"\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=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000001\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00224e53dddf6c6743c38908638dee9cace2\u0022\u003ETuesday, 3 May 2005\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000003\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00222febb7bcd4d340aca6f15a1e9a7b16da\u0022\u003ETuesday, 3 May 2005\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000002\u0022\u003EMadam Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000004\u0022\u003EPrayers.\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000005\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002226f68ce900cd4e299e3fbd8f3790c546\u0022\u003EVisitors\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000006\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022f4f90ad8d20f4d3998081ac301d794be\u0022\u003EAustralia\u2014Australian Senate Legal and Constitutional Legislation and References Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000007\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022ce0a2793a3f5403abf4888b6baae86f6\u0022\u003EAustralian Senate Legal and Constitutional Legislation and References Committee are present in the gallery. I am sure members would wish that the delegation be welcomed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022 data-id=\u0022fc97595f0dd74f5db8d399415d11086b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000008\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022fc97595f0dd74f5db8d399415d11086b\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I have much pleasure in informing the House that members of the \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000009\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022686bfbfc560141e09b8fee7fd0ef7901\u0022\u003EPoints of Order\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000010\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00222ef95c23a59c4674a1a13fc3d2397724\u0022\u003EQuestions for Written Answer\u2014Replies\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022 data-id=\u002294b11eb8e6424baa953434604ef1f415\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000011\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002294b11eb8e6424baa953434604ef1f415\u0022\u003EHEATHER ROY (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. This is the second time I have sought your assistance on this matter. I have asked several written questions of the Minister of Health, and the answers are now long overdue. In fact, one of the questions was first asked of the Minister of Health on 29 April 2004, so that question is now more than 1 year overdue. I raised this matter with you in the House on a point of order on 16 March, and you requested that I should write to you. I did so, and you responded on 17 March saying that you would look into this matter and contact me again. That was 6 weeks ago, and I have yet to hear from you. I would just like to say that Standing Order 366(4) is very specific on this matter, and reads: \u201CThe reply to a question for written answer must be lodged no later than the sixth working day following the day on which the question is published.\u201D I have 11 questions that are well and truly beyond the 6-day mark, and I wonder what redress I now have.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000012\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002249d517ff0688406ca79b5ca572187355\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the member. My understanding is that a response was given, but I will look into it further for her.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000013\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022cd9e3ad8212d4532a8c0b143cdb754da\u0022\u003EQuestions for Oral Answer\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000014\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022504b2e96e96144afad0f7206712af065\u0022\u003EQuestions to Ministers\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000015\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00220d45e9283f49482483f54c3364346d9b\u0022\u003EPharmac\u2014Policies and Procedures\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000016\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ff7fa608d6a142f08c359ef8ac113ceb\u0022\u003E1. Hon PETER DUNNE (Leader\u2014United Future)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Health: Does she believe that Pharmac\u2019s operating policies and procedures deliver consistently satisfactory outcomes sufficient to ensure the health and well-being of New Zealanders; if so, why?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022 data-id=\u0022cc73ed1b941345c1b1524f3c1243dd3e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000017\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022cc73ed1b941345c1b1524f3c1243dd3e\u0022\u003EHon ANNETTE KING (Minister of Health):\u003C/span\u003E In the main, yes. Pharmac has ensured that New Zealand continues to have access to a wide range of high-quality pharmaceuticals at an affordable cost to taxpayers through a national schedule of subsidised medicines. However, the operating policies and procedures can always be improved and reviewed on a regular basis, as is currently the case.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000018\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f542dbd5d9064326bf1c6a20ec875f44\u0022\u003EHon Peter Dunne\u003C/span\u003E: Given that the Minister told Susan Wood on the Close Up programme, and told the House this afternoon, that the operating procedures and policies of Pharmac were under review and that things like sole supply could be looked at as part of that review, how does she reconcile that statement with comments made by the chief executive of Pharmac that \u201CPharmac does not propose to make many changes to the operating policies and procedures\u201D; and which one of them is telling the truth?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000019\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b8d8a210089f48d181881fd07e7ae3e6\u0022\u003EHon ANNETTE KING\u003C/span\u003E: A full review of the operating procedures and policies is under way. I say to that member that the opportunity for members to have an input, and for the public and the pharmaceutical industry to have an input, is there. No decision has been made on what changes there will be. I believe that the chief executive will be stating that he cannot see many changes that need to be made, but that does not mean there will not be.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000020\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002276e4b8b7-c205-49d8-a21e-5d7a3ddf1330\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228cb783bee10b498e8cf58ac3a1718095\u0022\u003EMark Peck\u003C/span\u003E: When was the last review of Pharmac\u2019s operating policies and procedures, and what input did the pharmaceutical industry have into that review?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000021\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022746f52fadb0e4da39ac7eabaa9367ed3\u0022\u003EHon ANNETTE KING\u003C/span\u003E: The last full review was in 1999-2000, and at that stage the industry, patients, and medical groups were consulted. It is 5 years since that review. This latest review will be open to the same range of groups, including the industry, to have an input into operating policies and procedures.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229a325ff5ed6043cc9b999e1e3569971f\u0022\u003EHon Peter Dunne\u003C/span\u003E: When the Minister says that New Zealanders by and large can be satisfied with the way in which Pharmac performs, does she include in that consideration the response to this year\u2019s flu vaccine issue, particularly now that it appears the whole episode was unnecessary, given that the original vaccine apparently was effective anyway?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000023\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002205a6e60c74bb477c86ad77c58c2caa9a\u0022\u003EHon ANNETTE KING\u003C/span\u003E: I assume the member is talking about the fact that we had a sole supply contract for the flu vaccine. That has been the case for the 7 years we have had a subsidised flu vaccine approach in New Zealand. That certainly will be looked at by the ministry, which gave the contract for this last year to Pharmac, and we will see the results of that in the near future. In terms of the flu vaccine, it was not possible for Medsafe to register a medicine that had not reached the standard that had been sought and set by the World Heath Organization.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000024\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022336b47efda9944d095db80cc1aae6226\u0022\u003ESue Kedgley\u003C/span\u003E: Can the Minister confirm that drug companies often play hardball in negotiations with Pharmac, and that switching suppliers is sometimes the only way to get a drug company to negotiate a realistic price for its product and therefore ensure affordable treatment for New Zealanders?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000025\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cb482005224642c08a9da5371edf0587\u0022\u003EHon ANNETTE KING\u003C/span\u003E: I totally agree with the member.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000026\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eaf6f2a8b519421f80cfaedeeaf528c2\u0022\u003EHon Peter Dunne\u003C/span\u003E: Has the Minister seen the material provided to Asthma New Zealand - The Lung Association, in response to its questionnaire of patients concerning the switch from Ventolin to Salamol reliever for asthma sufferers, and in view of the strong rejection of Pharmac\u2019s move to switch from Ventolin to Salamol, is she prepared to direct Pharmac to reconsider its decision in this regard?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000027\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002289dff895f5b049f4851bf17902661ef5\u0022\u003EHon ANNETTE KING\u003C/span\u003E: Pharmac and Medsafe are investigating complaints about Salamol. In the meantime, Ventolin and Salamol will continue to be fully funded for patients until those investigations conclude.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000028\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002259d5f7cf9a2f448a98add4b5543b15cc\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: Why is Risperdal Consta, an antipsychotic injectable used by professionals on a fortnightly basis and paid for by taxpayers in the OECD and Australia, not available in New Zealand where the comparison is the hand out of tablets, which are frequently not used by those patients, leading to wide-scale problems in our society; and why does she not make that drug available in New Zealand? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000029\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226488265904054e8ba681e6f22172452f\u0022\u003EHon ANNETTE KING\u003C/span\u003E: I do not have that answer with me; I will find out for the member. I am aware that a number of antipsychotic medications that are injected are available in New Zealand. I do not know about that particular one, but I will get the answer for the member. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000030\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00225fe3eeb415f64c6796af733a3e0d49f9\u0022\u003EPolice\u2014Former Commissioner\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000031\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003E2. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002227ad14a85d864d43aa9a91a329215330\u0022\u003EDr DON BRASH (Leader of the Opposition)\u003C/span\u003E to the Prime Minister: On what specific dates in 1999 and 2000 did she speak with the Sunday Star-Times regarding the actions of then Police Commissioner Peter Doone during a traffic incident in November 1999, and for what purpose did she have those discussions?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022 data-id=\u0022a5d1a03fdcd44d75a758d767d6bf0dd1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000032\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a5d1a03fdcd44d75a758d767d6bf0dd1\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK (Prime Minister):\u003C/span\u003E I cannot recall specific dates from over 5 years ago. I would have answered questions put to me by the Sunday Star-Times, as is my normal practice. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000033\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221bf93a8db5bf45c0b927dfa1acc4a08e\u0022\u003EDr Don Brash\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Prime Minister, or anyone on her behalf, hold copies of the transcripts of telephone conversations she had with the Sunday Star-Times; if so, will she authorise their release and that of her brief of evidence on the matter?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000034\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221649fb7a2fd84374903744f2caabadc5\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: Journalists\u2019 notes of some conversations, but not all, have been made available. Given that we are told that further litigation is pending, I do not think it would be wise to release them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000035\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ec39d99e5e024dd5ac422c9638c2a482\u0022\u003ERodney Hide\u003C/span\u003E: Has she seen the transcripts of her conversations with the Sunday Star-Times\u2019 reporter and editor; if not, has she asked her lawyer whether he has seen the transcripts?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000036\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223887aea5c3cb4a0faafae99c2181cdee\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: I have seen journalists\u2019 notes of some conversations, but not of all.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000037\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222f050fdb4fb04087acd05e027c100fde\u0022\u003ERodney Hide\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. My question also asked the Prime Minister whether she had asked her lawyer if he had seen the transcripts. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000038\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002210a1212eeadc432c9339d21dc81f9ac2\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: My understanding is that the lawyer has shown me all that he has received. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000039\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002227e8e0558e234511883b783fd143489b\u0022\u003EDr Don Brash\u003C/span\u003E: Is it true that some of the Prime Minister\u2019s five conversations with the Sunday Star-Times occurred following the publication of the original story on 16 January 2000, and that those reassured the paper that the information she had given it was correct and that it should hang tough and keep investigating the commissioner?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000040\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e5aa2682ee4440bfa963845a07abed3e\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: The Sunday Star-Times ran stories on that matter every Sunday from 5 December 1999 onwards. The Sunday Star-Times, as I recollect, put it to me that the commissioner\u2019s car had been approached by a constable with some kind of breath-testing device\u2014I think it is known as a sniffer\u2014which I would have confirmed. I would then, I am very certain, have said that there were differing accounts of what was said between the constable and the commissioner. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000041\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022db88d3551074447d8b659f42c7ae8fb0\u0022\u003EDr Don Brash\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I asked the Prime Minister whether some of her conversations occurred after the publication on 16 January. She did not attempt to answer that question, at all. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000042\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224ab0df9609e4452b94051f3621c3d135\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: They may well have done, but I have told the member that I cannot recall when, over 5 years ago, people spoke to me. