, unless the contrary is proved.\u201D Now, that is just a shambles. What kind of legislative debacle\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000453\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b0fd1032b88d4ade9d6f896977525ebe\u0022\u003EOpposition Member\u003C/span\u003E: A junk clause.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000454\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f5c32f9f6f1946899f81c1d7f6995c89\u0022\u003ESIMON POWER\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014and junk clause, as my colleague calls it, is that? \u201CA certificate that appears to be signed by,\u201D; so it might not be signed, but it might appear to be signed. In other words\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000455\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bb612368a293455c91a35577c5f9c43d\u0022\u003ELindsay Tisch\u003C/span\u003E: The Prime Minister is good at this sort of thing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000456\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d8abd19afc3444638250e8472aaf2fe3\u0022\u003ESIMON POWER\u003C/span\u003E: That is right. It could be that the Secretary of Foreign Affairs and Trade decided to put a pen to paper, but changed his mind. So it may well be that we have an ink dot on the signature line, which is not a completed signature but the paper may appear to be signed. It could well be that the Secretary of Foreign Affairs and Trade changed his mind halfway through his signature, or accordingly signed on behalf of someone else\u2014something that members opposite will know a fair bit about. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000457\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003EIt strikes me that that is a bizarre way to describe the execution of a certificate. It is pretty straightforward: the certificate has either been signed or it has not been signed. It is like the words: this is a definition of a mercenary, and this is the definition of somebody who is not a mercenary. So why does the clause simply not say: \u201Ca certificate that is signed by the Secretary of Foreign Affairs and Trade\u201D, instead of saying \u201Cappears to be signed by,\u201D? What a load of nonsense! \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000458\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003EThen it goes on to state that \u201Ca State is, or is not,\u201D. So now we have a certificate that appears to be signed by somebody, and that could mean a State is, or is not, a party to the convention. It goes on to say that if it appears to be signed, and is or is not a member State of the convention\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000459\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225ad718a9f37b4b32a360179cfd6fe402\u0022\u003ERon Mark\u003C/span\u003E: On behalf of.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000460\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022369a4757098d4c7ea985933482d59bc6\u0022\u003ESIMON POWER\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014on behalf of\u2014then that is sufficient evidence. That is just ludicrous. But there is more. The clause goes on to say that all of that means there is sufficient evidence of the certificate\u2014unless the contrary is proved. Well, does that mean: \u201CNo, it does not appear to be signed, because I am going to prove that it was not, despite the fact it could be signed, there being sufficient evidence of the fact that somebody else, signing on behalf, could have signed to say the State is, or is not, a member of the convention, on behalf of somebody.\u201D? Now, if that is the type of legislation that is running through this Parliament, together with phraseology like: \u201CThis is not what a mercenary is but the legislation is designed to capture a mercenary\u2014which we cannot define\u2014so we will tell people what it is not.\u201D, as well as certificates that are not signed, or purport to be signed\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000461\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ed3e796e5f2d46b9ae469eefff650988\u0022\u003ERon Mark\u003C/span\u003E: On behalf of. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000462\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022da3c0cd0e1d4490e9976665855ca3655\u0022\u003ESIMON POWER\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014on behalf of somebody else, is sufficient evidence, unless one can say it is not sufficient evidence, in which case, whether it is signed on behalf of, or not, means the certificate could, or could not, be complete, depending on whether, or not, it appears to be signed by somebody. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000463\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226751371ea78d4960a5397e1040c56af0\u0022\u003ERon Mark\u003C/span\u003E: Unless the contrary is proven.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000464\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228c58dc1900d64d4da47ed6b6f9306c5e\u0022\u003ESIMON POWER\u003C/span\u003E: That clears it up, beautifully! So if I want to travel overseas and become a mercenary, I now know my rights\u2014completely! [Interruption] That is true; compared with the Associate Minister of Transport, I should do a far better job as a mercenary. The one thing we do know about this legislation is that it is sloppy and ambiguous. That is no way to determine whether, or not, mercenaries are indeed mercenaries, depending on whether certificates have been signed as being sufficient evidence on behalf of others, whether, or not, the contrary intention is proved, depending on whether, or not, the certificate purports to say that a State is, or is not, a State party to the Mercenaries Convention. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000465\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003ETo be fair, this is an absolute shambles. For the Government to pursue legislation that is indeed so messy, so untidy, and so ambiguous is\u2014to be blunt\u2014hopeless, when in fact it is the Government\u2019s responsibility to produce clear, unambiguous legislation to cover these types of issues, and it has not been able to do that in this case. And this clause proves that beyond reasonable doubt. I see that the Minister in the chair, Harry Duynhoven, is very keen to engage on this issue\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000466\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221772e9f5-5379-4bfe-9d9b-eaffb4c61b02\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221ad39831bc244b03b0e221ef56752b76\u0022\u003EHon Harry Duynhoven\u003C/span\u003E: No, no. I just want to ask: is this member a lawyer?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000467\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f9635e07fc714f5a9dfaa983c15a153a\u0022\u003ESIMON POWER\u003C/span\u003E: Is this a call?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221772e9f5-5379-4bfe-9d9b-eaffb4c61b02\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dfdd0b505084417d9bd8f3719630ad3e\u0022\u003EHon Harry Duynhoven\u003C/span\u003E: If the member will yield.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000469\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002212baf579ac6a43bda48968cb62e0e60e\u0022\u003ESIMON POWER\u003C/span\u003E: I am happy to yield to the Minister so that we can continue to debate Part 3 once he takes the call.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000470\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223e854e4de9c64eca8314d9a9d2512ecf\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Can I just say that if the member yields, the Minister can reply only to the questions asked, and that is it. It is not a means of transferring a call. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000471\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229fc1659641e348629c9e683d0a5e883f\u0022\u003ESIMON POWER\u003C/span\u003E: I am very happy to yield to the Minister, should he wish to answer the question. I am happy to transfer the call. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000472\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a96f2e72da174065a01e74833220a6f2\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Yielding is not a means of transferring a call. The Minister can only answer questions; that is it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000473\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ecc93aeab04747bc9cfbbaaafc3a1ae4\u0022\u003ESIMON POWER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I will just carry on. Therefore, I think it is very clear to the House that the Government has failed on two counts with this legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000474\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222a849ed4-a817-45a7-8b86-dbc9dd210193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b438c2c737ee48059d740f340dc0ae26\u0022\u003EJill Pettis\u003C/span\u003E: Just two?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000475\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e4bb668b01164735bc0b1dd960039d2e\u0022\u003ESIMON POWER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, there are more, but we will stick at two at the moment, I tell the senior whip. The first is that the Government has been unable to define what a mercenary is. The second is that it leaves the entire world, not only New Zealand, uncertain as to what the \u201Ccertificate that appears to be signed\u201D actually means.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022 data-id=\u00227c859a7f95bf4189a8fd22b354c188eb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000476\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227c859a7f95bf4189a8fd22b354c188eb\u0022\u003ERON MARK (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E One has to laugh, does one not, to read such a clause. I tell Mr Power that I tried to read that same clause three or four times, and I think his point is well made. I do not, for the life of me, understand why the Minister is not now scratching out an amendment to that, with the assistance of his staff, because it is an absolute nonsense and it is no wonder that lawyers make so much money out there when this Parliament produces paragraphs such as that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000477\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EI want to come now to clauses 15, 16, and 17. It is interesting that under the heading, \u201CInvestigation and prosecution of offences against Act or referred to in Mercenaries Convention\u201D, clause 15(1) states: \u201CSections 16 and 17 apply whenever the Attorney-General receives information that there may be present in New Zealand a person who has committed, or is alleged to have committed, an offence against article 2, article 3, or article 4 of the Mercenaries Convention.\u201D Then we get into a whole series of questions that I guess have to be asked, and I am going to ask them of the Minister right now. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000478\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EThe first is: what happens when the Attorney-General is told that there is a person in New Zealand who is recruiting people who someone believes will be mercenaries\u2014and, therefore, he is a mercenary\u2014what is to be done? Do we go and knock on the hotel door of the said chap, who might be from the United Kingdom or the United States, or who might well be here at the behest of the CIA or of any of Britain\u2019s intelligence agencies, looking to recruit good, competent, highly professional New Zealanders with good moral values and ethics, to go and\u2014say, for example\u2014chuck the Soviets out of Afghanistan after their having invaded Afghanistan? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000479\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E Will the Attorney-General of New Zealand bring to the courts in this land an American or a British officer, or a person operating or working on behalf of the British or American Governments? When the New Zealanders who have been, say, in Iraq doing the work that they are alleged to have been doing are found, what will we say? \u201CThe State where the offence was committed was Iraq.\u201D Oh, OK. \u201CThe State in relation to where the offence was directed or attempted was Iraq.\u201D OK. \u201CThe State in relation to which any person against whom the offence was directed or attempted is a person of the kind referred to in article 10 blah blah of the Mercenaries Convention, who was Saddam Hussein.\u201D Oh, OK. So we will prosecute that person for overthrowing Saddam Hussein. What is worse is we will prosecute that person for working with legitimate Government agencies as a private contract officer to overthrow some other tinpot dictator in a country that he or she has invaded or taken control of. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000480\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EWill the New Zealand Attorney-General seriously go head-to-head with intelligence agencies of allies who are seeking to make the world a better place through using New Zealanders of good moral and ethical values who have served 25 or 30 years in the New Zealand Army and are veterans of Sierra Leone, Cambodia, and East Timor? Will we seriously throw those people up in the courts, prosecute them under these clauses, and slap them in jail for 14 years? What will be the reaction of the average Joe Blow on the street to that? I suggest that the average New Zealander would say that it is ridiculous and absurd. It is unworkable and there is the potential in the bill for a diplomatic row or argument we do not ever want to have, particularly if on the same weekend the Prime Minister is over there trying to negotiate a free-trade agreement, I suggest. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000481\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EWhat would then happen to any of the allegations in this spurious, ambiguous legislation\u2014which might even have been maliciously brought\u2014when this Government engaged in another round of free-trade discussions with the United States? Well, I will tell members what would happen. They would be thrown out\u2014or would they? Would this Government and Attorney-General seek to make an international political row over such an issue, and accept the consequences of that? Now, I am waiting to hear the answer, because the procedures that are laid out here raise\u2014to me\u2014the potential for a huge diplomatic problem. So we will arrest some of the people who come here looking for good, professional, honest officers and NCOs of integrity to go into places like Iraq to try to rebuild it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000482\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EWill we tell police officers with exemplary service records that if a charge is laid against them because they have been actively engaged in combat actions whilst being paid more than local people and not being a national or a citizen of Iraq, the moment someone lays a charge back here\u2014despite the fact that those officers might well have been recruited by a British company at the behest of the British Government\u2014we will now charge them and all the people involved? I do not think so. I think this is rubbish.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022 data-id=\u002223574ecb91d24ed8a8c148c7bebfb5ee\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000483\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002223574ecb91d24ed8a8c148c7bebfb5ee\u0022\u003ESTEPHEN FRANKS (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E I was very sorry that in the debate on the last part the Minister chose not to answer the serious question I had raised as to the definition, and in this part the question is material again. That is because I am not confident\u2014and I do not have the background in this area of law, but I am sure the officials available to the Minister do\u2014that New Zealand is not setting itself up in clauses 15, 16, 17, and 18 to be deeply embarrassed. Members will recall the embarrassment for the British Government when General Pinochet was detained essentially at the request of, as I recall, a Spanish court at the instigation of activists in Spain, and the last thing the British Government wanted was to be in head-on conflict with any of the factions in Chile. But in the end, the British Government had enough international clout to do as it thought best for Britain, and the British courts have enough reputation for being independent that\u2014after Lord Hoffman was removed from the House of Lords bench\u2014it was very hard to suggest that anything other than the most honest view of the law was being applied. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000484\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EBut what if a similar circumstance were translated to New Zealand? For example, what if the Chinese made a request to us if it is a party\u2014and I am not sure China is a party, but I will assume it is\u2014to hold someone here who it claims has been a mercenary in Tibet, or it claims is recruiting or raising finance to cause trouble for China in Tibet? How would that go with New Zealand? Why would we want to put ourselves into a position where there is an instrument that gives the other State the expectation that it can call on us to chase the people it does not like? What about the Russians in relation toChechnya, the Indonesians in relation to Timor or Aceh, or the Kanaks in New Caledonia? There are any number of people whom we have relationships with\u2014for example, the French Government\u2014who might one day call on us to exercise powers under this legislation that we would much prefer not to have. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000485\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EI have not heard or seen any justification for this. The Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee\u2019s feeble report does not tell members how it weighed those kinds of considerations\u2014if indeed it did. There is absolutely no consideration from the perspective of New Zealand\u2019s interests, as opposed to some abstract interest of the international community, so who is looking after New Zealand in relation to clauses 15, 16, 17, and 18? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EThen I saw that clause 21 means that this legislation is included for the purposes of the Extradition Act of 1999. Now, I do not know whether that is a benefit\u2014I come to this as any ordinary member reading these words for the first time\u2014but I would have expected to be told, and I believe that the Minister ought to tell members, whether this does mean that China could call for the extradition of some poor soul who has offended it in Tibet or in relation to Tibet. So I do not think we should be voting for this. I despise the Greens, and I despise them deeply in matters like this. Those members are very, very prone to self-righteous speeches in this Chamber about looking after the benighted and those whom most Western World States consider to be terrorists. But when it comes to a bill in this Parliament that could be used to suppress freedom fighters or to harass people whose politics are unpopular with the Greens\u2019 mates, the communists\u2014no; they are in there, boots and all, supporting it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000487\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EI reckon members will see them vote for this thing unamended. They will vote for Part 3, because Part 3 is the bit they want. They want to be able to hand over people to ensure that the Governments they favour can claim the right to deliver up those who might offend them, wherever they may hide. We may find it could be as embarrassing as somebody\u2019s bodyguard coming with a foreign dignitary to New Zealand, who is suddenly hit with a request that he or she be intercepted, arrested, and suffer the fate of General Pinochet. Whatever one may think of him, it was a grave misuse of power to have arrested that man, who had come to Britain for medical treatment, for acts that were not illegal at the time he committed them in his own country and for which he had an exemption. To turn the law into an instrument of foreign policy like this, when it could rebound on a weaker country that has got itself offside with the international community, is stupid.