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227275e3656c8347bd893e6def69cc68af\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: Is there a pattern developing here of the type that emerged in the Dover Samuels case, wherein the Prime Minister said that he could not remain a Minister while allegations were swirling about him, and it turned out that she was the chief \u201Cswirler\u201D in that matter\u2014as she appears to be in this case, as well?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000044\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002259144855f73a46dfb50e91f0f78124d7\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: That most certainly is not the case.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000045\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222fb7dea5706742b5972cd319a672a70f\u0022\u003EHon Ken Shirley\u003C/span\u003E: What briefing has the Prime Minister had from her lawyer on this issue, and on what date did she have her last briefing?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000046\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223e852076a78c40408d882e9d31edd67d\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: Obviously, ever since the Sunday Star-Times\u2019 lawyers made it clear to my lawyer that the paper would subpoena me if evidence was not provided, there has been ongoing interaction with my lawyer, including to this day. Those conversations are, of course, privileged. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000047\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d2e009160470474397c04228e65731ce\u0022\u003EDr Don Brash\u003C/span\u003E: Why, when the Prime Minister had both the Robinson report and the Police Complaints Authority report\u2014neither of which asserted that commissioner Doone had said: \u201CThat won\u2019t be necessary\u201D\u2014did she verify for the Sunday Star-Times that he had indeed made such a statement?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000048\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002242c234f926ca4f27a6fd87c114470f6e\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: The member is quite correct that neither the Police Complaints Authority report nor then deputy commissioner Robinson\u2019s report used those words. I can only imagine that the reporter put those words to me and I would not have been in a position to confirm them, because they were not in the reports.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000049\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022425aa31fce8d47a0af24eb02b1d3d1b5\u0022\u003ERodney Hide\u003C/span\u003E: Has her lawyer briefed her on the contents of the conversations that she had with the Sunday Star-Times 5 years ago, and is it not the case that she is not really trying to remember back 5 years, but just to the last briefing that she had from her lawyer?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000050\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225a1eeb580bd64b5a9607fbdd842aa7c6\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: Those conversations took place over 5 years ago. There appear to be no tapes of them available. There are journalists\u2019 notes of some conversations but not of others.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000051\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224ae84b15e71c4c02bf145462565a8630\u0022\u003ERodney Hide\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. The Prime Minister did not address my question in any way, shape, or form. My question specifically was: has her lawyer briefed her on the contents of the conversations that she had with the Sunday Star-Times?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000052\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220144164203f24bd3a0bfe57c687b6641\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I listened carefully, and the Prime Minister did address the general point of your question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000053\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ae1d904948fa4930b075177fb9266ec7\u0022\u003ERodney Hide\u003C/span\u003E: Maybe you could tell us the answer, because I could not get it. [Interruption]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000054\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229a052e38deaf46c6906696aa04e898b1\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Would the member please stand, withdraw, and apologise?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000055\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c9676028aaa04a128691cf41d2249637\u0022\u003ERodney Hide\u003C/span\u003E: I withdraw and apologise.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000056\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bf7fd6acb2a947a2908c3c4e72680fb6\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Calling a member a liar is unparliamentary.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000057\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224f348b210af34bc3a582c5df89a1e9ca\u0022\u003EHon Ken Shirley\u003C/span\u003E: In view of the Prime Minister\u2019s statement that there appear to be some journalists\u2019 notes available, has either she or her lawyer asked the Sunday Star-Times for the recorded transcripts of the discussions that she had with the editor and journalists of the Sunday Star-Times so that she is properly equipped to answer these questions?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000058\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002252858c7e3e8a48eaa7344a8821ed705b\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: My understanding is that my lawyer does have what is available.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000059\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225bb8339cefa744c08302da8a582207a6\u0022\u003EDr Don Brash\u003C/span\u003E: Will the Prime Minister waive any entitlement to confidentiality and allow the release of the reporters\u2019 notes and any available transcripts, so that the serious question marks that now stand over her credibility can be dealt with?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000060\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fb59b29d4731435ba39287b77000363c\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: Given that further legal action is being threatened, I do not think that that would be desirable. I should also say that the Leader of the Opposition might well draw no comfort from the fact that his counterpart in Britain launches ceaseless attacks like this to no good effect, as is the case here.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000061\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022009443d368d540cdaf13fdc560805eea\u0022\u003ECataract Operations\u2014Announcements\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000062\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003E3. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022abe713639c2649c1ab847f10dda7a4a5\u0022\u003ESTEVE CHADWICK (Labour\u2014Rotorua)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Health: What announcements has she made about improvements to the number of cataract operations performed annually?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022 data-id=\u002297c7fd1bd12a4ac08be07b2f55762ab3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000063\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002297c7fd1bd12a4ac08be07b2f55762ab3\u0022\u003EHon ANNETTE KING (Minister of Health):\u003C/span\u003E Today I was delighted to announce that the Government will spend an extra $17 million over the next 3 years to provide up to 7,500 more cataract operations. Like the orthopaedic project I announced last year, the cataract initiative will dramatically improve the quality of life for thousands more older New Zealanders. When the cataract initiative is fully implemented in 2008, there will be 12,000 cataract operations publicly funded each year, compared with 8,000 now.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000064\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a027b7f6aef8434391f2295b40029f87\u0022\u003ESteve Chadwick\u003C/span\u003E: What responses has she seen to today\u2019s announcement of such a large increase in publicly funded cataract surgery?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000065\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f0cb6e9311e84aaea13ea45d534ca58f\u0022\u003EHon ANNETTE KING\u003C/span\u003E: I have seen a media release from the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists, in which the college president, Dr Allan Rosenberg from Australia, and the chair of the New Zealand branch, Dr Stephen Best, welcomed the announcements. Dr Best said that the initiative is a major step in addressing the inequitable distribution of access to cataract surgery. He says that cataract surgery is a very effective intervention in terms of improving the lives of New Zealanders. I am very delighted with their support for this project.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000066\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cfdabe42-521a-4dca-afab-3e781731a130\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223987dcc7944f4a31ba777a0d5937befc\u0022\u003EDr Paul Hutchison\u003C/span\u003E: What guarantee can she give to the 4,698 ophthalmology patients who at February 2005 have waited longer than 6 months for first specialist assessment\u2014many of whom are going blind not only from cataracts but from diabetic eye disease, glaucoma, and amblyopia in children\u2014that they will be seen promptly? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000067\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fa121f7b39124971895e558fe3f3c6d1\u0022\u003EHon ANNETTE KING\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the member for the question, because the guarantee I can give him\u2014[Interruption] \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000068\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d7d65c89558346ba87fd074b78396e52\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Let the Minister answer the question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000069\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b4b83ef2c7ae4a4281aa4184db2ba2ed\u0022\u003EHon ANNETTE KING\u003C/span\u003E: The guarantee that the Government can give is that 12,000 cataract operations will be done a year, compared with 8,000 now, which, I have to say, is more than used to be done under the previous National Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000070\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cfdabe42-521a-4dca-afab-3e781731a130\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e81ba9079324435a8a068304d18d6ef4\u0022\u003EDr Paul Hutchison\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I asked a very specific question about what guarantee she can give that 4,698 ophthalmology patients, who have waited longer than 6 months for their first specialist assessment, will be seen promptly. She did not address that question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000071\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022be5e0e4b80c643cd9aa6033d34d4f21d\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The Minister did address the question. She may not have given the answer in exactly the way the member wanted it, but she addressed the question and that is what is required under the Standing Orders.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000072\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220daaf9fb-1a1f-4d31-848a-fd13cb1a2c5a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002208be10f4a5794f9ea9ca4857a451619e\u0022\u003EBarbara Stewart\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Minister believe that the lottery approach whereby the Government selects an ailment, and provides a one-off funding boost to reduce patient numbers, is an acceptable alternative to a properly run health system in which operations are performed as and when they are needed; if so, why?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000073\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002298c73e32f6a64023b73b80a95be8acdd\u0022\u003EHon ANNETTE KING\u003C/span\u003E: Other elective procedures are run as they should be. However, there are two operations that the specialists in New Zealand, plus organisations like Grey Power, will tell the member give a quality of life above any other operations: cataract operations and major joint operations. We have not done enough of either of those operations in New Zealand. This Government was not prepared to sit on its hands and continue with that. We have taken the initiative. We are seeing the results now with the orthopaedic project, and we will see the results with the cataract project.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000074\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227e7cce8d8f3f4ba9867801f561a1b026\u0022\u003EJudy Turner\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Minister agree that it is ridiculous that people suffering from mobility and eyesight difficulties are forced to travel distances to other district health boards for cataract surgery if their own district health board is too busy, when local private providers just around the corner have spaces available; if so, will she give an assurance that the private sector capacity will be fully utilised, and if not, why not?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000075\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002290599c9a86114a61b75a6ab5948bf9b9\u0022\u003EHon ANNETTE KING\u003C/span\u003E: I am pleased to tell the member that this project involves operations in public hospitals, neighbouring public hospitals, and the private sector, as well as the mobile surgical bus, which can go into areas where people are living so that they do not have to travel, as we saw this morning when a cataract operation was carried out in Kapiti, which we were able to watch in my office. Last month I saw a cataract operation carried out in Westport, so the ability to do that operation in different ways is part of the project.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000076\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dfbe40c70c4a4ef79e30523cf0796204\u0022\u003ESteve Chadwick\u003C/span\u003E: How does today\u2019s announcement compare with the delivery of cataract surgery in New Zealand in the past?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000077\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227c29a2e8f24d452c957e8e7f0ab08891\u0022\u003EHon ANNETTE KING\u003C/span\u003E: I am aware of a number of cataract operations conducted from 1996. The highest number of cataract operations performed, without one-off funding from the waiting-times fund, was 7,000, in 1999. In the past we have performed 8,119 such operations, all from within sustainable funding. In 3 years\u2019 time, we will be performing 12,000 operations from sustainable funding. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000078\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229dc91e757bd942898bfd425167817d56\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: Just spin!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000079\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e8707e099e7648d3ac26219701211d47\u0022\u003EHon ANNETTE KING\u003C/span\u003E: Even the member who is calling out may qualify, if he needs one. He certainly would not have done so under his Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000080\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cfdabe42-521a-4dca-afab-3e781731a130\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002202dadce07cd741888f77b3e5f84f9bc8\u0022\u003EDr Paul Hutchison\u003C/span\u003E: How many cataract operations could be done with the $170,000 she is spending on sex-change operations?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000081\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226cbeee0b83084d5b9b75a9b05a0eb2b0\u0022\u003EHon ANNETTE KING\u003C/span\u003E: The sum of $170,000 is the total expenditure on gender reassignment. Interestingly enough, not one member in the National Government of the 1990s complained when it gave funds to carry out the same surgery. I wonder why it is not acceptable today, when it was all right under a National Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000082\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cfdabe42-521a-4dca-afab-3e781731a130\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a872681277db41b2be8d6375db979147\u0022\u003EDr Paul Hutchison\u003C/span\u003E: I seek leave to table a document from the Ministry of Health website, which shows that in February 2005 there were 4,698 ophthalmology patients who had waited longer than 6 months for their first specialist assessment. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000083\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bd233b0674d449298cc201914222ee9b\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? Yes, the document will not be tabled. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022f77e1360a44d4cb3a373650f8ef74661\u0022\u003EImmigration\u2014Iraqi Former Official\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000085\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E4. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022da1e4982db8c49edbe3a33b957b75a67\u0022\u003ERt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader\u2014NZ First)\u003C/span\u003E to the Prime Minister: Does she still have confidence in her Minister of Immigration, given that a former Iraqi official of Saddam Hussein\u2019s regime was allowed to enter New Zealand, yet he will not name him in spite of there being a revocation of his visitor permit?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022 data-id=\u0022084983095bcd43fdb4b315ef83a2f951\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000086\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022084983095bcd43fdb4b315ef83a2f951\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK (Prime Minister):\u003C/span\u003E Yes. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e4121052a23d4968bb769eb562b30414\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: Why, when her Minister and officials were told it was a person who had been a Minister in Saddam Hussein\u2019s regime, did they produce someone who had been a diplomat and never was a Minister\u2014in short, they went out for a wolf and brought back a rabbit? Why have we got the wrong person in this answer from the Minister of Immigration?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000088\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022165946d565f64127a5fb968dbe082a2d\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: If the member has evidence of a former Minister being present, he should come forward, because I can say that this Government would not knowingly admit, or allow to stay, such a person\u2014but we require evidence. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000089\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cad58740bf26441094725e0100bc60b1\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: Well, which part of this evidence fits the man whom she claims, alongside her Minister, to have found: a former Iraqi Minister for Agriculture and Agrarian Reform, a former delegate to the Food and Agriculture Organization and Unesco (Baghdad), who came here on a UN passport only about a month ago, and who consulted, for example, with the lawyers of one Ahmed Zaoui\u2014already costing this country $2 million\u2014McLeod and Associates? Which one of those facts fits the man whom she has found?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000090\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002254d843b655a34246b1a8cd8043c602a3\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: None. I ask the member to give us his evidence.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000091\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223b5fe67e94e54817b1028fc91695476e\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: Why would the Prime Minister keep in place a Minister who makes all sorts of claims about national security, yet cannot name, to enlist the help of New Zealanders and of Western society in general, the person he claims to have found?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000092\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022568fb5cb45824552b113129c5d45ac5b\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: There are very good reasons for not putting such names in the public arena, and I think that for at least one of those reasons the member would have some sympathy. Once the name of someone who is a refugee status claimant goes into the public arena, the fact that the name is in the public arena can actually lead to a successful claim. The member will recall that one of the problems with the Zaoui case was that Mr Zaoui\u2019s name was put into the public arena, and that then had weight in the refugee status application. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000093\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229c01fb499aa3475f9819c8eb3259b5ac\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: I ask the Prime Minister whether this is her quote, which she said at a Pacific round table on counter-terrorism: \u201CThe problem to be confronted in our region is not so much that terrorists will seek to attack the citizens or institutions of Pacific countries; it is rather that the Pacific might present a tempting target, either for an attack like the one on Bali, or as a base from which terrorist cells might undertake the planning and groundwork for an attack somewhere else.\u201D; so why is she now showing no leadership on this issue by not demanding that the man be named?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000094\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cbc69f7fb28249f7b5ce35abd3d53465\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: What I am asking is that the member provides any information he has about such a person to the authorities so that we can act on it\u2014because we will. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000095\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227bc563ccfcfd4697a518d6e22c3aa30e\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: When last week the information was given to this Government that there was such a person in New Zealand\u2014a former Saddam Hussein Cabinet Minister\u2014and that he had been in this country for a month, would that not have been enough information for the Prime Minister or any half-way competent surveillance service to be able to find this man; why is this Government so incompetent?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000096\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ff81ca83bcaf4de491c67aaead1d6a2e\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: Following the member\u2019s statements last week, extensive checks were made in respect of Iraqi passport holders. Mr Peters today has told the House that these people, this person, whatever, are UN passport holders. We would be grateful to have more information from him.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000097\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227b1eebf761d646bea79ca04ecf938e6a\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: Can I ask the Prime Minister why she has been giving assurances in this country and abroad, as has Mr Goff on anti-terrorism legislation and as has the Minister of Immigration on the lines, for example, of having an Advance Passenger Screening system, when this man, as Mr Swain has acknowledged, entered abroad, gave voluntarily information, and was still not picked up? What sort of circus is running on in this country under her leadership?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000098\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226f56d0d34ea24e25ad6a669a6f7716f9\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: I am not sure whether Mr Peters is referring to the case where Mr Swain has revoked the visa application, or the one that Mr Peters is referring to today. In respect of the one where the visa has been revoked, clearly there were problems in the immigration systems, and they will be fixed to the best of the Government\u2019s ability.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000099\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e5162c4357394227a5a3e4c6f58621b4\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Prime Minister mean to tell the country that, despite all the assurances and blandishments made since September 11, 2001, she is not aware of Amer Mahdi al-Khashali, also known as Amer Mahdi Saleh Khashaly, a former Minister for Agriculture and Agrarian Reform in the Saddam Hussein Government at the same time that hundreds of thousands of Kurds were losing their lives under a regime of genocide; does she mean to tell me she still does not know that this person is living in this country, and has been for over a month now?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000100\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002290eab1787a8c4eae8fc0b891530f4138\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: If such a person arrived on a UN passport, he would not necessarily trigger any concern. I thank the member for now putting that evidence before us, and we will be following it up.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000101\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b6c7212f86b642a0a5f0023b574f199c\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Prime Minister recall being advised at the security intelligence committee, which she chairs, of the need to take seriously the issue of terrorism in this country as one that she should focus new resources on, and to start trawling through some of the applications in the way that other countries have done; and is it not a fact that she has not done a damned thing since she was given that advice by, namely, myself?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f5d7beac5547473382fcbe77ada5ed7e\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: As the member is a member of the Intelligence and Security Committee, he will know that expenditure in this area has been among the fastest-growing areas of Government expenditure, because of this Government\u2019s determination to play a part in the international effort against terrorism. Now that Mr Peters has given details, checks will be made about this individual.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000103\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d77482ab47604b57a2dc48184e0ecfd3\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: Coming back to my original question, how can the Minister be a hard-working and conscientious Minister when he does not have the remotest idea of which Arab\u2014Osama bin Laden or anybody else\u2014may be in this country, where he might be, or what he is doing here?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000104\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002264547d7136bc48128120417ecc4a2a26\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: The member will be aware that there are individuals who go to considerable lengths to cheat immigration authorities worldwide so that they can enter countries, and I would venture to say that no system is foolproof against that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000105\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220a7a7707592d41eebe429dd6bd14b321\u0022\u003EStephen Franks\u003C/span\u003E: Can the Prime Minister explain whether she will be checking the competence of her Minister of Immigration, as he has apparently ordered another man \u201Coutski\u201D on the next plane, with no further inquiry, after that man came here openly and, apparently, lawfully\u2014his offence apparently being that he represented his country while the wrong thug was in charge\u2014yet the Government cannot get rid of Ahmed Zaoui, a proven associate of terrorists, although it started trying 2 years ago?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000106\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222bc9be3f31c34dd1946384c9304d3a0b\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: I can say that information was received about the gentleman whose visitor visa Mr Swain has seen to it was revoked that would mean that he should not have been given rollovers of his visitor visa. I can also confirm, because I am not talking about a source within the SIS, that that information came from another source, and was incriminating. The slip in the system was that it was not linked with the file at an earlier stage. In respect of the comparison the member is trying to draw with the Zaoui case, I can say that if the man whose visitor visa has now been revoked decides to put in refugee status claim applications, no doubt the legal industry will be very busy trying to draw the case out, as it has done with Mr Zaoui.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000107\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022372c6704729b492eb6dfdb80f287cfb7\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Speaker\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000108\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b4ff1b88f0684c129c06f8b1d0bdc2d2\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The member has had his supplementary questions\u2014in fact, he has had one more.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000109\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226b6d984c47b14c11804ad6b4f6d72b1a\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: Given the fact I have waited a week for some disclosure on this matter\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000110\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002228e54ee96f2544d7a66950faf1a1827e\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Is the member seeking leave?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000111\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022132a793ce8254093949c55c13779b346\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014hang on; I want members to know why I am seeking leave\u2014and because I and the media have been given the name of the wrong person, I seek leave to ask one more supplementary question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000112\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f20dad226f6948f4919eef58bd06a9c2\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought to ask a question. Is there any objection? There is no objection. The member may ask the question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000113\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022755ed840c3354c639fe5125597625a86\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: Is it true, in regard to the Prime Minister\u2019s \u201Chard-working and conscientious\u201D Minister of Immigration, that we have 20,000 overstayers in New Zealand today, and that we have somewhere in New Zealand 400 people who came here with false, missing, or misleading travel documentation and whose whereabouts the Minister does not know?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000114\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002253dcb05fb4e345c2af54811aa434c5f8\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: Of course there are overstayers in New Zealand\u2014there were when the gentleman was Deputy Prime Minister\u2014and every effort is made to get rid of them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000115\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c2e8221cff914928901a028d8ed079df\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. There was a simple request as to whether it is true that we have 400 people missing in New Zealand who came here with false, missing, or misleading travel documentation and of whose whereabouts the Minister is not aware. Is that true, or not?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000116\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e59c93fc2259492b970aea69045adb3e\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The Prime Minister addressed that question by saying, as I recall, that efforts were made to track down overstayers, as there always have been. That addressed the question. It may not be the answer the member wanted, but it did address the question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000117\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002233a5711d333649d19d00abce94bdcbae\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000118\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228dc0d4dc505e4ab88b5e4ded59b47091\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I am sorry but I have ruled on that point. Is this a different point of order?