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022c177c8754f7a44eea41bb2539347e22c\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That Part 3 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 70\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 3 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000488\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00225ef797622c274d8a9147c79cc255ec77\u0022\u003ESchedule\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00229b60f421fcbd4bdda884a2c419d3f99e\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the schedule be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 70\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESchedule agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000489\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022505c09da354e45fca1a4aca99a22aa4c\u0022\u003EClause 1  Title\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022 data-id=\u0022a00bfd9eb28d4d4c8545bf518bbde06d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000490\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a00bfd9eb28d4d4c8545bf518bbde06d\u0022\u003EDr the Hon LOCKWOOD SMITH (National\u2014Rodney):\u003C/span\u003E We are debating clause 1, \u201CTitle\u201D, of the Mercenary Activities (Prohibition) Bill. I believe that Parliament deserves to hear from Labour members as to why on earth they seek to pass this legislation. We have already established during the Committee stage of the debate that the agreement the legislation seeks to enable ratification of here in New Zealand was drawn up 15 years ago. The first question I believe Government members should answer is why, after 15 years in which New Zealand has not seen fit to ratify that agreement, we are now seeking to ratify it. One answer could be that the world has suddenly realised that it needs to be ratified. Maybe one answer could be that countries like the United States of America, Australia, the United Kingdom, or any number of European countries\u2014France, perhaps, or Germany\u2014all suddenly see that there is a real problem happening in the world, and say we should ratify the agreement in order to sort the problem out. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000491\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EBut that is not the case. Among the countries that have ratified it, our closest allies would be Italy and Belgium. They are the only Western countries I can find on the list of those that have ratified or implemented the agreement. Why on earth New Zealand wants to be in bed with Libya has really got me whacked. OK, Libya has at least abandoned its nuclear weapons programme in recent times\u2014we should at least give Colonel Gadaffi some credit for that. Or maybe we should give the United States some credit for it, because if the United States had not got rid of Saddam Hussein, Gadaffi sure as hell would not have given up his nuclear weapons programme. Still, I am blowed if I know why we want to get into bed with the few countries that have implemented this agreement\u2014including Libya. Maybe the fact that Togo has implemented the agreement is the reason the Labour Government says we should implement it, too. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000492\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EThere is an even more important issue. Let us not make light of this. The final statement of the majority of the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee in the commentary on the bill reads: \u201CThere are suggestions, including from the Special Rapporteur on Mercenaries\u201D\u2014that is, the special rapporteur of the United Nations\u2014\u201Cthat the Convention should be amended or a new convention negotiated to recognise the role of private military companies and regulate them accordingly. We understand that this is a long-term objective that will be pursued through UN processes and is an issue that the Government may address at a later stage.\u201D Given that the Labour members on the select committee acknowledge that the United Nations itself does not think the convention is satisfactory and the UN\u2019s own special rapporteur says it will not work, why is Labour now passing this bill under urgency here in New Zealand, 15 years after the convention was initially drawn up, when no other countries that we are involved with in any defence activities are doing the same thing? Parliament deserves an answer on that before the Committee stage is abandoned. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000493\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EI believe that the Minister in the chair, Harry Duynhoven, or another Labour member\u2014or a United Future member, as I note United Future supports this legislation, too\u2014should explain to the Committee why, when the UN itself says the convention is not satisfactory, New Zealand intends to pass this legislation to ratify it. That makes no sense, at all. If the UN had said that although there had not been a big take-up of the agreement and there had not been widespread ratification, it still believed it was important to ratify it for certain stated reasons, maybe then there would be an argument for doing that. But where is the evidence of that? The UN is telling us that the convention is not very satisfactory and that something else should be done, but Labour says it knows better than that and will ratify it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022 data-id=\u0022c88051f3a9a0428f8d187accc6919ecf\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000494\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c88051f3a9a0428f8d187accc6919ecf\u0022\u003ERON MARK (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E There, again, is the point. I plead with the Government to listen to the arguments. The bill\u2019s ambiguity is such that maybe it should be titled\u2014since we are discussing the title\u2014the \u201CWe\u2019re so very confused that we don\u2019t know how to define what a bad mercenary is in comparison with a good one that we\u2019re going to pass legislation that tries to define what a mercenary is not, although we\u2019re not really sure that we\u2019ve got it right and the United Nations is telling us that it too doesn\u2019t believe the definitions are sustainable, stand up, stack up, or are enforceable Bill\u201D. What does it take to get people to listen? As I think about Mr Franks\u2019 speech, I am drawn to remember the representations that have been made to Parliament by the Falun Gong. Is that what the Greens want? Do the Greens now seriously want this legislation to be used by the Chinese to have the Falun Gong arrested and tried or extradited because the Chinese deem those people to be a subversive element within their country that is engaged in recruiting mercenaries\u2014or, as the Falun Gong may say, in recruiting converts to a belief? Is that what the Greens support? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000495\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EThis legislation has so many hooks in its back end in Part 3 that can be misused to cause us huge international embarrassment that it is not worth passing. The dangers are there, and they have been flagged. The Greens have probably another hour to consider Part 3, in particular, seriously before they cast their vote. The \u201CUnited Poodle\u201D party\u2014well, who knows? It is a case of sit up, beg, lie down, roll over, and play dead because Helen Clark says so. The United Future members will just do as they are told. They do not have a coalition agreement, and if they had any agreement of any worth, this bill would not be going through, for one reason and one reason alone: it is unworkable. It is too ambiguous. Dr Lockwood Smith was perfectly correct when he said that the Labour Party acknowledged, as the commentary on the bill states, that the Special Rapporteur on Mercenaries\u2019 and the United Nations\u2019 views on the convention are clear. It is not enforceable; it is not workable. It is too full of ambiguity. The title of this bill should be \u201CYou\u2019ve Got to Be Joking Mercenary (Prohibition) Bill\u201D, because it is not workable. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000496\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EI re-emphasise that when talking about Part 3. The countries that have not ratified the convention, as Dr Lockwood Smith said, include Australia. Who are our major trading partners? Who are the people we most rely on for our growing economy? Australia, the United States, Britain, Singapore! Excuse me, have any of them signed this treaty? Do any of those countries allow regulated private companies to work in the security field? Yes, they do. Have they signed the treaty? No, they have not. Will we therefore put ourselves in the situation where one of those people who comes here to recruit people to go overseas, work for that person, and do legitimate, good work will be prosecuted, arrested, and detained by us? It may well be that that person is a representative of one of a country\u2019s internal security agencies. It may well be that that person is a representative of a company that the Government has ticked and approved as being a company with moral values that does nothing to jeopardise the interests of a free and democratic world, and therefore he or she is the type of person who should be contracting personnel to go into Iraq, Sierra Leone, or Cambodia. But those people will not fit within this definition. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000497\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EEven worse, we now have a definition of what a mercenary is not, and a sort of a definition of what a mercenary is, and those definitions do not quite stack up. Once we get into the courtrooms and we are dealing with vexatious litigants, how will a person prove he or she does not fit within the mercenary category? The room in this legislation for dragged-out legal actions, for diplomatic embarrassment, and for the inappropriate harassment of Falun Gong members is so broad, so wide, and so available as to make it not worth passing. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000498\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EI would simply say  to members that they should walk with caution, take a breather, take time out, and reconsider this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022793b63af47e34a609f1177bde26bde1d\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That clause 1 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 70\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 1 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000499\u0022\u003EBill reported with amendment.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000500\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002203e9f0b9e4e0439aaa28abc71726bf32\u0022\u003EThird Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221772e9f5-5379-4bfe-9d9b-eaffb4c61b02\u0022 data-id=\u00223f624c8158cd458a909d2b783feaeab1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000501\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221772e9f5-5379-4bfe-9d9b-eaffb4c61b02\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223f624c8158cd458a909d2b783feaeab1\u0022\u003EHon HARRY DUYNHOVEN (Minister of State)\u003C/span\u003E, on behalf of the Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade: I move, That the Mercenary Activities (Prohibition) Bill be now read a third time. This bill implements into New Zealand domestic law the International Convention Against the Recruitment, Use, Financing, and Training of Mercenaries, which entered into force in 2001. The bill criminalises the conduct of mercenaries and the recruitment, use, financing, and training of mercenaries. It allows New Zealand to demonstrate to the international community that we are committed to stamping out the use of mercenaries, and to show our support for the growing concern internationally that the use of foreign mercenary forces can impede the exercise of the right to self-determination and also violates human rights. New Zealand has long recognised the impediment that mercenaries can cause to the peaceful resolution of conflicts. In the Bougainville crisis New Zealand opposed the use of foreign mercenary personnel by the Papua New Guinea Government. We argued that the crisis would be resolved only through a comprehensive peace process, and we are pleased that has happened. It only confirms our belief that mercenary activity should be prohibited. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000502\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221772e9f5-5379-4bfe-9d9b-eaffb4c61b02\u0022\u003EAlthough there has been some criticism of the definition of \u201Cmercenary\u201D used in the convention, it is nevertheless important to become a party to the convention in order to plug a gap in New Zealand\u2019s law. This bill covers what we would term \u201Ctrue\u201D mercenaries\u2014that is, what people have traditionally envisaged by the term \u201Cmercenary\u201D. The convention is not aimed at covering all the people who may sometimes be loosely referred to as mercenaries in today\u2019s world. That is outside the scope of the convention, and outside what we see as the appropriate focus of this bill. Our concern is to put in place provisions that proscribe the form of mercenary activity that has been recognised as being of greatest concern. We see this bill as a useful and viable first step towards encompassing at least those generally regarded as true mercenaries.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221772e9f5-5379-4bfe-9d9b-eaffb4c61b02\u0022\u003E Some people have claimed that the definition contains too many elements. Of course, in the context of this legislation it is intended that only a small number of people will be caught by the definition, so it needs to contain more, rather than less, detail in order to ensure that it does not incidentally catch others. Changes have also been made by the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee, to obtain greater clarity in the definition. For example\u2014and this addresses some of the points raised by Opposition speakers\u2014it is now spelt out that people on peacekeeping missions who are carrying out mine clearance, delivering humanitarian aid, and providing policing and security services that protect individuals or property are not mercenaries. There have also been calls internationally for the convention to be amended so that the definition more accurately reflects today\u2019s reality, including the use of so-called mercenaries in criminal activities such as arms and drug trafficking. By becoming a party to the convention through the passage of this bill, New Zealand will be better placed to actively contribute to international discussions around the appropriate scope of the term \u201Cmercenary\u201D, and to influence any negotiations concerning amendments to the convention. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000504\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221772e9f5-5379-4bfe-9d9b-eaffb4c61b02\u0022\u003EThe bill also includes measures relating to international cooperation in investigations and prosecutions, which are important to ensure that individuals can properly be brought to justice. It was pointed out during the select committee process that few of the usual like-minded countries to New Zealand have become party to the mercenaries convention. Although that is true, New Zealand needs to make its own decision as to whether it wants to ensure that mercenary activity is outlawed in this country and whether the obligations in the convention accord with New Zealand\u2019s view that the use of mercenaries should not be supported\u2014as they do. Some concern has also been expressed by members that this convention is not relevant. In reply to that comment, I would say that mercenary activity needs to be tackled at the international level and domestically, and that this convention provides us with the opportunity to manifest our commitment to that end. An issue was also raised\u2014and I depart from the Minister\u2019s notes here\u2014by Mr Franks. I think Mr Franks\u2019 concern has been reduced as a result of his conversation with the officials and myself, in that he has been told we still have protections for those who might otherwise be extradited. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000505\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221772e9f5-5379-4bfe-9d9b-eaffb4c61b02\u0022\u003EAccordingly, the Government supports this bill. We do not want New Zealand to be seen as a safe haven or a soft spot for mercenaries, and this bill will ensure that that does not occur. I commend the bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022 data-id=\u002235ef7500aa5741edb4c308689f2e7bca\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000506\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002235ef7500aa5741edb4c308689f2e7bca\u0022\u003ESIMON POWER (National\u2014Rangitikei):\u003C/span\u003E I thank the stand-in Minister, the Hon Harry Duynhoven, for his comments on the third reading, but they still have not resolved for members on this side of the House the three or four main issues that we raised at the second reading and extensively throughout the Committee stage. If the Committee stage had been a tennis game, I would say that it was probably 40:love to the Opposition because I do not recall a Minister sitting in the chair, taking a call, and answering any of the issues raised by Opposition members during that time. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000507\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003EThere are four outstanding issues. First is the definition of \u201Cmercenary\u201D. The Hon Harry Duynhoven tried to convince the House, in his contribution on the third reading, that it was all a bit tough and a bit tricky and that we did not really want to capture anybody who was not whatever a true mercenary is, so for that reason the definition had to be somewhat more extensive. Members on this side of the House say to him that if that is the case, the term \u201Cmercenary\u201D should be defined properly. The Minister should not then move on to include a definition of what is not a mercenary that is larger than the definition of what is a mercenary. We say to Government members that we will continue to oppose this bill to its dying moments because the Government has been unable to convince us that the bill is sure enough, unambiguous enough, and certain enough to dispatch our concerns about the definition of \u201Cmercenary\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000508\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E The second issue raised by members on this side of the House is simply that we are about to pass domestic legislation ratifying a convention that puts us way out of step with our traditional allies, the US, Australia, and the UK, and finds us in company with countries such as Azerbaijan, Barbados, Belarus, Cameroon, Costa Rica, and, as my colleague Ron Mark pointed out, Libya. It seems to members on this side of the House that signing up to such important conventions should be done in, around, or slightly ahead of, in some cases, our traditional and historic friends and allies. That is not the case here.