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000119\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c41a632c9b374e29a4de1f537ab94f9a\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: You might have, but, with respect, an overstayer may be someone who has been here with legal documentation, which has expired. I am talking about someone who is here illegally from day one. There are 400 of them, as the Minister has admitted in the past. I want to know whether the Prime Minister still believes that is true.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000120\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cdd1f0f384b546b1a47b2176ad6c50a5\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: As the member knows, every year numbers of people come to New Zealand who have tried to put their passports down the toilet in the plane, or to do a variety of other things. Actually, the trend is down, and I think it would be rather down on what it was in the 1990s. Also, I heard Mr Peters in one of his asides during an earlier question assert that half Saddam Hussein\u2019s cabinet was here. I have no evidence of that, but if he would like to provide it, we are happy to look at it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000121\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e703bc8a82a349779de90555c3ffaac3\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. When in my prior questions did I make that statement?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000122\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002202c8315e1c224025bee242d1ecfa14f4\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I have no recollection of that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000123\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226d138358612f4ed2a71da4557994fe3c\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: The Prime Minister is required to be terse and to the point. That is what the Standing Orders say.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000124\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022368f0f549d354cf59f606b5fc3ce83dc\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: It is a rhetorical question. The member knows that. Will he please be seated.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000125\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224f435b8edc324a5aad7ced636509f0bd\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I will have my point of order made without interruption from you. If you do not mind, Madam Chair\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000126\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d49f9d66e1384c0b8ddea18ddc87f2eb\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: You may make your point of order. Please make it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000127\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002225c7fa50afb749388c829c9dc88dbedb\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: Can I make my point of order without your constant interruptions?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000128\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022588baa6b9726414c9616f49b38afdbc6\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I am inviting you to make it, so please do that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000129\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e81600ab9bfa475c8d808b7440679bcc\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: Please can I make it without your interrupting me every 5 seconds?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000130\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002227024b20a653455895f916eb63212cb6\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, by all means.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000131\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b86cd87b16e540d9a649bb2f967df88d\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: Well, thank you for the courtesy, overdue as it may be.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000132\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022090e1bc34c444bf9a4ad51f350b8c542\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I ask the member to withdraw that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000133\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d837d075e3034904a51656accaa37e62\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: I withdraw and apologise. Can I now have my point of order heard in silence? Madam Chair, where in that statement from the Prime Minister was there any evidence that it was a repetition of something I had said? If it was not, then why did you not check her as you would any other person in this House who was detouring from the requirements of the Standing Orders?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000134\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022629ec0fdb0d043deb65ef7571ad4b685\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: Speaking to the point of order, I want to say I made it quite clear that Mr Peters had made the comment in an aside. It was made as he was sitting down after one of his constant interventions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000135\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002239ce5ca9ea1344c78e2e831d63d0dea6\u0022\u003EHon Tony Ryall\u003C/span\u003E: Has the Immigration Service check of appropriate files revealed any other Iraqi immigrants of interest\u2014in particular, any ranking officials who may, in fact, have gained refugee status in New Zealand?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000136\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022907d55367eff4561b7920fb9b72578d1\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: The check has been of those who have had applications in the system over the past year or so, which was relevant to the circumstances raised by Mr Peters. I do not know of anything else that has come to light in the course of that check. I do not have any advice on whether others have slipped through the net in past years.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000137\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ccbe2740a3bc46f4854b5195eddb2dca\u0022\u003ERodney Hide\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I do so in order to be helpful and to clarify matters. Mr Peters has named an alleged Minister of the Iraqi Government. He said his name, but it might save some confusion if he were to take leave and spell it out.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000138\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002246383cb89806401f94113933675f5061\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I am sorry, but that is not a point of order. To assist the member, I am sure the correct spelling will be in the record, when, in fact, there is the opportunity to look at the Hansard.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000139\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022783b5b30ba6843409b77bf8359dcd373\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: I seek leave to spell out the name so that the officials might do something in the next few days to find this man.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000140\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022282535f957d44c77a6b598e2bb9fdb82\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought to spell out the name. Is there any objection? Yes, there is, so the name will not be spelt out.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225d48ac6ed71a46ae8ff4584ab23512cf\u0022\u003ERodney Hide\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. My concern is this: if the name goes out misspelt, it could be that the wrong person is named. I think it is fair, if a person is to be named, that we want it to be accurate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000142\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222b530fc80c844ff9982f5bba64e40c74\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Leave was sought. Would the member please sit down.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000143\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222db85be5d0c745afb17294eaa05ebdca\u0022\u003ERodney Hide\u003C/span\u003E: I want to explain it. I think that if the member puts the leave again he might get accepted, because the danger is that if the name is misspelt or misheard, we could have the wrong person being named.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000144\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002204ee8afbb7d5432da6f7302428193b4b\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Leave was sought by the member to spell the name. We will try it again for the final time. Leave is sought to spell the name. Is there any objection?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000145\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002241d7c2e54d8d43598592860288d747c5\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: No, no. I seek leave to table a document that has on it the name of this former Minister of Saddam\u2019s regime.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000146\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003EDocument, by leave, laid on the Table of the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000147\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a5736b7ae73d4119a4cc0a7404837714\u0022\u003EPublic Service\u2014Staff Numbers\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000148\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229df41e27-6082-4bc7-9fda-bab499cb9246\u0022\u003E5. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d77902a7c06e4460a47508b473f8a9c9\u0022\u003EHELEN DUNCAN (Labour)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of State Services: What reports, if any, has he received on changes to the number of staff employed in the public service?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u0022cf9e5b25e2914f39853e6dcfcb6f54dc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000149\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022cf9e5b25e2914f39853e6dcfcb6f54dc\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Minister of State Services):\u003C/span\u003E I have seen a report from Dr Brash stating that without policy analysts and information one cannot make good decisions. I have seen another report, from John Key, stating that the Government employs too many policy analysts. If, when in Opposition, they cannot come up with a policy on how to make policy, it is no wonder that no one trusts them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000150\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229df41e27-6082-4bc7-9fda-bab499cb9246\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224016cedad4a7479ca04cdcda7ea643e7\u0022\u003EHelen Duncan\u003C/span\u003E: Can the Minister advise the House how many Government employees would need to be sacked in order to reprioritise $200 million in spending?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000151\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d9f542eec1894a3cad3629091dcdf196\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: There are a number of ways of looking at it. If one took lower-paid public servants, such as social workers, Work and Income case workers, call centre operators, and customs officers, then 5,000 people would be sacked to make Don Brash\u2019s $200 million in reprioritisation. But, of course, if it were higher-paid people, such as teachers or nurses, one would have to sack only 3,500 Government employees. Don Brash said he would cut $200 million. He should tell us which ones he would sack.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000152\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225eacbbc3e8254153b4861e5fcac3495d\u0022\u003EJohn Key\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Minister realise that the hiring binge being undertaken by the State sector is adding to the skill shortage and wage inflation being felt by the private sector, and is this not one of the reasons that Dr Alan Bollard rated today, when he indicated that interest rates will rise in June for the eighth time this year; or does this Minister not care about borrowing rates that New Zealanders are paying?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000153\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022935de8cb2e3143438b4972295be0efc8\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: Dr Bollard, unlike his predecessor, does not make statements like that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000154\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228840cd80b4bc472e9ad1bd63e6b1d9a6\u0022\u003EJohn Key\u003C/span\u003E: I seek leave to table Dr Alan Bollard\u2019s statement, in which he made that comment today\u2014unusual as it is\u2014between monetary policy statements.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000155\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003EDocument not tabled.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000156\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022fa7504a03b4a4bb0ba714a1292cc58bf\u0022\u003EPolice\u2014Former Commissioner\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000157\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E6. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226af08228a53346908a5d34ee54d97e8d\u0022\u003ERODNEY HIDE (Leader\u2014ACT)\u003C/span\u003E to the Prime Minister: In light of the statement by Fairfax chief operating officer and editor-in-chief that \u201Cthe full story is not being told at this time and is not being represented accurately in some public statements and reports.\u201D, does she stand by her claim that she \u201Cwould have drawn their attention to the fact that the evidence was contested.\u201D?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022 data-id=\u0022de61fc11ea454f638f3720e765c09a95\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000158\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022de61fc11ea454f638f3720e765c09a95\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK (Prime Minister):\u003C/span\u003E Yes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000159\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002247103c051d9f4a4391c9dbbd5118aee3\u0022\u003ERodney Hide\u003C/span\u003E: Does she deny to the House that she assured the Sunday Star-Times reporter and editor that they were accurate in what they were claiming, after they had published it on 16 January 2000, and after Peter Doone had told them they had it wrong and was threatening suit?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000160\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022de9e648b83a04da2a0e85fe0164c1b39\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: I stand by my claim that I would have said that the evidence was contested. What I had in front of me were official reports that suggested that it was. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000161\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229b37d7c534134c349316ee17ff0c793e\u0022\u003ERodney Hide\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. My actual question was: \u201CDoes she deny \u2026\u201D, and that question was not answered. It is a yes or no question. She could answer yes to the primary question; what about to the supplementary question?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000162\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228cae879beae24e42a1f2fbab49eb7183\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: As the member is aware, the Minister has to address the question, not answer it to the satisfaction of the member. That is the Standing Order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000163\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229b1c5f453f774b1493e9d8111d57ca46\u0022\u003EDr Don Brash\u003C/span\u003E: Can the Prime Minister confirm that she required the resignation of the previous Minister of Immigration, Lianne Dalziel, for lying to the media, and can she advise the House why she is applying a lesser standard to herself when she has clearly provided information to the Sunday Star-Times that she must have known, on the basis of the Police Complaints Authority report and the Robinson report, to be untrue?