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000509\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222a849ed4-a817-45a7-8b86-dbc9dd210193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022263a31b14f84459583ca28f3d31a355e\u0022\u003EJill Pettis\u003C/span\u003E: This man changed the National Party policy at a regional conference.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000510\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222d894b3c6f7f4243ba7dca4015410de6\u0022\u003ESIMON POWER\u003C/span\u003E: Screeching from the other side of the Houses does not make the member any more likely to address the issues that have been raised by Opposition members. The member who is screeching from the other side of the House should take a call and answer some of the concerns we have listed very carefully, very methodically, and very clearly. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000511\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003EThe third thing we are concerned about is the continuing trend of this Government to put into domestic law conventions and international agreements that have very marginal relevance to our own domestic circumstances. We have highlighted that problem throughout the passage of this debate. The last issue I wish to raise relates to the certificate as to State parties under the mercenaries convention. In the break, the officials managed to advise me, with the blessing, or consent, of the Minister that the wording contained in clause 14 is a standard-recipe clause used in these cases. I would simply say to members of the Government who are about to vote for this legislation that just because it is done all the time does not make it right. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000512\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003EThe Government has failed to convince members on this side of the House that this definition of mercenary is sufficiently tight, clear, and unambiguous to create good law. The National Party will continue to oppose this legislation and will vote against it in the third reading for those reasons.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022 data-id=\u002283f93d11e44741b1807bc00d80002ff9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000513\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002283f93d11e44741b1807bc00d80002ff9\u0022\u003ERON MARK (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E I rise in the third reading debate to once again make it clear that New Zealand First opposes this bill. Let me make it very, very clear, for the benefit of the senior Government whip: New Zealand First is not opposed to dealing with the people the Government is choosing to describe as the true or traditional mercenary. We are not opposed to that. We are not opposed to outlawing renegade private armies that fight for fortune, and not for ideology, the integrity of the sovereign State, or its borders. We are not for those people. We will assist any Government that brings to this House sane legislation that seeks to deal with those people. However, we are against legislation that is ambiguous\u2014so ambiguous and so broad in its net that it scoops up people the Government says it does not intend to scoop up. Indeed, the Government, by its own words, in the inclusion of amendments to this legislation, has gone out of its way to try to deal with the problem the United Nations says exists with the convention\u2014that problem being that it is hard to define what a true mercenary is. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000514\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EThe Government has recognised that problem to the extent that it has tried to include paragraphs\u2014big paragraphs\u2014to try to define what a mercenary is not. The problem is that those definitions are still ambiguous. In this world, which has moved on since 4 December 1989, the use of private armies and private companies in security work has absolutely exploded across the world. Legitimate Governments, sovereign States, and democratically elected leaders to this day are using, more than ever, private companies to put people in to assist countries to preserve their democracy and sovereignty through the use of private, contracted, defence personnel. Our reading of this definition wraps those people up, and improperly so. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000515\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EThe Minister raised a number of issues, with the true mercenary one being a big argument. I have consistently asked the Government what the urgency is about this legislation and who brought it to the Table. When we asked the officials at the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee nobody could answer the question: why are we doing this? What is the pressing urgency? When I ask why we are debating this bill under urgency, a very clear reason should be given as to why this matter must be dealt with now, but there is not. It only leaves the cynics to presume that maybe other motives are in play. If the Government wanted to deal with arms and drug trafficking, that would be fine\u2014so does New Zealand First\u2014because that is about organised crime. I believe that every member in this House would want to bring down organised criminal networks. We do not need this legislation to do that. We need better security relationships with our traditional allies and with our trading partners, and that brings me to my next point. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000516\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EWho signed up to this treaty? Whom are we throwing our hat in with? Libya! Excuse me! Libya signed the agreement on 4 December 1989, when on 21 December 1988 it blew a Pan Am aircraft out of the skies over Lockerbie, killing everybody on board. Is that a credible signatory? The only thing this legislation does is bring our integrity into question. Why should we be hopping into bed with people like Gadaffi and telling the world that he is a leader in the campaign again mercenaries? He is not, never has been, and never will be. For us to be throwing our hat in alongside of him brings disservice and discredit to New Zealand, not credit. Who else is a signatory to that treaty? Azerbaijan, Barbados, Belarus, Cameroon, Costa Rica, Croatia, Italy, the Maldives, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia. Traditionally, they have always used contract personnel, and to this very day they still do. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000517\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EThe next question I asked the officials was what compliance test had ever been conducted on these outstanding leaders of the international community\u2014like Gadaffi and Croatia. What compliance test has been run over them? What measures and what tests were conducted to see that they are indeed complying with the convention that they would have us support? The answer is none. There has been no compliance test, and no measure, and we have no idea of their level of collusion with mercenary companies that the Government describes as true mercenaries. We have no idea. We are signing up to fluffy, feel-good legislation that we cannot enforce, and if we do, we will run the risk of scooping up people whom we should not be attacking. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000518\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EThe test of the credibility of this convention lies in the fact that the United Nations itself questions its value. The United Nations wants to work with the Labour Government of Britain towards regulating the industry, and so gaining better control in a more legitimate and appropriate fashion. For the life of me I do not understand why this Labour Government, which looks so fondly on Tony Blair as a wonderful Labour leader and a fine example of Labour Governments, does not listen to him. This Government should pause for a moment to listen to what Tony Blair\u2019s Government has to say. Tony Blair has put his finger on it. He said that that is not the way to deal with the issue that we have quite rightly recognised. That saddens me\u2014no it does not, really, because I know a heck of a lot of people out there who used to vote Labour and who do not agree with this nonsense. They do not agree with the logic. They do not agree with passing law under urgency that is ambiguous, unenforceable, and therefore meaningless. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000519\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EI shall go to the final area of concern from New Zealand First\u2019s perspective. I refer to the international implications of New Zealand now seeking to be party to, or allowing itself to be forced into, arresting, detaining, deporting, or extraditing people whom another country says are mercenaries, who are not here recruiting converts to Falun Gong but who are recruiting mercenaries who have the aim of going back to China and undermining the sovereign State of China and its legitimate Government. What a horrible position to now be put in\u2014and all for what? There is no gain here. One risk that lies in here and has not been dealt with is the diplomatic risk of embarrassment at being at loggerheads with the people with whom we trade and on whom our economy depends, all because we want to be alongside Libya, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Mauritania. Well, I am sorry, but that is not logical. That does not make sense, and this House has better things to do. This Government has better legislation, which New Zealand First will support, sitting in the wings and waiting to come to the House. Instead, it is here dealing with this nonsense. New Zealand First opposes this legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022 data-id=\u002265c07cd6478d433db187b80868b222dc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000520\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221e93d9c8-b183-40db-b200-833697df066c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002265c07cd6478d433db187b80868b222dc\u0022\u003ELARRY BALDOCK (United Future):\u003C/span\u003E I rise to indicate United Future\u2019s support for the third reading of this legislation. We listened to the debate throughout the Committee stage, and did not hear any arguments put up by Opposition speakers that would cause us to change our position of support. The bill was in large part guided through the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee by the Hon Peter Dunne, who has a vast amount of experience in foreign affairs, and we in United Future stand behind him in supporting the third reading.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022 data-id=\u0022f49df2c4b8fc4bdaa8d7b854282e354d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000521\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f49df2c4b8fc4bdaa8d7b854282e354d\u0022\u003ESTEPHEN FRANKS (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E I rise for the ACT party to record our opposition to the passage of this bill that criminalises mercenaries. As earlier speakers have said, this bill has nothing to commend it to New Zealanders. There was apparently an argument that appealed to the majority on the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee that the bill is in the interests of the world community. It is not easy to see even then why that should be so. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000522\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EWe heard nothing from Government members during the Committee stage to reassure those of us who are concerned about the very long tradition of brave people who have made their living by fighting\u2014sometimes for ill and sometimes for good\u2014other people\u2019s fights. We heard no comment about or response to the fact that this law would have criminalised the people who manned the Flying Tigers, which provided the only assistance the Chinese had for some years in their battle with the most awful foe, the Japanese. There was no attempt to explain why New Zealand should put itself in a position whereby, had this law been in force at the time of the Japanese aggression on China, we would have been obliged to arrest and hold those pilots, should they have come to New Zealand, and to hand them over to the authorities in the north of Japan\u2014that is as the situation seems to me when I look at this legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000523\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EI heard no answer to the concern I expressed that if there had been technical experts who were being paid more than Franco\u2019s troops, they could not have assisted the International Brigades. I met a woman\u2014I think it was last Friday evening\u2014who must have been 85, and who had been in the International Brigades. She was a New Zealander passionately committed to the cause of socialism, and when Franco\u2019s troops, assisted by Nazi planes, were overrunning Spain, she took herself off\u2014to the great alarm of her father\u2014to assist in Spain. She happened to be a nurse, so would not have fallen foul of this law. But anyone who had been prepared to defend Guernica from the German planes would have been paid, just as the Flying Tigers were.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000524\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221583b5cb-f4e0-4981-97ba-193c338ff404\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224f6fd33ac02b419caef74ba6429af4b7\u0022\u003EHon Marian Hobbs\u003C/span\u003E: They didn\u2019t get paid.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000525\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002277dd6ba6988249ef9661c729f55d45b8\u0022\u003ESTEPHEN FRANKS\u003C/span\u003E: We have this awesome stateswoman, Marian Hobbs, saying that they would not have been paid. Why were the Flying Tigers paid when they were trying to defeat the Japanese? Does that mean that because they helped the Chinese patriots against Japan they should be criminals, but that those in the International Brigades should not? Of course, with any money the International Brigades would have employed people to help with servicing. As in almost every modern war, people are needed to service equipment, and those people would be caught under this legislation \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000526\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EI asked also for clarification as to how this bill could be in New Zealand\u2019s interests, when it exposes us to the potential for requests from big and menacing northern neighbours\u2014perhaps from Indonesia, which does not like our attitude to Aceh. If there are some New Zealanders out there who fall foul of the Indonesians, or if there are some Aceh refugees down here who are raising money to try to defend their kith and kin, this measure says we should hand them over. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000527\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EWhy is that in our interests? Why is it in our interests even to give such countries a weapon to beat us around the ears with? Sure, the officials can say to us that we do not have to, and that the Attorney-General can stay a process; sure, the officials and the Minister can say there is always an opportunity for people to go to court to try to defend themselves against extradition. Yes, there is, but they still have to make sure they do not fall within the tests. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000528\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EThese definitions are fatuous. They are so poor that after saying what the conduct is that represents people as mercenaries\u2014and basically it means those who are more highly paid than the people they may fight alongside\u2014they then state that a number are not mercenaries, even though they are doing those things. So we get subclauses (2) and (3) of clause 5. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000529\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EI have also had assistance\u2014and I thank the Minister for the advice from the officials\u2014on the meaning of clause 7. I was concerned that it made recruiting a wider offence than that of being a mercenary, and I am not reassured. Clause 7 does not have the qualifications that appear in clause 5. It does not have what I believe to be essential exceptions to the mercenary definition, and therefore we have an even wider opportunity for some malign Government to use it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000530\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EI am indebted to Mr Ron Mark for his comparison with the attitude of the Chinese Government to Falun Gong. I understand that China is not a party to this treaty, for which we can be grateful. Of course, it could become a party to it at any stage, and we imagine it would be an extremely cynical party that would use these provisions in the same way that it misuses other statements of intent, and in the same way that it is trying to renege on the promises it made to Hong Kong.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000531\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EThis is entirely unnecessary legislation, or if it is necessary, that necessity has not been explained. We have a Government that loves to go off to attend battle commemorations, a Prime Minister who will not miss any opportunity to be photographed alongside old soldiers, and a Government\u2014her Government\u2014that is paying no attention to the old soldiers in this House who are attesting to the honour of mercenary activity. We have a Government that may well need to sponsor and use people who can go and fight\u2014or who can support others fighting\u2014in our region.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000532\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EOur region is not benign. There are many competing interests. There is a power vacuum\u2014or there would be if the Australians had reneged as disgracefully as New Zealand has on defence commitments. We have a near vacuum in some areas, and it may well be that mercenaries are the best way in which we can support those who share our values. This bill will make that a very difficult thing to do.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000533\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002207c3dce979d64dce978fc934c584296d\u0022\u003EHon Rick Barker\u003C/span\u003E: So if you do it for money it\u2019s OK?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000534\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e2a4df821e014396aa7000a6fa273076\u0022\u003ESTEPHEN FRANKS\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Barker, braying as he usually does, did not bother to take a call. We will not hear him make a speech, but he brays that doing it for money is wrong. I take it that the member is here out of altruism. I take it that he has not been banking his pay cheques. Does that taint everything said in this House by the member? Does that make what would otherwise be worthy, brave, and courageous activity all wrong?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000535\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ab2f71c7b49341c89079752786e33913\u0022\u003ERon Mark\u003C/span\u003E: If they\u2019re supporting communist ideology, it\u2019s OK!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000536\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002282c1087fbbc44308976eff8b3dc7cbb4\u0022\u003ESTEPHEN FRANKS\u003C/span\u003E: It is OK if it is supporting communism\u2014I thank Mr Mark.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000537\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022014651a1-9604-485f-a1d1-4f752fff8c59\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a86f35ba6fb049cd8506096a83d49e5b\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The member will come back to the bill, please.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000538\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221666560d1f204bd8a094599ab33dbd37\u0022\u003ESTEPHEN FRANKS\u003C/span\u003E: The contribution made by the Ministers or from any member on that side has been conspicuous, indeed! The only reason offered in this entire debate for passing this legislation is that fighting and being paid is somehow not appropriate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000539\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EBut this bill does not actually do it. The only offence here arises if some people are paid more than others. If people are alongside a conscript army, or beside the poor kids in Africa who are forced to fight for nothing, then they are mercenaries, but if they are alongside some highly paid Arab soldiers, who could easily be paid more than them, then it is not mercenary activity. Could the Government please justify that? There are plenty of calls in this debate. I am sure there will be space for it. I long to hear it. We would give leave if the Government needed more time. We would love to hear an explanation of just how this bill can be in New Zealand\u2019s interest. There has been no explanation throughout the debate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002295a92d464e574f2f94970b4c9e32588e\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the Mercenary Activities (Prohibition) Bill be now read a third time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 70\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill read a third time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000540\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022cc0886f826ef4b4f8e6c3704ce134c10\u0022\u003ESecondhand Dealers and Pawnbrokers Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000541\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022c18d13d369d44e3e8fcf97561f1481fa\u0022\u003ESecond Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022 data-id=\u0022c6b64c5f0c884faf826ef5fc09dd76a6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000542\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c6b64c5f0c884faf826ef5fc09dd76a6\u0022\u003EHon RICK BARKER (Associate Minister of Justice)\u003C/span\u003E, on behalf of the Minister of Justice: I move, That the Secondhand Dealers and Pawnbrokers Bill be now read a second time. This bill radically reforms the legislation relating to both second-hand dealers and pawnbrokers. It is part of a package of measures being implemented by the Government to combat property crime.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000543\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EWhen this Government was elected in 1999 it committed itself to cracking down on burglary. For too long burglary had not been treated as a serious crime. Since then, burglary cases have dropped from around 75,000 cases per year to around 60,000 cases per year. That is a significant improvement. Further, the resolution rate for burglary has also improved from just 11 percent in 1999 to 17 percent last year. That is a huge improvement, and we intend to do better. Those improvements reflect the support this Government has given to the police, through record police numbers, a record police budget of more than $1 billion a year, and an increased police focus on burglary as a serious crime. This bill follows the Government\u2019s recent toughening up on DNA legislation, which means that DNA evidence can now be used to link suspects to burglaries and to improve further the resolution rate for those crimes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000544\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThis bill has two main objectives\u2014first, to make it harder for criminals to dispose of stolen goods through second-hand dealers and pawnbrokers and, second, to make it easier for the police to recover stolen goods or solve property crimes. Both the Secondhand Dealers Act and the Pawnbrokers Act are hopelessly outdated laws. They do not reflect either the modern industries they are supposed to be regulating, or the sorts of goods that are of particular interest to burglars and, therefore, to the police. For example, the Secondhand Dealers Act still concerns itself with the disposal of fur coats and gramophones instead of computers, cellphones, DVD players, and the like. There have been few amendments to either Act since they originally came into force. Reform is now urgently needed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000545\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThere is currently no requirement for either second-hand dealers or pawnbrokers to verify the identity of their customers. Under the bill, both second-hand dealers and pawnbrokers will be required to verify the identity of people who sell or pledge goods to them\u2014in most cases, by sighting an approved photo ID. That will make it harder for people who knowingly try to pass on stolen goods, and it will assist the police in tracing where the stolen goods ending up in dealerships have come from.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000546\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EUnder the bill, second-hand dealers and pawnbrokers will be required to comply with various record-keeping and labelling requirements in order to keep track of the origins of goods in their possession. The Law and Order Committee recommended a number of changes to those provisions, which will simplify the requirements related to record-keeping whilst ensuring that the information available to the police is of high quality.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000547\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EWith regard to retention requirements, the bill replaces the outdated list of furs, suits, and gramophones with a new and more generalised list of second-hand goods that must be retained for 14 days. That list includes items that are frequently targeted by burglars, such as compact discs, computers, cameras, and so on. The definitions are fairly generalised, in order to accommodate the future popularity of goods that might not yet be in common circulation. Retention of those goods for 14 days will give the police an opportunity to ascertain whether the goods have, in fact, been illegally acquired and passed on to dealers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000548\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe bill provides for the licensing of second-hand dealers and pawnbrokers. One licence will now cover both second-hand dealing and pawnbroking. It also requires key individuals associated with second-hand dealing and pawnbroking businesses to be licensed in their own right. The select committee has recommended a number of changes to clause 6, which sets out who is to be regarded as engaging in the business of second-hand dealing, and who is not. Those changes improve the clarity of that clause. Compliance costs for second-hand dealers and pawnbrokers have been kept as low as they reasonably can be, while being mindful of the objectives of the legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000549\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EAlthough the reforms envisaged by this bill are primarily aimed at making it harder for criminals to dispose of stolen goods and easier for the police to solve property crimes, the bill\u2019s provisions also have a consumer protection component, particularly in relation to the duties of pawnbrokers. Pawnbrokers will now be required to retain goods pledged to them for a 3-month minimum, unless they are redeemed before that date. After that, if a pledge is unclaimed they will be obliged to offer it for sale.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000550\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe bill specifies restrictions on how the pledge might initially be offered for sale. If the redemption price is not reached at that initial offering, the goods may then be sold by any means the pawnbroker chooses, as long as that is calculated to reach the best price. The committee recommended that the bill be amended to make it possible to offer the unredeemed pledge by Internet auction as well as public auction, at the initial offering. That recognises that the Internet auction is a common way of selling goods today, but still provides a way of selling that is transparent.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000551\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EI also intend to move a Supplementary Order Paper during the Committee stage to allow pawnbrokers to purchase unredeemed pledges they have accepted\u2014providing they do that only by way of an unconditional contract and only if both parties agree. That amendment will introduce some flexibility into the disposal of unredeemed goods, while not unduly placing at risk consumers\u2019 interests in achieving a fair price for their goods.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000552\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003ECurrently, promoters of markets and fairs are not required to keep records of who is selling second-hand goods at their fair or market. This bill places record-keeping requirements on such promoters, in order to assist the police. The requirements are not onerous. The committee recommended that similar provisions be introduced for Internet auctioneers. That reflects the increasing popularity of the Internet as a means of selling used goods, and is a major improvement to the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000553\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EIn respect of enforcement, the police will be entitled to search registers, and to inspect any and all goods held by licensees for the purposes of second-hand dealing or pawnbroking. Those are powers the police are already able to exercise under the current law, but the improved information available to them\u2014for example, verified identities of those who supply goods\u2014will greatly improve the effectiveness of such inspections.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000554\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EPenalties in the bill will be much higher than the existing penalties in the Secondhand Dealers Act or Pawnbrokers Act. The maximum financial penalty under the current Secondhand Dealers Act is just $200 and under the Pawnbrokers Act is just $100. Those penalties are far too low to provide any deterrent effect. The maximum penalty under this bill for unlicensed trading as a second-hand dealer or pawnbroker will be $20,000. Penalties for failure to comply with the obligations in relation to, for example, keeping a register, will now be punishable by fines of up to $10,000.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000555\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThis bill represents an important reform that will bring second-hand dealing and pawnbroking into the 21st century. It will make it harder for burglars to dispose of stolen goods via such dealers, and it will make it easier for the police to track down criminals if they try to do that. It is another move by the Government in support of the police to crack down on burglary, and these efforts are already beginning to deliver. I thank the Law and Order Committee for the work it has done on this bill, and I commend the bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022 data-id=\u0022c36b4b2506964b09bf0ee540f363acf2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000556\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c36b4b2506964b09bf0ee540f363acf2\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL (National\u2014Bay of Plenty):\u003C/span\u003E I do not know whether it has escaped other members\u2019 attention but it is very obvious to members on this side of the House that every Minister of the Government who has spoken on a bill this week has given some defence of the Government\u2019s management of the law and order system in New Zealand. Every single one of them has ponied out the tired old myth that the crime rate is coming down in New Zealand. The fact is that violent crime is going up, and the chances of people being bashed, mugged, or attacked by someone on parole are the highest they have ever been in this country.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000557\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003EI would like to talk about the Secondhand Dealers and Pawnbrokers Bill. I must say that at the Law and Order Committee it was a most interesting bill on which to sit, not so much because of issues related to second-hand dealers but particularly because of issues associated with pawnbrokers. For those who have not had much experience with that subject, I can tell them it was fascinating to learn about the role that pawnbrokers have played in the history and development of the world. Indeed, Christopher Columbus\u2019s exploration of the Americas was funded by the Spanish royal family pawning their Crown jewels. That raised sufficient to enable Columbus to go to the Americas and bring back great wealth and prosperity to the Spaniards.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000558\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003EIt was also fascinating to hear about the sort of people who use pawnbroking services. We discovered that it is not necessarily poor people under significant financial pressure who use those services; it is often people who just need some assistance with their cash flow. We were told of people from a wide variety of social groups who, for example, would bring in some jewellery or watches to a pawnbroker for a very short period of time, in order to assist themselves with their cash flow. It is clear that pawnbroking is a service used by many people in the community.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000559\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003ESelect committee members spent a lot of time in trying to assure themselves that the compliance costs that would burden second-hand dealers, pawnbrokers, and those running community craft markets and flea markets involving people who sold second-hand goods would not be significant. We are confident that the changes made should not be an excessive burden on people involved in those businesses.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000560\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003EThe National Party would like recorded that it has an amendment in respect of clause 54, and I draw members\u2019 attention to that clause in the reported-back bill. The provision requires primarily that pawnbrokers who have pledges they wish to redeem, should redeem those at auctions. Now, why do people go to auctions? They go to auctions because they expect to get a good deal\u2014a cheap deal. So what we are doing in this clause is saying that the pawnbroker, in order to redeem a pledge, must take it to an auction, and even if the price is hopeless the pawnbroker still has to accept it\u2014it has to be the price. If the pawnbroker gets no price, then the pawnbroker can look at other options. But if someone goes along to an auction expecting to get a cheap deal, gets a bid accepted, and gets the price of a cheap deal, then that is the residual price or value the pawnbroker gets to defray costs, and the person who owns the asset\u2014the pledger\u2014gets the net proceeds. We do not think that that is good for the people pledging their assets.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000561\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003EWe think that many pawnbrokers actually want to act in the interests not only of themselves but also of the people who have pledged with them, because they want those people\u2019s repeat business. We think there should be an option that says to pawnbrokers that if they reasonably believe they can get a better deal by putting those pledged assets for sale on shelves in their second-hand shops or at their pawnbroking businesses, then they should be able to do that. Auctions are great for cheap deals, but they are not necessarily great for getting the best net proceeds for people who have pledged their assets. So we have an amendment to introduce in respect of that provision, and we look forward to support from other parties for that amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000562\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003EI say in conclusion that the National Party is happy to support this bill. We participated strongly on the select committee to get amendments to a number of what we thought were unworkable and burdensome provisions in this bill. I think those have been tidied up. We still have some concerns, but we think the bill goes a long way towards addressing what is an important concern. At the end of the day, the best way to prevent stolen goods from being sold through second-hand dealers, in pubs, or off the backs of lorries is for the community not to buy them. While that may be easy to say, I believe that it would be the best way to actually end those trades.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022 data-id=\u0022b4f15d2f790d42bb81761e8e941d624b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000563\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b4f15d2f790d42bb81761e8e941d624b\u0022\u003ERON MARK (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E I rise to indicate that New Zealand First will continue to support the passage of this legislation, and to congratulate the Government. It is interesting that in the last two bills I have had to debate on behalf of New Zealand First, I have made it very clear to the Government that I totally opposed the legislation it brought to this House. I totally opposed the reason and the rationale for it, and I tried my best to articulate New Zealand First\u2019s reasons why. I did articulate in the last debate that I thought we possibly did not need to have that last bill in the House. We could have been moving on with legislation the Government had that New Zealand First supported and was keen to see passed into law. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000564\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EThis is one such piece of legislation, and I will say, firstly, congratulations to the Government on dealing with this issue, and congratulations to the entire Law and Order Committee. It was something of a revelation. I think this legislation, the updating and amending of the legislation in so far as second-hand dealers and pawnbrokers are concerned, is something that has been at the forefront of the minds of police officers and criminal investigative staff for a very long time. The reasons are very clear. Second-hand shops are places where in the past\u2014and hopefully we will soon be able to say it is in the past\u2014stolen goods were most often fenced, got rid off, and moved on at profit to the underworld, the organised crime elements within our society. Indeed, I have had some very blunt and frank discussions with members of our police force on occasions, and if they had had their way, they would have had certain second-hand and pawnbrokers\u2019 shops, particularly in the Christchurch area, shut down and put out of business a decade ago. In their minds, those people are nothing more than a front for organised crime. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000565\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003ERegrettably, those sorts of activities stigmatise and bring into disrepute people who are legitimate second-hand dealers and pawnbrokers, who do their very best to cooperate with the police to ensure that nothing illicit passes across their tables. It is an area fraught with difficulties in terms of law enforcement, and it is very timely that this issue is being brought to the Law and Order Committee and dealt with as promptly as it has been. When I say promptly, I see that the bill was introduced to the House on 5 June 2003, and here we are\u2014maybe not so promptly\u2014on 1 July 2004, finally working our way towards the third reading. I suggest we would be much further down the road if we had not had some of other rubbish legislation brought to the House and distracting us. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000566\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EI will simply say that this legislation is good legislation. It has been worked through well. The issues have been well discussed and well canvassed. The select committee worked as a team under the chairmanship of Martin Gallagher and the deputy chairmanship of Marc Alexander, and I think the results are good. I note the Hon Tony Ryall\u2019s intention to move an amendment to clause 54. I also note that the select committee unanimously put in a new clause that strikes out the original. I am still of the mind that that new, unanimously agreed clause is the right way to go, but I will listen to the debate and then indicate where New Zealand First will finally come down. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000567\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EBut I do think that a public auction conducted by a person who is not the pawnbroker, or the pawnbroker\u2019s spouse or de facto partner, or an employee of that particular pawnbroker, is the sensible way to go. It removes conflict of interest, and that is the issue we discussed at some length and the officials tried to work through. But we are listening, and if there are more compelling arguments, who knows, we might be able to support them. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000568\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EI guess at the end of the day\u2014and the comment has been touched on\u2014all of this is no use at all if the law enforcement agencies do not have the resources to deal with organised crime, burglaries, robberies, and those who get rid of, fence, or distribute stolen property. All this legislation amounts to nothing if we do not resource the police accordingly so that they can enforce it. I have huge reservations about whether our police will be able to actively enforce the law and tighten up on organised criminal elements who take advantage of second-hand dealerships, because they simply do not have the numbers. I have huge reservations because we still continue to see policemen and women, who are supposedly in the police force to carry out general duties and investigative work, being siphoned off and ring-fenced around traffic policing and quota ticketing. Those are my concerns. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000569\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EWhilst we continue to see that sort of administration within the police force then, I am sorry, but we will continue to see organised crime flourish. I would much rather that this bill was supported by a commensurate all-out attack on organised crime, a move to criminalise membership of gangs and organised criminal elements and  seriously put them out of business, thereby reducing the need for us to pay such close scrutiny to second-hand dealers and pawnbrokers, who, in the main, are legitimate, honest folk. New Zealand First will be supporting the second reading of this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022 data-id=\u0022062dd597e6f04523a57fefa0e37999a4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022062dd597e6f04523a57fefa0e37999a4\u0022\u003EDEBORAH CODDINGTON (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E I rise to speak briefly on behalf of the ACT party. We support this legislation. It is good to see a tidy-up of old legislation with a new piece that is a mechanical, sensible, and practical. In this sort of consumer legislation, we do not have to put up with the usual old garbage that tries to go down the path of a balance of power between the consumer and the vendor, as we saw in the consumer credit legislation. The intent of the bill is to make it more difficult for criminals to dispose of stolen goods. The bill does balance the issues there, because, as Ron Mark said, the majority of second-hand dealers are honourable and honest people, but there are the car-boot sales in the parking lot. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000571\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003EThe other issue that should be commended in this bill is that the ID requirements are not too onerous. For instance, the bill actually allows the second-hand dealer to confirm identification by personal knowledge. That is, if the client is already known to the dealer, that is enough to comply with the legislation. The dealer does not have to get the client to produce a photo ID every single time he or she buys goods. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000572\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003EThere is a huge amount of \u201Cbuyer beware\u201D in this area of consumer transactions. I do not think that we should ever go down the path where we over-regulate and people do not take responsibility for their own actions. That said, we will never totally eradicate the people who say \u201CI bought it off a guy in a pub.\u201D or \u201CIt fell off the back of a truck.\u201D But as I said, the ACT party supports this legislation, and we will be voting in favour of it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022 data-id=\u0022b920e66b8b40416f815a5706260e3bd9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000573\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b920e66b8b40416f815a5706260e3bd9\u0022\u003EMARC ALEXANDER (United Future):\u003C/span\u003E I rise for United Future to offer our point of view on the Secondhand Dealers and Pawnbrokers Bill, and will not take too much of the House\u2019s time in doing so. Most of my concerns have been set out in Supplementary Order Paper 236, and there are quite a few amendments there. What I would like to do is focus on a few minor areas that I think would make this bill a much better bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000574\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022\u003EWe consider clause 6(2A), for example, to be unnecessarily restrictive in arbitrarily setting 6 or more days, or $2,000 in value of traded goods, as the benchmarks for meeting the criterion of being a second-hand dealer. We think that is restrictive in this day and age, and see no reason why the amount should be quite as low as that. Moreover, clause 44A(2)(a) limits the resale value to a minimum of $40. That is the threshold for separate identification as a single article\u2014that is, in cases where one is selling a CD collection, a set of bottles, or whatever. I think $40 is a little bit too low for that, so I have suggested in my Supplementary Order Paper that we actually look at $100 as being a much more reasonable amount. The sum of $40 really does not cover very much, and anybody who has gone to a garage sale with $40 does not usually come away with very much. If one does, it is not something one wants to keep for very long. It is usually a present for somebody else, or one might offload it for a $5 profit\u2014but I am speaking as a capitalist at heart.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000575\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022\u003EClause 48B and the consequential clause 57(1)(aa) are not supported by United Future, as they impose restrictions on pawnbrokers conducting their activities in premises other than their normal place of business. It seems reasonable to me that if a person has had a business arrangement with a pawnbroker over a number of years, and that person becomes incapacitated, or there is some other reason why that person would like the pawnbroker to come to his or her place to conduct business, it seems unnecessarily restrictive, in the normal course of trade, to disallow that. I see that provision as going against the grain of good commerce. At the end of the day it is very good policy to allow pawnbrokers, or any other dealer\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000576\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223f4ebfeb4cb840ceadc90a63730cdacc\u0022\u003EHon Member\u003C/span\u003E: Car dealers are allowed to move around.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000577\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fe0476156b094ba495106d688111daaf\u0022\u003EMARC ALEXANDER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, car dealers are allowed to move around, but to go to the clients and conduct the business at their convenience is to provide a service, and, after all, that is part and parcel of what good old capitalism can do for this country.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000578\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022\u003EUnited Future does not support clause 54 in its entirety as it places a restriction on freedom to trade on a best-practice basis. And that is exactly what I have been talking about: the customer should come first, as every good capitalist knows, and if securing the sale means going to the customer\u2019s place of business to conduct business, then that is the way to do it. It is service, after all, that hospitality in this country prides itself on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000579\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022\u003EWe will be supporting this bill all the way through the House. I would like to thank the members of the Law and Order Committee for working together very constructively. It is a good bill. It is a bill that is being pushed forward by Labour very reasonably, and it addresses a lot of the problems people have had with pawnbrokers and second-hand dealers. For the most part it is legislation that I think will stand up and will not need immediate amendment. So United Future will support it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000580\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002204ed8007-24ee-45fb-ab8e-8573da79b238\u0022\u003EBill read a second time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000581\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022c3971249c4c44e90b25a699a5a5f87ea\u0022\u003EInstruction to Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022 data-id=\u002204aef6cefca641e19c2bb80d47291eed\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000582\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002204aef6cefca641e19c2bb80d47291eed\u0022\u003EHon RICK BARKER (Associate Minister of Justice)\u003C/span\u003E, on behalf of the Minister of Justice: I move, That it be an instruction to the Committee of the whole House on the Secondhand Dealers and Pawnbrokers Bill that it take the bill part by part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000583\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000584\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022687907f9ce5c4d4eaf9d7d33f22868c7\u0022\u003EIn Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022 data-id=\u002209369aed8b9240aa9494aaa2b40c7782\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002209369aed8b9240aa9494aaa2b40c7782\u0022\u003EJOHN CARTER (Senior Whip\u2014National):\u003C/span\u003E Despite the instruction given by the House, I seek leave of the Committee to have one wide-ranging debate and take the bill as one. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000586\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ed9ad81-05c1-4171-80c6-24fa02cade42\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022da8754061a5c44119b29d7916bd8873f\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich)\u003C/span\u003E: Leave has been sought for that course to be followed. Is there any objection? There appears to be none. Is it also the wish of the Committee to take the votes on the provisions of the bill as one question, but with separate questions on members\u2019 amendments? Leave has been sought for that course. Is there any objection? There appears to be none. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000587\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022ebc423eb302d4994a9b0ac36f4b6913f\u0022\u003EClauses 1 to 78, and schedules 1 to 3\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022 data-id=\u0022d32f1bbcd3fc47b7840b759e1dc629e9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000588\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d32f1bbcd3fc47b7840b759e1dc629e9\u0022\u003EHon RICK BARKER (Associate Minister of Justice):\u003C/span\u003E There are two amendments that I would like to talk about, but, firstly, I thank the Law and Order Committee for doing an excellent job. It worked very well and strengthened the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000589\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EMr Ryall\u2019s amendment would add a new paragraph (c) to clause 54(2). I can sympathise with the intention of the amendment, but I am inclined to be against it, because it does not help the transparency of the process. It states that the pawnbroker may sell the goods in any other way that can be reasonably shown to achieve a realistic price for the goods. We believe that it is important that the process be transparent and that there is opportunity to test the market as to the real value of the goods. Clause 54(2) provides that the pawnbroker must at least put the goods to auction once. It is a public auction, so there is an opportunity to test the market value of the goods. If Mr Ryall\u2019s amendment goes through, then we will subvert the transparency of the process, and there will not be the ability to test the market value of those goods. So I am disinclined to support that amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003ESupplementary Order Paper 236, in the name of Marc Alexander, makes a number of amendments. I am not particularly inclined to support his amendments, because they seem to shift the balance, which I think is what the member intends to do. But the select committee has come back with recommendations about how much should be paid\u2014how much should be lost between the pawnbroker and the person who seeks to pawn the goods. His amendments seek to shift the balance backwards in favour of the pawnbroker. I am very much inclined to stick with the select committee\u2019s recommendation, and, as far as I am concerned, the original percentage should stand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000591\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 236 in the name of Marc Alexander to clause 44A be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002294ef28f176e6434cabc28df0f858be01\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 35\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; United Future 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 83\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; ACT New Zealand 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000592\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Tony Ryall to clause 54 be agreed to:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000593\u0022\u003Eto add to subclause (2) the following new paragraph:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000594\u0022\u003E(c)\tthe pawnbroker may sell the goods in any other way that it can reasonably be shown to get a realistic price for the goods.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022ae00e3979fed4725886109739f223f02\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 70\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000595\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 236 in the name of Marc Alexander to clause 54(2) be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000596\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000597\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 236 in the name of Marc Alexander to clause 54(3) be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000598\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220ed9ad81-05c1-4171-80c6-24fa02cade42\u0022 data-id=\u0022844f57ee21854826a98522342c825ca5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000599\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ed9ad81-05c1-4171-80c6-24fa02cade42\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022844f57ee21854826a98522342c825ca5\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich)\u003C/span\u003E: The next amendment to clause 54 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 236, in the name of Marc Alexander, is to omit and substitute subclause (4). This amendment is out of order as it is the same in substance as that of the Hon Tony Ryall, which has already been decided.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000600\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ed9ad81-05c1-4171-80c6-24fa02cade42\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 236 in the name of Marc Alexander to clause 55(2) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000601\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ed9ad81-05c1-4171-80c6-24fa02cade42\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000602\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ed9ad81-05c1-4171-80c6-24fa02cade42\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 236 in the name of Marc Alexander to clause 55(3) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000603\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ed9ad81-05c1-4171-80c6-24fa02cade42\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000604\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ed9ad81-05c1-4171-80c6-24fa02cade42\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 236 in the name of Marc Alexander to clause 55(4) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000605\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ed9ad81-05c1-4171-80c6-24fa02cade42\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000606\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ed9ad81-05c1-4171-80c6-24fa02cade42\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 236 in the name of Marc Alexander to clause 56 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000607\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ed9ad81-05c1-4171-80c6-24fa02cade42\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000608\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ed9ad81-05c1-4171-80c6-24fa02cade42\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Papers 225 and 235 in the name of the Hon Phil Goff be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000609\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ed9ad81-05c1-4171-80c6-24fa02cade42\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to, and clauses 1 to 78, and schedules 1 to 3 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000610\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ed9ad81-05c1-4171-80c6-24fa02cade42\u0022\u003EBill reported with amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000611\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00229bb64703c7ff4a93a33de07842b6e8a2\u0022\u003EThird Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022 data-id=\u0022b04f9ed164954c41b6064f881b1ae6e0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000612\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b04f9ed164954c41b6064f881b1ae6e0\u0022\u003EHon RICK BARKER (Associate Minister of Justice),\u003C/span\u003E on behalf of the Minister of Justice: I move, That the Secondhand Dealers and Pawnbrokers Bill be now read a third time. It is with considerable personal pleasure that I see the Secondhand Dealers and Pawnbrokers Bill reach its third reading. I say personal pleasure because while I was living in a Wellington suburb, my flatmate, Mr Peck, and I were robbed continuously. People kept breaking into our flat. They seemed to use it as some sort of department store. They took beer, sausages, ice cream from the fridge, CDs, stereo\u2014[Interruption] It was none of my parliamentary colleagues. The point is that we made numerous complaints to the police, and the police were very attentive to the issue. However, we were unable to make any inroads. In frustration, the police officer showed me what he was up against. We then took a tour of a number of second-hand dealers and pawnbrokers in the local area\u2014I will not name the area\u2014so that I could see whether I could identify, by this stage, one of the three video players we had had stolen. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000613\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EI have to say that life has its parallels. Some years ago as a young male I went shooting in South Westland, and the Inland Revenue Department was very concerned to gets its tax on the amount of venison that was being taken. They were concerned at people coming along and getting paid in cash and not identifying themselves or their rewards. They then got themselves a book. I saw this when I turned up with a friend of mine to take in a carcass for the first time. We were shown the book, which we had to fill in, and I was gobsmacked to see that former President of the United States John F. Kennedy was alive and well in South Westland and doing very well shooting deer. He was a good marksman, as was Mickey Mouse, who must have taken time out of Toon Town to go to South Westland and enjoy the fantastic scenery. Obviously, the record was a fantasy. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000614\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EI saw another fantasy when I went around with a police officer to look at the books of the second-hand dealers and pawnbrokers. It was pure rubbish, yet the law had been complied with. There were videos, which then had a price of $900, that had been turned in for $100 or $150. The constable said to me that that did not represent reality, and I said no, it did not. All the labels were wrong, and it was the shonkiest process I had ever seen for the supposedly legitimate recycling of stolen goods. It irked me then, it irks me today, and this long-overdue legislation will give the police a very effective weapon to deal with burglars and thieves. I think this is a fantastic day and it is long overdue. I congratulate this Labour-led Government, and all the other parties in this House that supported it, for enacting this fabulous legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022 data-id=\u0022390a56bdc8c04aeb97187cb727f613ff\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000615\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022390a56bdc8c04aeb97187cb727f613ff\u0022\u003EBRIAN CONNELL (National\u2014Rakaia):\u003C/span\u003E I can assure the last speaker that having also hunted down in South Westland, I made sure I carted out all my carcasses, all my venison, and all my velvet, and duly registered my right name when I was trading them in for cash. I remember that in the Haast pub in those days venison could be bartered for other goods, and the member probably knows what I am talking about. I have seen him there from time to time participating, as well. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000616\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022\u003EI turn my attention to the Secondhand Dealers and Pawnbrokers Bill and start by saying that I want to commend, as other members have, the outstanding work that members of the Law and Order Committee did, and the way in which they came to grips with legislation that was at times rather complex. I have to recognise my colleague the Hon Tony Ryall for his outstanding contribution to the select committee. It was often through his guiding hand that we got the result that we are now basking in here today. I will not mention the Hon Tony Ryall\u2019s name again; I will just leave him to bask in the glory of his achievement. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000617\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022\u003EThe central theme of this legislation is the registering of pawnbrokers and second-hand dealers, in order to close down the fencing of stolen goods. This is commendable, and the National Party supports it. As the Hon Rick Barker has pointed out, this is a problem that is not insignificant, and we should not underestimate that. It might surprise members of this House to know that New Zealand has one of the highest rates of property theft in the world. Our police tell us that the bulk of those goods are disposed of through second-hand dealers and pawnbrokers, either knowingly or unwittingly. We can learn from our friends in Australia. The Western Australian Parliament introduced legislation that is very similar to that which has been suggested here today, and that has seen the incidence of burglary in that state reduced by 30 percent. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000618\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022\u003EThe message is very clear. If we close down those fencing channels\u2014the distribution networks\u2014we severely curtail burglary. The demand cannot be satisfied so it essentially diminishes. The theory is right. The select committee has done its work. It has put in front of the House legislation that would be effective except for one critical flaw. That flaw is simply that we do not have the policing resources to breathe life into this legislation. It is not a matter of not having enough resources; it is a matter of where and how those resources are being deployed. Too many of our police personnel are being directed to hassle otherwise law-abiding motorists as they go about their business, simply so that this Government can continue to stuff its greedy fists full of more dollars. I say to the House that that is an issue that we will have to address as a Parliament if legislation like this is to have any credibility. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000619\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022\u003EIt gets worse. I have information stating that at times it is taking 4 days after calls are received at the Southern Communications Centre before police are dispatched to the scene of a burglary. The answer is very clear. One only has to travel the road between Christchurch and \u201CAsh Vegas\u201D to see not just one, not two, not three, but five police cars on the road at any one time. It is impossible for our police officers to spend their time on the road, booking motorists, and at the same time check second-hand dealers and pawnbrokers. This legislation will not achieve its worthy objective unless that issue is addressed. I am afraid that we are talking about a Clayton\u2019s bill unless the police are allowed to properly police what is intended. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000620\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022\u003EThe bill introduces tougher licensing and certification regimes for second-hand dealers, pawnbrokers, and their staff. I note\u2014and other speakers have picked up on this as well\u2014that the fine has now moved from $100 or $200, depending on which legislation was being dealt with, to $20,000 if a dealer is not licensed. I wholeheartedly agree with that. If we are to have legislation, we should make it enforceable, and make sure that people understand that there is a significant penalty for not being in accord with what is required. The legislation requires dealers to sight IDs, and record the contact details and the signatures of all people selling goods. That is sensible and it has my support and that of my National Party colleagues, as well. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000621\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022\u003EI do not want to take up too much of the House\u2019s time today, as it has been a long week. I will raise just one other issue that submitters raised through the select committee process, and that was regarding those who were trying to run fund-raisers for schools, etc. Those people were concerned that they would have to go to the trouble and expense of being licensed and recording goods. That was never the intention of this legislation. It was never the intention that people engaged in fund-raisers would be picked up under this legislation. So the select committee moved very quickly and sensibly to ensure that those groups were not picked up. We introduced, as was suggested as a group, that 6 days remain in any 12-month period, but a dollar figure has been attached to it. It is debatable, as Mr Alexander has mentioned, as to whether $2,000 is the right amount or whether it should be higher, but the concept is right. We were trying to strike a level that suggested that these people were not engaged in trading and were simply fund-raising. It was the balance of our opinion that $2,000 was a fair reflection of that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000622\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c598ffd3-4771-4027-a15f-5d1f643631e0\u0022\u003EThe other point that I would like to raise very quickly is that licences will be renewed every 5 years. That is good because it is a test of character and good citizenship. Things can change over a 5-year period. Having it in perpetuity, we thought, was a flaw, so we moved to make sure that this issue was dealt with. In conclusion, I say that this legislation has the very strong support of the National Party. It has been a privilege and a pleasure to work with such a constructive select committee, and I commend this legislation to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022 data-id=\u0022808a94b064b54a97aebd45d383159244\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000623\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022808a94b064b54a97aebd45d383159244\u0022\u003ERON MARK (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E I am just sitting here pondering that it is amazing that whenever people out there in the public arena discuss what members of Parliament do and what they are like, so often the media and talkback hosts say that we act like a bunch of kids, that people do not want to listen to that sort of nonsense, and that we waste their time. We try to correct some of those perceptions by saying, hang on a minute, bills that are contentious will be contested vigorously by both sides of the House and the cross benches, as is right and proper. But we very rarely hear reports of when members actively work together to solve a problem that exists and we all agree needs resolving, and then come to the House, present the bill, debate it through, and all vote unanimously in support of it. I feel it is a tragedy that so rarely do political commentators highlight to the public the large amount of legislation that goes through this House with unanimous agreement, whereby the select committees have worked determinedly and conscientiously to get the right outcome. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000624\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EThis is one such bill, and I have absolutely no doubt that we will not read anything of any substance about it in the papers tomorrow. We will not hear talkback hosts saying that it was great the way all the MPs got together and dealt with an issue that has been plaguing the police for decades\u2014dealt with a piece of outdated, outmoded legislation that had become so inappropriate that it needed dealing to. I doubt very much that I will hear one talkback host tomorrow complimenting the House on the way it has conducted itself in the passage of this legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000625\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EI say \u201Cwell done\u201D to the Government, and \u201Cwell done\u201D to the Law and Order Committee\u2014it was a pleasure to work with them all. I say to the police who are out there waiting for this legislation to be passed that there are a number of things that New Zealand First campaigns on very vigorously in support of the police and law and order, and that this bill is focused on a law and order issue. On a number of issues, New Zealand First will always challenge the ability of the Government of the day to effectively police our streets. We will challenge it on the numbers of police, because we fundamentally believe that the police are understaffed to do all the work\u2014such as this\u2014that we believe needs to be done. We believe that police numbers should be doubled\u2014end of story\u2014and we have said so. We know the financial implications. We believe that the police are completely under-resourced. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003ESuccessive Governments have created this situation, and the passage of more and more detailed legislation that requires the police to do more and more work cannot be ignored, so we challenge that. We will challenge the priorities until they are corrected. We have made our solution very clear. Police priorities, in terms of who they are focusing on and what they are doing, need looking at, and we specifically point to highway patrols and traffic safety. New Zealand First has said that it will resolve that issue. Policemen need to be out there checking on pawnbrokers and second-hand dealers, because they know who is fencing the goods. New Zealand First does not want to see the focus on quota ticketing, and to make sure that that does not happen under our governance, we will split that side of the police force right out of the police. It will go back to the Ministry of Transport and the Land Transport Safety Authority. They can look after traffic policing with all the vigour they desire, but the police will be left to do policing. It is a question of priorities. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000627\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EThe third area is having the tools of the trade to do the job, and this bill is one such tool. The police need good legislation. They need outdated legislation to be tidied up. The Minister has brought it to the House and we have dealt with it. This is good, and New Zealand First is supporting this bill all the way through, but there is other legislation, like a \u201CSuppression of Gangs Bill\u201D, that I want the Government to bring to the table to help the police. Let us have it! Let us put some teeth into those laws that are not enforced, like criminal non-association. We have those laws on our books but they are never enforced. We sit here and watch the very people who burgle homes and organise the fencing of stolen goods through shady second-hand dealers and pawnbrokers. We let them sit behind their huge fences. We let them walk the streets with patches on their backs. We know who they are, and we tolerate them through some misguided belief that we are impinging on their civil right to express themselves openly as members of such \u201Cesteemed\u201D organisations as Black Power or White Power. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000628\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EThe police need good tools such as this legislation, but I am saying that they need more. A \u201CSuppression of Gangs Bill\u201D would be welcomed by New Zealand First if it would seek\u2014and my colleague and friend Dover Samuels is nodding his head\u2014to wipe out gangs forever. We say that knowing that our whanaunga are an integral part of the gang structure in this country, and we desperately want them dealt to, as do the police. Let us look at other legislation like the confiscation of assets. That would be perfectly in line with this bill. Those gangs that are engaged in stealing, converting, burgling, and then fencing, are all putting their ill-gained profits into investments to improve their lifestyles. They have the nice homes and the nice cars, and they are all very well shielded by inadequate legislation that does not allow the police or the Minister of Justice to go for the throat. We have seen examples in Ireland of how this legislation has worked well. We have seen female reporters shot dead on the streets as a result of gangs seeking to protect their ill-gotten gains, which are often gained by fencing stolen goods through shonky second-hand dealerships and pawnbrokers. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000629\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EThis is good legislation. New Zealand First congratulates the Government and all the members of the select committee for the work that has been done, and we congratulate the officials who worked patiently to help us understand some of the intricacies that were involved. I am looking forward to seeing the bill passed. I am looking forward to hearing police say: \u201CThank God, now we can go out there and get into the work.\u201D I am looking forward to seeing the police being used more appropriately on the streets, and to more legislation of this type coming to the floor of the House under this Government, so that we can help it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022 data-id=\u0022e69a55105e894aed80bc8f41d6d5c2f3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e69a55105e894aed80bc8f41d6d5c2f3\u0022\u003EDEBORAH CODDINGTON (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E ACT supports this legislation, so I will not waste the House\u2019s time. There is nothing I hate more than the sound of my own voice, but I would like to remind people in this House\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000631\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002298db43bb1b2d4a48b3bb0f7f7214575e\u0022\u003EGovernment Members\u003C/span\u003E: Love your voice!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000632\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228147395183a14b2792908c39a5dca280\u0022\u003EDEBORAH CODDINGTON\u003C/span\u003E: Well then, sit down, be quiet, and listen! I remind members\u2014and Ron Mark has just talked about tools for the police to fight crime with\u2014that we are passing legislation that sets out a registry of second-hand dealers. These are people who have done nothing wrong, but they will be registered, and it will be a national database. When legislation comes back before the House at the end of the year that will seek to set up a registry of convicted sex offenders, I hope that members will not go queasy but will support it with the same strength and passion with which they have supported this bill, and with which yesterday they supported a registry of dogs that might bite people. ACT supports this legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000633\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003EBill read a third time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000634\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a2c883c5c422448786fa99f7f86006a4\u0022\u003ELand Transport Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000635\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022034b2bf620f8488792fc138ff9ee5f6b\u0022\u003EFirst Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022 data-id=\u00224af58af5f20d4667bcc4f054e2ad8799\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000636\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224af58af5f20d4667bcc4f054e2ad8799\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON (Minister of Transport):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the Land Transport Amendment Bill be now read a first time. At the appropriate time I will move that the bill be referred to the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee, and that the committee have the authority to meet to examine the bill at any time while the House is sitting, except during questions for oral answer and during any evening on a day on which there has been a sitting of the House; and to meet on a Friday in a week in which there has been a sitting of the House, notwithstanding Standing Orders 191 and 194(1)(b) and (c).