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000164\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022287dd53476cf48448c383464f7844bab\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: I do not believe the assertions in the member\u2019s questions to be true. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000165\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a7e67ce014aa492eaaa2c3301a8ce27f\u0022\u003EPublic Works Act\u2014Land Acquisition\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000166\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c2dfe169-d946-4f87-8d43-0bcdb7d8bebc\u0022\u003E7. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022519e3465db8849b5a84c877743358b68\u0022\u003ETARIANA TURIA (Leader\u2014M\u0101ori Party)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister for Land Information: What processes are taken into account to recognise the status, use, or significance of land acquired under the Public Works Act 1981?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022 data-id=\u002284e5d1984e8140e5a98677b120a891ab\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000167\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002284e5d1984e8140e5a98677b120a891ab\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON (Minister for Land Information):\u003C/span\u003E The due process of law is used under the Public Works Act of 1981, and, in the case of M\u0101ori land, some additional requirements apply under Te Ture Whenua Maori Act of 1993.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000168\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c2dfe169-d946-4f87-8d43-0bcdb7d8bebc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223a27a900a317415387a490d8f83e23a7\u0022\u003ETariana Turia\u003C/span\u003E: Is it appropriate for Transit New Zealand to be threatening and humiliating a humble family over a period of 6 or more years in seeking it to dispose of a family homestead on M\u0101ori freehold land, for the purpose of widening State Highway 2 in Tauranga?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227200dc97df5640c9a2a3df40602b56c1\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON\u003C/span\u003E: Threatening and humiliating behaviour is not tolerable, and the member would be welcome to raise the issue with me. Indeed, she could have raised it in the primary question\u2014I would have had a decent answer for her.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000170\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222d1f6ccabae24c70a037cfd5aca6c610\u0022\u003EMetiria Turei\u003C/span\u003E: Is the Minister concerned that the Public Works Act has been used by Transit New Zealand and its predecessors to acquire thousands of hectares of land against the owners\u2019 will, and to hold it for decades, and does the Government have any plans to limit the time for which Transit can hold land that has been compulsorily acquired but not used?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000171\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e111205274564e8ca0cb2895334e0541\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON\u003C/span\u003E: The answer to the first part of the question is, no, I do not have any concerns; that is why we have a Public Works Act. But I do think that an issue raises its head from time to time when land is held, for many decades in some cases, and not put to use. I think there does need to be a better process for returning that land to the original owner.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000172\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c2dfe169-d946-4f87-8d43-0bcdb7d8bebc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226583bb9bf43d407b89298980b0a8afa6\u0022\u003ETariana Turia\u003C/span\u003E: How would the Minister address the statement that the wh\u0101nau must be no better or worse off, and take into account that this is the only family land that this family has left\u2014or is this just another land confiscation that tangata whenua must accept from this Government?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000173\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228e01b905ce4144bbb4fef7943fab098e\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON\u003C/span\u003E: I do not have any idea what sort of land the member refers to, because she has given me no notice of it. If it is fee simple land, then it will be treated through the Public Works Act. If it is multiple-owned land, then it will also require a process laid out in Te Ture Whenua Maori Act of 1993, the decision under which is, I believe, appealable to the M\u0101ori Land Court.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000174\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00227b09c6853209483e9c5f1c14f7f34d41\u0022\u003EPolice\u2014Former Commissioner\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000175\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003E8. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224630a77ae18a4ff9838d06f3d4bab408\u0022\u003EDr DON BRASH (Leader of the Opposition)\u003C/span\u003E to the Prime Minister: Was she advised by the Attorney-General that a letter had been sent from the Attorney-General to then Police Commissioner Peter Doone\u2019s lawyer on 12 January 2000; if so, what was the purpose of that letter?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022 data-id=\u0022218594d663ad42f7a211c95a1015f1e3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000176\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022218594d663ad42f7a211c95a1015f1e3\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK (Prime Minister):\u003C/span\u003E Yes, the letter set out the ministerial concerns about the Government\u2019s ability to retain confidence in Mr Doone as Commissioner of Police, and offered Mr Doone an opportunity to respond.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000177\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228b93b04c54644501bd2fa89afe986868\u0022\u003EDr Don Brash\u003C/span\u003E: Does she not accept that her obligation, following the Attorney-General\u2019s letter, was to preside over a proper process to determine whether the Government had confidence in the highest-serving officer of the New Zealand Police; if so, why did she sully and undermine that process by leaking material about Mr Doone to a national newspaper, especially when the assertions she leaked were wrong?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000178\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002251820ec8e8b84da6b997982a1c3e2661\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: There was a proper process, and the Government\u2019s course of action was in no way impacted on by any media reporting, which had, of course, been ongoing since early December.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000179\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002249bdc6fc0c2e496f8d70cca77bcaf2eb\u0022\u003EDr Don Brash\u003C/span\u003E: Does she consider her behaviour in providing incorrect information to a national newspaper, right in the middle of a ministerial consideration of Mr Doone\u2019s future as police commissioner, to have been appropriate or ethical, and was not her anonymous verification designed to publicly kneecap Mr Doone?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000180\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002221da6dfc38914dac81ab6a5ec84c7fd7\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: I do not believe that incorrect information was provided.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000181\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ae6a99ede5bc4e94864732c70d6dcd72\u0022\u003EDr Don Brash\u003C/span\u003E: Can the Prime Minister confirm that the Attorney-General\u2019s letter outlined that Ministers were considering public perceptions of Police Commissioner Doone\u2019s actions, and can she tell the House precisely what she expected to achieve from her encouragement of the Sunday Star-Times story about Mr Doone, if it was not to actually shape public perceptions in relation to Mr Doone?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000182\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224eb66d476d034ee5a8e645320070eaba\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: The issue of perception was specifically addressed in the report of the Police Complaints Authority. It was that on which the Attorney-General would have based her letter.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000183\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a20bbbe2e7d34f47a7701810002bcf57\u0022\u003EDr Don Brash\u003C/span\u003E: I seek the leave of the House to table a copy of the Attorney-General\u2019s letter of 12 January 2000, in which the point is made clearly that one of the questions that was being addressed was public perceptions of the commissioner.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000184\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003EDocument, by leave, laid on the Table of the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000185\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00220486b5e97ccd476ea822b37974b81d43\u0022\u003EDefence\u2014Budget\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000186\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223a0e52c8-5bb1-4325-9870-21f4e3eb3702\u0022\u003E9. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222f5b2e9a3e5f41a3ba23ed380604bed8\u0022\u003EMARTIN GALLAGHER (Labour\u2014Hamilton West)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Defence: What recent decisions has the Government made on defence spending?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002272e48ab0-e7ae-427f-bedc-793b7a91adba\u0022 data-id=\u002279618a8e9b504a56add6daf84a9493a0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000187\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002272e48ab0-e7ae-427f-bedc-793b7a91adba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002279618a8e9b504a56add6daf84a9493a0\u0022\u003EHon MARK BURTON (Minister of Defence):\u003C/span\u003E Yesterday I announced details of the Defence Sustainability Initiative, totalling $4.6 billion over 10 years. It is the fourth stage of a systematic approach by this Government to restore the capability of our Defence Force, after it was shamelessly run down throughout the 1990s. This major initiative will enable defence to move forward, secure in the knowledge that it has the long-term funding required to meet the country\u2019s defence and security needs.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000188\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223a0e52c8-5bb1-4325-9870-21f4e3eb3702\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b861100179a148ad9cfeb125e2ccc174\u0022\u003EMartin Gallagher\u003C/span\u003E: Has he seen any other reports on defence spending?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000189\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002272e48ab0-e7ae-427f-bedc-793b7a91adba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e3b66596715e45debcc2e646ab0956f8\u0022\u003EHon MARK BURTON\u003C/span\u003E: Many. Among them I have seen a number of reports from Dr Brash. In one he is reported as saying that the defence budget should be increased by 10, 15, or 20 percent, or by $100 million or $200 million. In another report he admitted that he had no defence policy at the moment, but said that he would reorganise the money anyway. That funding reprioritisation, as he called it, would presumably come at the expense of health or education. Today that man said that the Government\u2019s announcement of a 44 percent increase may not be enough. Frankly, the only conclusion New Zealanders can reach is that Dr Brash and National have no policy\u2014and on that performance, they will not need any.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000190\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002279222cb395734fd68ee04200a9c2f327\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. As entertaining as the Minister may be for the House, I would ask you to consider some of the comments he made towards the end of his answer. If it is to stand that he can make highly political comments like that, then we would expect a degree of disorder in the House to follow and indeed questioners to start making highly political comments in their questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000191\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222bea8f41436045f6a708b949893cb783\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The Minister should confine himself to his own responsibilities. He went a little off track towards the end.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000192\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219386ba0-5a6e-485e-abc0-5a3128b4e1f6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229d26a79d6c4a4f85b758ac89494c7708\u0022\u003EHon Ken Shirley\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. We have a specific Speaker\u2019s ruling 145/5, which is an exact example of what we have just seen from the Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b45494b24400498ab2bbe1b313eb83c6\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the member. As I ruled, the Minister did, in answering the question, go outside his responsibilities, so he was out of order. I thank the member for his assistance.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000194\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002272e48ab0-e7ae-427f-bedc-793b7a91adba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fd1b21d6fe354bd3aa6d8247e33ee24f\u0022\u003EHon MARK BURTON\u003C/span\u003E: I withdraw and apologise for any deviation from the Standing Orders.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000195\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d9e8d2546bd44a6abd8498c6e9221db3\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the Minister for that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000196\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222a7f4dbc4df147ad84b4bc0f8ff13709\u0022\u003EKeith Locke\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Minister agree that he could find the money for necessary Defence Force improvements without increasing the overall level of the defence budget if he phased out the naval combat force, the frigates that currently chew up $538 million or over 30 percent of the current defence budget, and that that course would be particularly useful as we have much better boats, the multi-role vessel and new patrol boats, coming on stream?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000197\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002272e48ab0-e7ae-427f-bedc-793b7a91adba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002204d0edafc4da4952a6aba57adb7db712\u0022\u003EHon MARK BURTON\u003C/span\u003E: I have not done the maths on that, because it is not the Government\u2019s policy so to do. It was the previous National Government that made the decision not to have the third frigate. However, I apologise. It is this Government\u2019s policy to have a well-structured, balanced Defence Force. That is what we are building.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000198\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002233f0970ea19e4e128b12d7cce612bd56\u0022\u003EHon Peter Dunne\u003C/span\u003E: What estimate does the Minister have, in the light of yesterday\u2019s announcement, about the likely increase in recruitment numbers for each of the armed services and also of any implications for the growth of the Territorial Force?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000199\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002272e48ab0-e7ae-427f-bedc-793b7a91adba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229b8f5b159fba479384603ccaf68dbb04\u0022\u003EHon MARK BURTON\u003C/span\u003E: The overall anticipated growth is in the order of 2,000 personnel or thereabouts over the next 10 years. We anticipate a firming of the Territorial Force numbers, and then steady growth in the future.