\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000637\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003EThis Government has a commitment to improving the safety and security of all road users. This bill does that by making the enforcement, operation, and administration of land transport safety law more efficient and effective, in line with the objectives of the Government\u2019s New Zealand Transport Strategy and the Road Safety to 2010 strategy. The bill improves the law concerning the responsibilities of road users, traffic offences and penalties, and driver licensing, and fixes some provisions that are unclear, inflexible, unenforceable, or outdated.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000638\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003EAlthough the road toll of 404 in 2002 was the lowest for 40 years, the toll last year was 460, and there have been only slightly fewer road deaths so far this year than at the same stage in 2003. Clearly, with increased traffic volumes we need new initiatives to improve road safety. Alcohol and excessive speed are the two biggest contributing factors to road crashes in New Zealand, together accounting for about 40 percent of all fatal crashes. This bill gets tough on the most serious traffic offenders by reducing the speed and alcohol thresholds for immediate driver\u2019s-licence suspension, and increasing the range of penalties for repeat drink-driving, including immediate vehicle impoundment. It also requires a wider group of repeat drink-drivers to attend a drug and alcohol assessment centre, in order to help rehabilitate more drivers whose offending is rooted in a drinking problem.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000639\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003EThe bill will make the law around driver licensing clearer and more user-friendly. For example, it allows a temporary driver\u2019s licence to be issued where a person\u2019s licence has expired or been revoked, thus enabling a person to drive for assessment purposes. It requires a photo driver\u2019s licence to show the original issue date rather than the date that the licence was last issued, and that will help New Zealand drivers wanting to drive or hire a car in other countries. It allows for the suspension of a driving instructor or testing officer in the interests of public safety, and it prohibits driving instruction for financial or commercial gain without a current driving instructor endorsement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000640\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003EThe bill enhances the ability of courts to deal with people who repeatedly drive while disqualified. Most people convicted of driving while disqualified are recidivists. Many of them build up so many disqualifications that they see no hope of ever regaining their drivers\u2019 licences. They continue to drive and build up further disqualifications. In cases where those offenders present no risk to road safety, the bill will allow courts to impose a community-based sentence, rather than further disqualification, for driving while disqualified. It also enables offenders who have already accumulated long periods of unserved disqualification for disqualified driving to return to court to request a reduction in their outstanding disqualifications on the ground that they can demonstrate to the court that they have attempted to change their behaviour.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000641\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003EThe bill contains amendments to transport operator licensing, in line with the conclusions of a review of the licensing system in 2001. It simplifies and clarifies licensing requirements, and that will reduce compliance costs for transport operators. The bill also introduces measures to improve commercial drivers\u2019 standards, enhance the accountability of taxi organisations, and strengthen offences and penalties. It prohibits anyone convicted of a serious violent or sexual offence from being a passenger service driver.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000642\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003EFollowing consultation with the transport industry and the general public, and in line with a review of the driving hours and logbook system, the bill simplifies that system and introduces a new, simpler definition of work time. It also alters the penalty system, in line with industry concerns, to graduate penalties according to the seriousness of the offence. It increases the use of infringement notices and demerit points for logbook and other record-keeping offences. It retains mandatory licence disqualification for driving-hour breaches of more than 1 hour only. It introduces a new \u201Cchain of responsibility\u201D offence to ensure that employers and other industry participants are held accountable if they knowingly allow or cause driving-hour breaches, and it provides for alternative fatigue-management schemes to encourage operators to take greater responsibility.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000643\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003EThe bill amends provisions concerning vehicles impounded under the Land Transport Act. It reduces the period that storage providers must wait before applying to dispose of an unclaimed vehicle from 28 days to 10 days. That will reduce the cost to storage providers of holding vehicles that are, often, not roadworthy and of little value.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000644\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003EFinally, the bill contains a number of common-sense amendments to fix various defects in land transport legislation that make it more difficult to enforce or administer. These include making the criteria for appointments to the Land Transport Safety Authority board consistent with the Human Rights Act, so that appointees do not have to be New Zealand citizens; preventing the taking of a blood sample at the request of an enforcement officer where that would be prejudicial to the treatment of the patient; permitting the release of driver\u2019s-licence photographs of deceased persons to their next of kin; empowering police to serve at the roadside a notice of licence suspension on a driver with more than 100 demerit points; clarifying the obligations of a driver who is requested to stop by an enforcement officer; ensuring that driving offences involving injury or death apply both on and off a road; creating an offence of failure to report an accident; enabling rental service operators to charge fees for owner-liability offences back to the person hiring the vehicle at the time; and providing an alternative to full vehicle re-inspection when vehicles are ordered off the road for non-compliance with vehicle standards.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000645\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003EIn addition, the Greens have raised with me the issue of a lack of distinction, in terms of offence and penalty, between persons driving on an expired licence and those who drive without any licence. Their suggestion is that it may be appropriate to have a lesser penalty for driving on an expired licence, on the basis that forgetting to renew one\u2019s licence is not as serious an offence as driving whilst never having had one. Currently, the bill contains a provision that states that \u201Cunlicensed\u201D, in relation to a driver, includes holding an expired licence. However, the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee may choose to examine whether the present lack of distinction is fair and make any recommendations it feels are appropriate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000646\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003ELastly, I have had the matter of excessive vehicle noise raised with me by Larry Baldock. Should the select committee examining this bill consider it appropriate, it may wish to examine whether the current offence regime for dealing with excessive vehicle noise, including stereo noise, is acting as a sufficient deterrent. If not, the committee may wish to examine what penalties would be suitable for such offences, particularly repeat offences. Although the bill does not address that issue directly, it has now been just over a year since the House passed provisions to deal with boy racers, and it may be time to examine whether future measures to deal with the related issue of excessive noise are needed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000647\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003EIn conclusion, I would like to acknowledge the support from the Greens, United Future, and New Zealand First for the bill as introduced. The bill proposes a large number of positive changes to the legislative framework underpinning land transport safety. It will improve safety and help save lives. It will also reduce unnecessary complication and business compliance costs. I commend it to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228a87c178-9f60-439e-aa9b-0f1336c37ea9\u0022 data-id=\u0022b9783cdfa99944e893c3e0e83334cd37\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000648\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228a87c178-9f60-439e-aa9b-0f1336c37ea9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b9783cdfa99944e893c3e0e83334cd37\u0022\u003EHon ROGER SOWRY (National):\u003C/span\u003E At the outset of what will be a fairly short speech, I want to say to the House that the National Party will be voting for this bill to go to a select committee. The bill needs a considerable amount of work, and the National Party is prepared to work with the Government on some of the important issues of road safety. Like all political parties in this House, we view with concern the road toll. It came down considerably during the previous National Government\u2019s time in office, largely due to a combination of a very aggressive advertising campaign on television\u2014at times it was almost too aggressive\u2014and the moves that took place around the issuing of the new photographic licences and that whole new regime of removing people from the road. We believe that that was highly successful in driving down the road toll. That is not to say that there are not other things that can be done, and I particularly want to commend in the bill the provisions around serious traffic offenders, whereby there will be the opportunity for immediate driver\u2019s-licence suspension and an increase in penalties for repeat drink-driving. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000649\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228a87c178-9f60-439e-aa9b-0f1336c37ea9\u0022\u003EI am not someone who believes we need to race out and lower the blood-alcohol level, or do any of that sort of more extreme stuff. But as someone who often reads the little bit in the paper on drink-driving offences, which are reported on a weekly basis, when I read the convictions I am concerned to see a number of repeat offenders who consistently appear, week after week, in the newspaper. I think that anything this House can do to stop repeat offending by the removal of drivers\u2019 licences earlier in the process is something that should be supported, and I also think the requirement for a wider group of repeat drink-drivers to have to attend drug and alcohol assessment and rehabilitation courses is something we need to have. It is no good just to take their drivers\u2019 licences away\u2014suspend them\u2014and then let those drivers come back at a later date. We do need a more intensive programme, and they should have to prove they have been on the programme before they get their licences back. I personally support that part of the bill, and I hope the House will support it, as well. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000650\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228a87c178-9f60-439e-aa9b-0f1336c37ea9\u0022\u003E In terms of the simplification around the driving logbook system, I think it does go some way towards meeting the concerns that have been expressed to me regarding logbooks. I am worried about the increase, or the ability, I guess, to have automatic demerit points for a logbook offence, because I think the issue is that many people may well be outside their driving time when it is not a planned event. I am thinking of the recent example of the floods in the northern part of the \u014Ctaki and through the Rangit\u012Bkei areas, where truck-drivers who were doing really good community work in terms of moving stock and furniture\u2014and they were moving furniture in the Hutt Valley, which was also flooded at the same time\u2014were pinged by the quite petty and frankly, I think, overzealous actions of some traffic police for weight and logbook offences. Common sense prevailed in the end, and those offences were waived. But I do worry about the increasing focus on revenue gathering, and logbook offences are one way that that whole issue can be used by the traffic police. I do not support that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000651\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228a87c178-9f60-439e-aa9b-0f1336c37ea9\u0022\u003EVehicle impoundment is another issue I want to comment on, because it was quite controversial when it was introduced in the House in the late 1990s, and I am sure the Minister was aware of the debate at the time. In fact, I think it was difficult at the time to keep a certain number of members in the House in order to get that part passed. It was a very close vote, and I notice the Hon Harry Duynhoven laughing at that as well, because I think he was involved in the negotiations at the time. Suffice it to say that vehicle impoundment has worked really well, and I think the Minister is right to ask the committee to look at reducing the time cars are kept. I know that that is a problem; it has been raised with me. Where vehicles have no value or very little value, no one comes to pick them up. They then end up being kept for a long period of time, and the operators who have those vehicles in their yards end up wearing a loss. So from that angle, we need to sort that out. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000652\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228a87c178-9f60-439e-aa9b-0f1336c37ea9\u0022\u003EAs an aside, I just hope the committee also takes the chance to look at abandoned vehicles. I notice an increasing number of people around the country who have vehicles of little value, and I am not sure whether those things just break down or the owners forget where they are, but one way or the other, the owners just leave them there on the roadside. Traffic officers drive past those vehicles for a week to two weeks, and the vehicles gradually lose bits. If one goes past such a vehicle on a Friday, one sees it is all OK. However, on Saturday one sees the windows are broken, on Sunday the wheels have gone, and by Wednesday it is sitting there as a wrecked vehicle on the side of the road. That is not something that does this country proud. The police need to act on that situation a lot quicker than they do, and I hope the committee will look at that. I think that it is probably just a product of the value of a vehicle, when it is probably not worth the towing fee. I myself have had a car in that category, and I have very fond memories of it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000653\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221cecc15ca5bb423a93cdf08045e97a46\u0022\u003EDarren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: Tell us about it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000654\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228a87c178-9f60-439e-aa9b-0f1336c37ea9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c75192e6d88e4feb927200ace5aefe14\u0022\u003EHon ROGER SOWRY\u003C/span\u003E: It is still on the road, actually. I sold it for $300, and it is still being driven by a very proud seventh former. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000655\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228a87c178-9f60-439e-aa9b-0f1336c37ea9\u0022\u003EI want to finish by saying that the issues around taking blood samples and some of the human rights issues around dealing with blood samples and breath testing are things we will want to look at quite closely. I am sure there will be varying views in our caucus on those issues, but I am pleased to say that the National Party will be supporting the referral of the bill to the select committee and will work in a constructive way to get it through the House as soon as possible. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022 data-id=\u00221b52db9a5ce44678acfc0834ec6516b4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000656\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221b52db9a5ce44678acfc0834ec6516b4\u0022\u003EPETER BROWN (Deputy Leader\u2014NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E Towards the end of the week it is becoming a transport week; transport is becoming the flavour of the week. I can see Harry Duynhoven smiling, over there. Last night the Minister made an announcement on new funding for infrastructure, and today there is the Land Transport Amendment Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000657\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EI turn to the announcement last night on funding. I have to say to my colleagues in United Future that if they want to put out press releases that attack the Rt Hon Winston Peters and me personally, I would advise them to stick closer to the truth, because we are a little bit tetchy over here at the moment. We will not respond in kind, but those United Future members should stick to the truth.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000658\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EI return to this bill. I think much has been said about it and New Zealand First will not add a great deal more, but I want to raise a few concerns we have and I think this bill will give us the opportunity to look at them more closely.