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000200\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a792c8c653c449f883ccb387bcac5607\u0022\u003EFamilies Commission\u2014Former Chief Executive\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000201\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E10. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223d6b59336a9d42feafa8dbfef1f4018f\u0022\u003EJUDITH COLLINS (National\u2014Clevedon)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: How much money was paid to Claire Austin on her departure from the position of chief executive at the Families Commission?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022 data-id=\u0022a86cf9ef3af14bbcbd8fb5425d9ce2b3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000202\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a86cf9ef3af14bbcbd8fb5425d9ce2b3\u0022\u003EHon STEVE MAHAREY (Minister for Social Development and Employment):\u003C/span\u003E The agreement between the Families Commission and the former chief executive includes a provision that the details of the settlement are confidential. I have conveyed to the Chief Families Commissioner that this settlement, and the process that preceded it, do not appear to be consistent with the clear expectations of the Government or with the guidelines that the State Services Commission and the Audit Office have developed in relation to the departure of a State sector staff member. A process is in place to work through with the chief commissioner the consequences of his decision.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000203\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002290aeec6e605d4d478091a3998a3092f1\u0022\u003EJudith Collins\u003C/span\u003E: Does he agree with John Tamihere\u2019s response to a question over whether New Zealand taxpayers have a right to know what Claire Austin was paid and why she left, when he said: \u201COh, I think so. I think any payment out of the public purse should be made available.\u201D; if not, why has the Minister changed his mind in terms of the responsibility for golden handshakes, since he got into Government?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000204\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022394eddb86fb2453e8d6abaaa17f815bb\u0022\u003EHon STEVE MAHAREY\u003C/span\u003E: I have not changed my mind. I agree in general that \u201Cany payment out of the public purse should be made available.\u201D In the case of the Families Commission the fact of the matter is that, whatever our view, the confidential agreement exists now. However, as I have said, there is a process in place to work through with the Chief Families Commissioner the consequences of that decision. I point out that under section 152(1)(d) of the Crown Entities Act, put in place by this Government, confidential payments are something we are disapproving of.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000205\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002283052c3b2aff4b62bf18e471f7f594ea\u0022\u003EHeather Roy\u003C/span\u003E: Has the Minister asked for an explanation from the commissioner, given that the current Prime Minister, when in Opposition, promised that Labour would stop golden handshakes, saying: \u201CI\u2019ve had a gutsful. I don\u2019t intend, if I\u2019m Prime Minister, to have to sit there and suffer one humiliation after another because of a culture of extravagance which has been allowed to grow in the public sector. Whatever is in there and hidden, we want out.\u201D?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000206\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224375ffb921524d7c9d1c8ceb4f6cd536\u0022\u003EHon STEVE MAHAREY\u003C/span\u003E: The Prime Minister was absolutely right. Yes, I have discussed this with the Chief Families Commissioner, and yes, he understands exactly the Government\u2019s position. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000207\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223c9d8d3c2dce441d99acc6a23725a3ef\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Can the Minister confirm that under the Crown Entities Act, which he referred to previously, when the annual report is tabled, it will be clear what the amount is?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000208\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002277b652bd6404474290ae308bbaf2ef80\u0022\u003EHon STEVE MAHAREY\u003C/span\u003E: That is the case.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000209\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002287c9a36c96274690a68f003282d802c7\u0022\u003EHon Peter Dunne\u003C/span\u003E: Was the Minister in receipt of any reports or advice before this incident, or has he been in receipt of any since, of other parties in this House with strong views against the Families Commission that are simply using this incident as a further opportunity to bag that necessary body?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000210\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dd6a827c038c41da95b9bcc333dfada7\u0022\u003EHon STEVE MAHAREY\u003C/span\u003E: I have seen reports that the National Party has an aversion to any independent advocacy on behalf of New Zealand families. After what it did to them in the 1990s, it is no wonder it does not want that kind of advocacy. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000211\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226f6e1ae1-8aa5-4f71-8e73-30bb378026c4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002266e62d6fae5f45b2aafec5ee30d24416\u0022\u003EGeorgina Beyer\u003C/span\u003E: What initiatives has this Government put in place that are in keeping with the mission of the Families Commission, which is to further the interests of New Zealand families?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000212\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002278c13ee9d660486b8abc5083c0e7ee6b\u0022\u003EHon STEVE MAHAREY\u003C/span\u003E: The answer is heaps. I will give just a few examples: Working for Families, which put $1.1 billion into the pockets of 61 percent of New Zealand families; Family Start, which has been expanded each Budget; paid parental leave, which was introduced under this Government; the Families Commission itself, which has been established to advocate for the interests of families; the Well Child programme within the Ministry of Health; Child, Youth and Family Services\u2019 funding increase of over 50 percent since Labour became the Government; and we have committed ourselves to 20 hours per week of free early childhood education. I could go on, but I know that members want me to stop. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000213\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ce2022617d7448789cc3ed8fbff9e6ec\u0022\u003EJudith Collins\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Minister stand by Helen Clark\u2019s statements when in Opposition that a Labour Government would \u201Cabandon the culture of golden handshakes,\u201D, and that: \u201Cwe are making commitments on which we will deliver. We are accountable to you.\u201D; if he does, will Dr Prasad lose his job over this issue?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000214\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f1c939896b0449f2a4afa6f780186588\u0022\u003EHon STEVE MAHAREY\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, we do stand by the statements made by the former leader of the Labour Opposition, now Prime Minister\u2014absolutely. That is why there has been a change in legislation; that is why the Auditor-General has issued his statements; that is why the State Services Commissioner has made clear to State servants what they must do; and that is why we are working through this issue with the Chief Families Commissioner. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000215\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c01fce6017dc4a048ded0e1a69c75fe5\u0022\u003EJudy Turner\u003C/span\u003E: Can the Minister give this House an assurance that the departure of the chief executive of the Families Commission will not disrupt the work programme of the commission?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000216\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022968c784f6d0c462fbc3ad25222daf6f1\u0022\u003EHon STEVE MAHAREY\u003C/span\u003E: I have received an assurance from the commission that this will not disturb its work. The commission is well advanced on its key research programme, the first aspect of which will be delivered by the end of June. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000217\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226c024991d7b14a4b89566fa605f04617\u0022\u003EHeather Roy\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. In light of the point of order I made earlier\u2014and this one is relevant to this question, which is why I am raising it now\u2014I think this is a very serious matter. I lodged a written question to the Minister for Social Development and Employment, and the answer was due yesterday but I have received none. In fact, it was the very same question that the National member Judith Collins asked in her primary question. As I said, the answer to the written question is overdue. I just refer to Speaker\u2019s ruling 145/3. The second sentence in that ruling is, I think, pertinent: \u201CIf the Speaker feels that a Minister is trifling with the House, the Chair can permit a further question or questions to be asked.\u201D I believe that the Minister was trifling with the member who asked the primary question. I believe that he is trifling with me in not answering the four questions that I asked on this matter of the chief executive of the Families Commission. I ask the Chair to consider now granting me an extra supplementary question\u2014one of which I have already asked the Minister, but he has not responded to it\u2014above and beyond the number of supplementary questions that ACT is entitled to today. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000218\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227690a00644c54495896d78590422b8c4\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: So the member is seeking leave to ask an extra supplementary question?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000219\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002299c4b1cb96bd4bbca74f0affe86fd116\u0022\u003EHeather Roy\u003C/span\u003E: No, I am not seeking leave. I am asking you as Speaker to make a ruling to give me an extra question, as Speakers\u2019 Rulings make provision for. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000220\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ad4eb27350b948888d2322fd867cc461\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: My understanding is that the answer was due yesterday. Is that right?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000221\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ce610cc67e7c4092b756b6199fc3f3e0\u0022\u003EHeather Roy\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, that is correct.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000222\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002291ff1c9ceaa94e378cfbed8b477d0cb0\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I think the Minister should take note to respond to that question immediately. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000223\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022132dea2d0e4247bb832e4b28d2be3cae\u0022\u003EHon STEVE MAHAREY\u003C/span\u003E: The member will have her answer by the end of the day. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000224\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002267e2f08f919c4d748288f659c4d156b8\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. The assurance is given, so there is no supplementary question. The member will get the answer to her question today. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000225\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002294d41de6a7534fb5bd7b83220aeed896\u0022\u003ENeonatal Unit, Wellington Hospital\u2014Staphylococcus Aureus\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000226\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003E11. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cfaf863417f849ff9bf135ec01fb139b\u0022\u003ESUE KEDGLEY (Green)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Health: How long after the detection of the new, particularly aggressive, gentamicin-resistant strain of the Staphylococcus aureus superbug in the neonatal ward of Wellington Hospital was she advised of the outbreak?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022 data-id=\u002273230d910bc94baba1e9ae154cb62972\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000227\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002273230d910bc94baba1e9ae154cb62972\u0022\u003EHon ANNETTE KING (Minister of Health):\u003C/span\u003E I was informed last Thursday by Capital and Coast District Health Board\u2014after it had spoken with the parents of the babies of the situation in the neonatal intensive care unit, and the infection control action plan was already in place to eradicate the gentamicin-resistant strain of Staphylococcus aureus.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000228\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a600b60446b443529d5fd1a6d9153cba\u0022\u003ESue Kedgley\u003C/span\u003E: Has the Minister sought an explanation as to why Wellington Hospital failed to inform parents with babies at the neonatal unit about the existence of the aggressive superbug, or even to inform parents such as Maree Hood that their baby had died from an infection caused by the superbug; does she agree that the failure to do so was both deplorable and unethical?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000229\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002261f85b33fa5340b0a0b2405bdd13c5d6\u0022\u003EHon ANNETTE KING\u003C/span\u003E: I received a report from Capital and Coast District Health Board within a day of asking for it. To add to that, in terms of communication with the parents, all parents were contacted. They were given the appropriate information, and I understand that the families of the babies affected feel that they were fully informed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000230\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a69ceb330c6049fbafc70bc769de737b\u0022\u003ESue Kedgley\u003C/span\u003E: Given the aggressive nature of the deadly superbug, which is said to defy normal infection control procedures and has infected more than 37 people, why did the Ministry of Health keep the outbreak under wraps for more than 6 months and inform the Minister only last week; and would she not have expected to be alerted much, much earlier about such an aggressive outbreak, as would all the parents in the unit during that time, other hospitals, community laboratories, and other neonatal units?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000231\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e8e9470efd004abca628b3a5d472e93b\u0022\u003EHon ANNETTE KING\u003C/span\u003E: The member is incorrect. It was not the Ministry of Health that informed me, it was Capital and Coast District Health Board. The board informed me through its clinicians that managing and handling outbreaks of infections in neonatal units is part of its daily routine and that it undertakes the highest level of infection control, which is up there with the best international practice.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000232\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d745a76e0fd24f32a21edac50581d6a3\u0022\u003ESue Kedgley\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. My question asked why the outbreak was kept under wraps for 6 months, and whether the Minister would not have expected to be informed earlier. I would appreciate it if the Minister would answer the question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000233\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022853e0aba2ed949cbb93f8ec42c9c11ec\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Minister wish to address the question?