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000659\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EThe driver\u2019s licence system concerns us, and I see in the bill some areas that specifically address our concerns. I am hopeful that the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee will look at the concerns elderly drivers have. I have a letter here from a lady called Jean Jones that was written to my colleague Pita Paraone, which he passed on to me for a response. She talks of her sister-in-law having to take a computer test for 2\u00BD hours, which cost $236. When she passed that, she had to have a practical driving test with a police officer and a therapist for 1\u00BD hours, which cost $209. That lady had a history of a mild stroke some few months before, but the testing system cost her $445. That is not the way to treat the elderly in this country. It is absolutely deplorable! I am hopeful that we can look at the driver\u2019s licence system to address the concerns of elderly folk. It really does put stress on them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000660\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EI am also keen, as I heard the Hon Roger Sowry say, to look at logbooks, particularly at those for commercial operators. I have seen some logbooks with very, very minor errors in them, and I would suggest they are far more minor than errors that some of us who worked in those occupations made when we filled in our logbooks. [Interruption] Paul Adams, of course, does not make any mistakes, but with the exception of that member I would say we all made tiny errors. I have seen one driver\u2019s logbook with a very minor error. To pick it up would have been very, very hard, yet the driver was fined hundreds of dollars. That is not on. Those guys are not academics; they are truck-drivers, and this country is blessed with having some of the best truck-drivers in the world. They are very courteous and, by and large, they know exactly what they are doing. To be fined hundreds of dollars for a minor error in a logbook is not on, so I am hopeful that we can have a look at those sorts of things.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000661\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EI am also keen\u2014again, members have raised this matter\u2014that we look at the provisions for handling people who drive under the influence of alcohol and drugs. I would put some emphasis on the latter. I am not sure how the police pick up people who are under the influence of drugs, but it is being reported informally to me that because we have an MP in this House who advocates drug smoking on an individual basis, we are becoming very, very liberal on the roads.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000662\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226595c69ca68b426d8a4fc28d14195147\u0022\u003ESue Kedgley\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The member is making incorrect statements in saying we have MPs who advocate drug smoking, etc.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000663\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ed9ad81-05c1-4171-80c6-24fa02cade42\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221eb15fe3311a47afb7c9b34d9a2f1abb\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich)\u003C/span\u003E: That is not a point of order; it is a debating matter.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000664\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022272a5460e6cd4c81b9141bbaa85a2d25\u0022\u003EPETER BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: It is a debating issue, Mr Speaker, and I thank you for correcting the member on that. I just want to tell her, because she might have forgotten, that not long ago a press release went out from her party advocating that people go to a park, smoke cannabis, then get in their cars, and go home.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000665\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221772e9f5-5379-4bfe-9d9b-eaffb4c61b02\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220dcef8c9dc86474da5f8f86960a2e9c2\u0022\u003EHon Harry Duynhoven\u003C/span\u003E: What? That\u2019s irresponsible.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000666\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227bf603c17c374a9eb0187c90479ddeae\u0022\u003EPETER BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, it is irresponsible in the extreme. I hope we will take a good look at those sorts of concerns.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000667\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EI also hope we will take a good look at foreign drivers who drive in this country. That is an area that is becoming a major concern. New Zealand First is on the record as saying that if foreigners drive irresponsibly in this country, then not only will they shorten their holiday or whatever reason they are here for but they will be on the first plane out of the country. I am not talking about minor offences, which might be understandable, I am talking about major offences where some people are doing quite serious antics on the road. New Zealand First is not in the business of allowing people to come to New Zealand and drive \u201Cany old how\u201D while they carry on with their holidays. Our attitude is that if people commit an offence of serious proportions on our roads, then out they should go.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000668\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EI am also hoping that the select committee will have an opportunity to look at how we police our roads. We have major concerns about some of the attitudes of the commercial vehicle police and how they handle truck-drivers. I have just referred to the logbook situation, but for some months now New Zealand First has been undertaking a survey\u2014for want of a better term\u2014on road policing. In excess of 90 percent of people who have responded to the survey have told us they believe that the traffic police should be separated from the police. We will pursue that with some vigour. Traffic duties should be taken away from the police and a traffic unit itself should be set up under the umbrella of the Land Transport Safety Authority. The public perception of police officers has gone down quite a lot, because those officers are seen as revenue gatherers, so I hope the select committee will have a good look at how we police the transport system in this country. Our view is that it could be done so much better if the traffic police were under the jurisdiction of the Land Transport Safety Authority, and the police force itself was left to get on with the job of handling criminals.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000669\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EI have said all I need to say on this bill. New Zealand First will support it going to the select committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022 data-id=\u0022a67c80ca3c814468bb42fdab24d2d9ba\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000670\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a67c80ca3c814468bb42fdab24d2d9ba\u0022\u003ESUE KEDGLEY (Green):\u003C/span\u003E This is yet another bill\u2014we have had a number of them today\u2014on which there seems to be total support and consensus in the House. Indeed, I would say that seldom have we seen a bill full of so many good ideas and common-sense suggestions, and which I am sure would have the support of almost all New Zealanders. I am sure that New Zealanders would be delighted to know that we will target serious traffic offenders by reducing the speed and alcohol thresholds for immediate driver\u2019s-licence suspension. It is a particularly good idea that we will require repeat drink-drivers to attend drug and alcohol assessment centres.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000671\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EI say in parentheses that it was interesting that the New Zealand First representative had barely finished attacking United Future, saying how annoyed New Zealand First members were with United Future and how tired they were of United Future\u2019s attacks, when he proceeded to make totally incorrect, ill-founded, stupid attacks on the Green Party. That is exactly the sort of behaviour that brings the House into disrepute. Someone goes on and on about how terrible it is that he or she is being attacked, then turns round and makes exactly the same sort of idiotic attacks as he or she has been complaining about.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000672\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EAnd, for the record, arguing that people should not go to jail for smoking cannabis but, rather, should attend assessment centres, as is proposed in this bill, and that we should be focusing on harm minimisation, is not advocating for persons to smoke cannabis. Frankly, we are getting very, very tired of those pitiful little attacks from United Future and New Zealand First\u2014just as New Zealand First members say they are getting tired of attacks on them. Let me just set the record straight there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000673\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EAll the suggestions in this bill are basically aimed at trying to reduce speed and driving while under the influence of alcohol, which, as the Minister said, are the causes of so many accidents. This bill seeks to address the underlying causes of the road toll. I am sure that everyone will support it; I am sure that all New Zealanders will support it. It is so full of good ideas that we wonder why we did not have most of the proposals in it on our law books many decades or years ago.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000674\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EThe only thing I would say in conclusion is that the Minister of Transport talked about a proposal by United Future to put in legislation forbidding excessive noise from vehicles. I think that is targeted at boy racers who have radios on while they drive around. I suggest that surely the House has more important things to talk about than trying to prohibit the few people who drive around making a loud noise. Is this a serious problem? What is the problem we are trying to find a solution to here? That proposal is really a case of going overboard. There is not a huge problem, and, frankly, that sort of excessive regulation is unnecessary.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000675\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EAnyway, that is not included in this excellent set of amendments. We are delighted to support them, and we will be active in the select committee in considering the proposals. I think that most of the submissions will be totally in support of the bill, and that New Zealanders will say we should get on and get them enacted as soon as possible.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022 data-id=\u00228a17c6232180461d86a5ba687ed4106e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000676\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228a17c6232180461d86a5ba687ed4106e\u0022\u003EDEBORAH CODDINGTON (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E The ACT party will support the referral of the bill to the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee. However, we will be looking at it very carefully at the select committee. The bill does need to be dealt to in select committee. There are some issues we will be looking at very carefully, along the same lines as Roger Sowry from the National Party signalled. The criteria for appointment to the Land Transport Safety Authority are to be consistent with the Human Rights Act. Surely, appointments to the authority should be made on the grounds that the appointees have the skills, experience, and talent for the position, not that their appointment complies with the Human Rights Act\u2014an Act that is often more correctly called the \u201CHuman Wrongs Act\u201D. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000677\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003EWe support anything that tries to get recidivist drink-drivers off the road. They just wreak carnage on New Zealand families, leave behind a huge amount of grief, and more often than not they have absolutely no remorse for what they do. They take no responsibility for their crimes. They are just out there committing them again and again. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000678\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003EI do despair sometimes whether we will ever do anything about it by changing the law. Certainly, changing laws and passing regulation does bring about culture changes. However, I think that there is something endemic in the New Zealand psyche, whereby people have a skinful of liquor, they get behind the wheel of a car, and they think they are invincible. They think they can do things that, clearly, they are incapable of doing. In fact, they are in charge of a very, very dangerous weapon. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000679\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003EI do not have a problem with people having to spend a lot of money to get a driver\u2019s licence, to pass the test. I understand where Peter Brown is coming from. It is difficult for a lot of elderly people, but then a lot of elderly people are very dangerous on the road, too. It has been proved by research recently that drivers who fall asleep repeatedly are just as dangerous as repeat drink-drivers, and a lot of elderly drivers fall into that category. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000680\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003EThe other issue that concerns me is that it is no use passing laws like this if there are not the resources on the roads to police them\u2014if roads in the areas where it is known that repeat drink-drivers get in their cars are not policed, and I am talking about country roads and country pubs. It is not so much now. One often drives out of Auckland at 6 o\u2019clock in the evening and a booze bus is stopping everyone. People are probably not over the limit, but the police have a quota to fill of potential drink-drivers. They are not the people who are causing the problems. The people who are causing the problems mostly are in Dannevirke, Takapau, West Coast, and all those sorts of places. [Interruption] I am just making sure that members are awake.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000681\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb5e591b-8ffc-4539-a900-1ee22224f7d7\u0022\u003E Finally, I agree with Sue Kedgley from the Greens when she was alarmed at United Future wanting the select committee to look at noisy stereos in cars. Sure, these stereos are a nuisance, but should we, as politicians, get into the area of passing laws to ban things that we find a nuisance? I mean they are not actually physically hurting anyone except themselves, and they are not actually breaking the law. It is alarming that we have people in this House who think it is their role to pass laws against people who are just a bit of a bother. But we will be supporting this bill to select committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224e6caa14-14ae-43f5-b9da-fe479511fe74\u0022 data-id=\u0022a6b83afca1e74ffd8442a365dc7e65aa\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000682\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224e6caa14-14ae-43f5-b9da-fe479511fe74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a6b83afca1e74ffd8442a365dc7e65aa\u0022\u003EPAUL ADAMS (United Future):\u003C/span\u003E I rise on behalf of United Future to support this first reading, and I stand in amazement as here we have the two extreme parties in this Parliament\u2014the ACT party on the extreme right and the Green Party on the extreme left\u2014in agreement over a ridiculous issue. It is unbelievable. Here we have somebody talking about an amendment that my good colleague Larry Baldock is intending to put in this legislation to deal with noise from motor vehicles. Now that is 100 percent sensible, because just picking up on a point that Peter Brown made, we do have to have laws in this nation\u2014first because otherwise we would not have a job, and that would be a very serious problem to us all! But the other side of that is that the people who interpret the laws must have a brain, and that is often where we have a problem. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000683\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224e6caa14-14ae-43f5-b9da-fe479511fe74\u0022\u003EComing back to the noise issue, let us take for example the boy-racer legislation where we stated that a car can only have an exhaust system that is no noisier than the standard exhaust of a normal motorcar. There is a major problem here, because we have an after-market exhaust industry and, as many of the V8 lovers in this House would know, there are people who would just like to fit that little after-market muffler that gives a beautiful sports roar. All of a sudden the legalistic side of the Land Transport Safety Authority comes down hard and all of these people who have sports exhaust systems fitted to their cars are breaking the law. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000684\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224e6caa14-14ae-43f5-b9da-fe479511fe74\u0022\u003EIn my personal opinion that is not necessarily because there was anything wrong with the law, but the people interpreting the law do not have a brain. So there is a need to have a look at exhausts in cars. My colleagues who have spoken against this measure may not have had the experience of living in a small suburban Auckland neighbourhood where young people will often wind up their stereos late at night and they cannot be dealt with. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000685\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224e6caa14-14ae-43f5-b9da-fe479511fe74\u0022\u003EI come back to the Green Party and its attack on United Future. I can assure members, as Peter Brown has stated, that if they put out a press release that people are to gather in a park to smoke cannabis and then drive home, then they should get a life. Most New Zealanders would find that totally unacceptable, and United Future finds that totally unacceptable. To me it is almost criminal to put out reports like that. What sort of message is the Green Party trying to give to the young people\u2014or to the older people, as we can see\u2014of this nation? It is not a message that United Future wants to put out. The Greens will have problems with United Future as long as they continue to promote that sort of ridiculous legislation, because we are a party of common sense. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000686\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224e6caa14-14ae-43f5-b9da-fe479511fe74\u0022\u003EUnited Future supports this legislation and we look forward to discussing it as it goes through the select committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000687\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224e6caa14-14ae-43f5-b9da-fe479511fe74\u0022\u003EBill read a first time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022 data-id=\u0022413478ab273e4276b7c987690dff7005\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000688\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022413478ab273e4276b7c987690dff7005\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON (Minister of Transport):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the Land Transport Amendment Bill be referred to the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee for consideration, that the committee have the authority to meet at any time while the House is sitting, except during questions for oral answer, and during any evening on a day on which there has been a sitting of the House, and on a Friday in a week in which there has been a sitting of the House, notwithstanding Standing Orders 191 and 194(1)(b) and (c).\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022c9141f0f31a545d9a979cc22fd4bd5b4\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the motion be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 70\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000689\u0022\u003EThe House adjourned at 5.35 p.m. (Thursday)\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2004062942d8984feecc4c9697788884b022a581000690\u0022\u003E\u003Cbr\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n  \u003C/body\u003E\n\u003C/html\u003E"