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000234\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022969c95955d9245ac8d2042ed99e28bec\u0022\u003EHon ANNETTE KING\u003C/span\u003E: If the member looks at her question, she will see that she asked me why the Ministry of Health kept it under wraps. I said that I was advised by Capital and Coast District Health Board. I then went on to say that the hospital undertook normal practice. There are often outbreaks of such bugs in neonatal units around the world, and New Zealand is no exception. It was handled as part of the hospital\u2019s usual routine. When there is a case, it does not constitute an outbreak. The member is incorrect. When the bug was first found, the unit immediately changed its infectious control techniques. It carried on testing, changed its infectious control techniques, and has managed this infection as it would be expected to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000235\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002233cea06ad5e94501a8e7acc1f8221df9\u0022\u003ESue Kedgley\u003C/span\u003E: Is the Minister saying that she is quite satisfied that she was not informed until last week by Capital and Coast District Health Board\u2014or for that matter by the Ministry of Health, which one would have expected to be fully informed of this outbreak\u2014of an outbreak of this sort of seriousness?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000236\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022faf6e320e8b444cc8f6b33dacd522569\u0022\u003EHon ANNETTE KING\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, I am, for the reason that I have already given in two answers and for the reasons that were given by microbiologists and by other paediatricians around New Zealand last week when they said that this is very much their daily job in terms of infection control. It is not something that they tell the Minister of Health about every time there is an outbreak of any bug within a neonatal unit\u2014they get on and manage it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000237\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225589575da2a84108ac41def2828ef9d9\u0022\u003ESue Kedgley\u003C/span\u003E: Why do we not have enough neonatal beds in New Zealand so that a unit can be closed down when there is an outbreak of such an aggressive and highly resistant superbug, as happens with serious outbreaks of methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus in adult wards, and when will the Minister respond to the national review of neonatal units that found last year that crowded and stretched neonatal units are endangering babies?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000238\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002268dfe02c59eb4fa684c82d51b8380d19\u0022\u003EHon ANNETTE KING\u003C/span\u003E: At any time of any day we know exactly how many neonatal facilities we have in New Zealand. Yesterday we had seven spare beds. There was no reason to close the unit down completely, because when proper infectious control mechanisms of international standard are used, units do not need to be closed down. Situations can be managed through a system of coding\u2014red, orange, and green. Capital and Coast District Health Board has handled this situation with that method. I have the latest figures on the cases. One can see the improvement that has occurred through the use of that sort of method.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000239\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fcec3a63a6eb4341abba8781dd8b26e6\u0022\u003ESue Kedgley\u003C/span\u003E: Can the Minister confirm that an expert panel report dealing with superbugs recommended more than 6 years ago that the Government set up a comprehensive national surveillance and monitoring system of antibiotic resistance in humans and animals to assess how prevalent antibiotic resistance is and to enable rapid response to outbreaks such as this; and why, 6 years later, has her Government still not acted on this recommendation?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000240\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002275120ad08d824d26bed193ee58e8e2f7\u0022\u003EHon ANNETTE KING\u003C/span\u003E: I think the first thing I need to do is correct the member. She calls this a superbug. There is no such classification of bacteria. Secondly, this bacterium is not resistant to the antibiotics used to treat the infection that caused it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000241\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a6ec5cce3881463e8f25247f7a92f299\u0022\u003ESue Kedgley\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I asked a very specific question about whether an expert panel had recommended setting up a surveillance system, and why nothing had been done about that. The Minister has not responded and I would appreciate an answer to that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000242\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d497a9f8aaea46409d4f7b4c88f6470c\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The Minister did address the question. I listened really carefully and it was addressed. This is another example of the questioner not getting the answer that was desired.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000243\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022e6310f2654a3423fa7e1a74278378e4e\u0022\u003EPolice\u2014Former Commissioner\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000244\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E12. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002258ddae0e9e5c4294b9fbc83efaefc405\u0022\u003ERODNEY HIDE (Leader\u2014ACT)\u003C/span\u003E to the Prime Minister: Did she advise the Sunday Star-Times to hang tough and continue their investigations into Police Commissioner Peter Doone after the publication of their 16 January 2000 story, as claimed in the Herald on Sunday this week; if so, why?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022 data-id=\u002280691072cdc44fa993e84c9f6920c558\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000245\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002280691072cdc44fa993e84c9f6920c558\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK (Prime Minister):\u003C/span\u003E It is impossible to recall specific words used in conversations of more than 5 years ago. I should note, though, that I had no reason to discourage the Sunday Star-Times from following a story it had been reporting on since 5 December.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000246\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b94e15982d2a4fe0aba5d5c4b037125a\u0022\u003ERodney Hide\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Prime Minister specifically deny to this House urging the Sunday Star-Times to stick to its story after the Commissioner of Police, Peter Doone, had threatened suit on the newspaper; and given that it is her honesty that is in question now, why will she not table the reporter\u2019s notes that she says her lawyer has\u2014what has she got to hide?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000247\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022989a29456ac747c0b054bfa14578ea49\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: As I said in the primary answer, I had no reason to discourage the newspaper from continuing to follow a story that it had been reporting on since 5 December, when it was quite clear that there were different accounts of what people had said in the incident. It is also worth pointing out that a Police Complaints Authority report found that Mr Doone\u2019s behaviour was undesirable, and a police report found that it was inappropriate. With regard to the latter part of the member\u2019s question, given that further litigation is being proposed it is simply not appropriate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000248\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dcb97d21cabe4cc4897acca65a31d848\u0022\u003EDr Don Brash\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Prime Minister, with the benefit of hindsight, understand that without her encouragement and active support the Sunday Star-Times would not have felt able to run the article criticising the Commissioner of Police, Peter Doone, and does she wish to express regret to the House today for any of the actions she has taken regarding this matter?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000249\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002261587207d49f4890b8d9d51d2a634665\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: No. As the Sunday Star-Times lawyer has said, I was not its source. The newspaper had many sources within the police.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000250\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a4aa5fb029ee4c4abc184c58cd508ed6\u0022\u003EUrgent Debates Declined\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000251\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002226fa55810fbd4516a2aa7f9a6ca3a689\u0022\u003EStudent Allowances\u2014Numbers Receiving Allowance\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022 data-id=\u0022bd597037c9f34a36b7ce006af18d9b53\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000252\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bd597037c9f34a36b7ce006af18d9b53\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I have received a letter from Nandor Tanczos requesting a debate under Standing Order 373. The member cites three releases of information as contributing to a need for an urgent debate relating to the number of people receiving student allowances. The accumulation of information in regard to an issue is not itself a particular case of recent occurrence. I refer the member to Speakers\u2019 rulings 152/6. The application is therefore declined.\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=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000253\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00223f16412b5d6e4f3a92d6f9bed45cd7aa\u0022\u003EInjury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill (No 3)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000254\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022778aacf446f74ea18035c614bc65e656\u0022\u003ESecond Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022 data-id=\u002222e008d6042842478fcf79385c44b6c0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000255\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002222e008d6042842478fcf79385c44b6c0\u0022\u003EHon RUTH DYSON (Minister for ACC):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill (No 3) be now read a second time. This bill builds on the framework provided by the existing legislation, providing a fair, comprehensive, and equitable accident compensation scheme that is responsive to the needs of claimants while maintaining a responsible approach to fiscal and levied costs. The bill continues to progress towards making the scheme more responsive to claimants\u2019 needs by simplifying cover and streamlining processes for medical misadventure, by making weekly compensation entitlements for the newly self-employed fairer, and by improving claimants\u2019 access to more comprehensive social rehabilitation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000256\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EThe primary purpose of the bill is to implement the new category of treatment injury, which replaces the existing medical misadventure provisions in the current Act. No longer is there a distinction between medical error and medical mishap. Claimants do not have to demonstrate error or show that their condition is both rare and severe. The new cover provisions provide that treatment injuries are simply ones that result from the treatment. Punitive faultfinding is also removed from the processes of the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC). Instead, the bill directs the organisation concerned to examine how a treatment injury occurred. This will foster a learning environment for health providers and organisations, and will help to prevent adverse medical events in the future. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000257\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EChanges to the medical misadventure provisions also support claimants to make claims. The changes facilitate processes by providing for claimants to be informed of the role of the Health and Disability Commissioner in investigating complaints about the standard of care provided. The new provisions also encourage the cooperation of the health sector in participating in the claims process, and to provide necessary medical reports and advice to ACC promptly. The bill helps to maintain the safety net by requiring ACC to report information to the relevant professional body, if it considers that there could be a risk of harm to the public. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000258\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EThese changes are the result of an excellent consultation review, in which the Government worked together with key stakeholders and the public.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000259\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EI place on the record my particular thanks to my friend and colleague Lianne Dalziel for her work in setting up this review. The review was a three-stage process, beginning with discussion of the issues with stakeholder groups, then public consultation on the issues and possible solutions, followed by further consultation with stakeholder groups as a result of the feedback received on the options for change. As a result, a wide consensus is held on the direction that the new provisions provide from almost all those involved in the process, including health practitioners, medico-legal experts, claimants, and others. That is the best example of high-quality public policy process and interdepartmental work I have seen. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000260\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EThe bill also provides fairer methods for calculating weekly compensation for people who have moved into self-employment. Income from other work undertaken during the income year will now be factored into the calculation. This will provide more certainty for people moving into self-employment that accident compensation entitlements will be fair during that transition period. In addition, the bill provides the Accident Compensation Corporation with the discretion to provide certain rehabilitation entitlements that previously have been prohibited by the legislation. This will help seriously injured claimants lead independent lives by enabling greater individualised responses to their needs. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000261\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EDuring the consultation process, the Health Committee received 163 submissions on the bill. Many submissions expressed support for the amendments to the medical misadventure provisions, with many commenting favourably on the removal of the current faultfinding role of the Accident Compensation Corporation, the potential for faster resolution of claims, and the extension of rehabilitation and compensation to all those who have a treatment injury. Many submissions also noted that the new provisions relating to treatment injuries will operate more fairly and will bring personal injury from medical incidents into line with other injuries covered by the scheme. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000262\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EThe bill returns to the House with a small number of technical amendments relating to treatment injury. Amendment to the definition by replacing the phrase \u201Cpersonal injury caused by treatment or treatment injury\u201D with the single term \u201Ctreatment injury\u201D will prevent any misapprehension that there are two types of cover. Also, the exclusion provisions for treatment injury, and to whom the existing medical misadventure will continue to apply, will be clarified.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000263\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EI have already released Supplementary Order Paper 348, which sets out further amendments that I intend to move in the Committee stage. This includes an amendment to clarify the policy intent around funding attribution of claim costs for work-related gradual process, disease, or infection, from the ACC employers account, and an amendment to provide for later decisions about which account will fund lump-sum compensation for permanent impairment caused by gradual process, disease, or infection. The Supplementary Order Paper also includes minor technical amendments to existing parts of the bill, such as allowing the movement of the definitions of treatment providers and health professionals out of the legislation and into regulations to occur singularly or in groups, in order to ensure administrative efficiency given the timing of the bill; allowing the 2005 levy regulations to be amended, without the usual consultation process, to include private domestic workers in the employers account in respect of levies; clarifying that the provisions for calculating weekly earnings for self-employed and shareholder employees apply to claims for weekly compensation on or after 1 June this year; specifying that the provisions that allow ACC the discretion to provide entitlements, where that is not permitted under current legislation, have no retrospective effect; and in allowing those parts of the bill that are currently scheduled to take effect on 1 April 2005 to come into effect later. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000264\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003EI appreciate the work done by the Health Committee and I welcome its report. I particularly thank all those involved in the preparation of this bill and those who took the time to make submissions. I commend the bill\u2019s progress to the House. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002295ac7206-f497-429d-bf58-715224d5160f\u0022 data-id=\u0022c6666ca1c7e94ffda6e2b1fea2aa4549\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000265\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002295ac7206-f497-429d-bf58-715224d5160f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c6666ca1c7e94ffda6e2b1fea2aa4549\u0022\u003EKATHERINE RICH (National):\u003C/span\u003E The National Party supports this bill but, I must say, with some reservations. On hearing the Minister speak just now, I can say there are a lot of things we agree with in relation to that Minister. The National Party believes in a fair system of accident insurance. We believe in a comprehensive system of accident insurance, and we also believe in an equitable system for accident insurance. But where we differ from the Government, of course, is in the area of choice. We believe that New Zealanders should have a choice of insurer. We believe that New Zealanders should have the ability to make decisions about who provides accident insurance for their businesses and organisations, and that is what we do not have in this legislation. We have choice removed from a very important part of New Zealand life. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000266\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002295ac7206-f497-429d-bf58-715224d5160f\u0022\u003EThe National Party has always supported a no-fault system for accident insurance, like most within this House. Since 1974 that system has been the way of providing accident insurance within this country. But we have seen the removal of choice for many businesses, so that they do not have any ability to go out and identify which organisations would provide them the best services for accident cover, injury prevention, and things like that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000267\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002295ac7206-f497-429d-bf58-715224d5160f\u0022\u003EWe continue to support this bill because it makes an important change to the accident compensation system in the area of medical misadventure. The system we had in the past required people who were victims of injuries as a result of medical treatment to find fault, in the first instance, but then also to prove who was culpable before they were able to access cover. Often that process was very time-consuming and difficult for all involved, and the faultfinding, investigative systems that had to be put in place did not work well, either for the medical profession or for those people facing injuries. I think there is a smoothing in this legislation\u2014an introduction of the same standards for medical misadventure that we have seen in other areas in respect of accidents. This bill will allow people who have suffered from unexpected injuries as a result of their treatments to have the same standard of cover as any other New Zealander who has had a workplace accident. So we support the no-fault system, and we support the changes that have been made to the medical misadventure area. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000268\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002295ac7206-f497-429d-bf58-715224d5160f\u0022\u003EI suppose that many members on this side of the House will have faced a number of constituency problems and concerns in this particular area, so we will go on from here by ensuring that those people will not have to go through a very difficult process of trying to find fault with the medical profession before they have the same standard of cover. That is not to say that we will not continue to look for fault where fault needs to be found. If the issue is to do with medical negligence or is the result of poor practice, that will still be picked up on and investigated. But the issue in the legislation is that those people will be able to get cover for their injuries under the same circumstances as other New Zealanders who have faced more easily defined accidents, such as falling off ladders, etc. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000269\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002295ac7206-f497-429d-bf58-715224d5160f\u0022\u003EIn terms of this bill a lot of the changes are very technical changes, but in the bill there is a key difference between the parties\u2014a really defining issue between the National Party and the Labour Party. National is a party that believes in choice, that believes that the private sector should have the ability to provide certain services where they can be of value, and that believes that the State is not necessarily the only provider that can supply this kind of service. Certainly, in the area of accident prevention education, the State is not the only provider that can undertake that sort of educative process. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000270\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002295ac7206-f497-429d-bf58-715224d5160f\u0022\u003EWe believe that it is important to have a system whereby all New Zealand workers are covered\u2014and not just covered but where everybody is covered fairly in the event of accidents taking place that do not allow them to continue to work. We believe there is a comprehensive system that covers a wide range of accidents and injuries that face all sorts of New Zealanders in the various vocations they are involved in. We also believe in a system that provides cover in a very cost-effective way and rehabilitation, in the event that those accidents take place. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000271\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002295ac7206-f497-429d-bf58-715224d5160f\u0022\u003EBut one of the things we believe in, which goes further, and which the Labour Party has a closed mind to, is the idea that employers should be able to choose their insurers, just as they make decisions in every other aspect of their businesses. There is no reason that the State has to have a monopoly on the accident insurance area. It does not have a monopoly in other areas of insurance and it does not have a monopoly in other areas that the Government is not involved in with regard to accidents. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000272\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002295ac7206-f497-429d-bf58-715224d5160f\u0022\u003ESo in this case we think that there are opportunities for choice. This party stands on the side of choice, and we believe that when it comes to provision for New Zealanders, people working, and people who face all sorts of accidents in their various vocational areas, there are different solutions in the accident compensation area. I think that the Accident Compensation Corporation goes a long way to provide many good programmes when it comes to the education of our people, but it is not the only source of preventive education. It can not be the only source for accident insurance, but I think that the Government certainly has the blinkers on when it comes to this area of insurance. The Government feels in this case\u2014and I think it is ideology that is driving the Government\u2014that it has to dominate this area. This Government nationalised a lot of businesses that had invested in the area of accident insurance. It basically went in and marched over Kiwi businesses that had gone into the accident insurance area and that were, or early indications showed that they were, doing a very good job. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000273\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002295ac7206-f497-429d-bf58-715224d5160f\u0022\u003EIn terms of where to from here, we have some reservations about some of the technical details, which we will go into during the Committee stage of this bill. But I think that what we will see from the speeches that follow will be a demonstration of whether parties are in favour of New Zealanders making choices about their own lives, or whether we have the nanny State, Government-knows-best idea coming from the Labour Government and we will have no choice and no ability to make business decisions. The Government will provide one option, which will be the only option. So there will be very little room for innovation in this accident insurance area.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022 data-id=\u0022aceb0480b67f4374837438114e67fb7e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000274\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022aceb0480b67f4374837438114e67fb7e\u0022\u003ESTEVE CHADWICK (Labour\u2014Rotorua):\u003C/span\u003E I am delighted to speak to this bill and I would like to personally congratulate the Hon Ruth Dyson as the Minister for ACC. This is the third bill on accident compensation that we have had since we came into Government in 1999, and it is beginning to reshape the whole of accident compensation to those Woodhouse founding principles that we really believed in. Those principles were about community responsibility through education and awareness of reduction of injury, and comprehensive entitlement\u2014and we mean comprehensive entitlement. I wonder whether the previous speaker, who talked about the principle of choice of insurer, is aware of the HIH debacle in Australia, where insurance went belly-up and left people with no cover whatsoever. That is the risk that we are not prepared to take. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000275\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003EReal compensation is a big issue for us. This bill starts to deal with the issues of real compensation, and it does allow for administrative efficiency. The administrative efficiency forms around the principle where practitioners and claimants themselves used to have to talk about fault and \u201Crare and severe\u201D medical injuries. As constituent MPs, we dealt with desperate accident compensation claimants who were waiting sometimes years until they achieved entitlement to accident compensation, while they waited for reports from specialists and reports from hospital providers. The gap was simply too long, and all of us felt that. This bill is now taking away the definition of \u201Crare and severe\u201D injury and replacing it with a definition of \u201Ctreatment injury\u201D. It is something that medical practitioners and public health service providers are absolutely delighted about. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000276\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003EThis result comes about, as the Minister has said, because of a very robust consultation phase. We talked to providers of health-care services. We talked to clinicians, who found it particularly difficult and did feel that they were being punished for having to prove that they had not done anything wrong during a course of treatment. That requirement has gone now, and with the no-fault approach and the treatment injury provision in this bill, clinicians do not need to hide or duck for cover, and they do not need to call Sedgwick\u2019s Ltd or their indemnity insurers to seek advice about whether they should have admitted liability, even though they knew that something catastrophic had happened with the outcome for a patient. Now they feel so much happier about this treatment injury provision. It takes away that punitive environment that prevailed in the health field.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000277\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022944e4302eca84249a5c7643dea0cc4fb\u0022\u003EPeter Brown\u003C/span\u003E: For 5 years.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000278\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221ff8b9c1590d4d4f88f82ca839f593da\u0022\u003ESTEVE CHADWICK\u003C/span\u003E: No\u2014it was for at least 10 years, because I used to deal with all the complaints against practitioners that came to our district health board, or our Crown health enterprise. The poor old practitioners used to hide in fear. They used to bring their lawyer to a meeting when we were simply talking about what went wrong, whether we could avoid it happening in the future, and what we needed to do to systems and education in order to prevent that catastrophe happening again\u2014even if it was something as simple as joining up anaesthetic systems so that they worked efficiently. We could not get practitioners to come to an environment that was legally safe and that did not lead through a pathway through the courts. Now there is an environment where they feel that they can participate in continuous improvement. That also links into the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act, which was passed in 2003. This bill adds on to building an environment where clinicians feel that they are valued and that they can speak up quickly when an error occurs, and where patients can receive due and appropriate compensation for their injury. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000279\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003EThis is a marvellous bill and, as a select committee, we all agreed on it. There were some minor technical amendments that we did not agree on. I was very happy to see a definition of \u201Cacupuncturist\u201D come into this bill, although other parties felt a bit differently about that. I thank those members on the Health Committee who know about health. Dr Paul Hutchison knows about that environment in which he used to have to practise, and in which he was very nervous about anything going wrong and then wondering where to go to receive professional support as a practitioner. It was nice to have his support there, and I thank the member. I thank the other members of the committee, such as Heather Roy, who also knows a lot about health systems management in this country. I think that we worked very well as a committee. I would also like to thank the committee clerk and supporters of our committee work, which went very smoothly. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000280\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003EThe Supplementary Order Paper was released by the Minister very early, so there were no surprises. That is how this Minister has dealt with accident compensation issues and injury prevention issues. I am sure that we will see more improvements made in the future so that we achieve a robust, publicly funded system.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220daaf9fb-1a1f-4d31-848a-fd13cb1a2c5a\u0022 data-id=\u0022381911773dad47469ca6d257b755d967\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000281\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220daaf9fb-1a1f-4d31-848a-fd13cb1a2c5a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022381911773dad47469ca6d257b755d967\u0022\u003EBARBARA STEWART (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E On behalf of New Zealand First I rise to speak in support of the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill (No 3). New Zealand First believes that there needs to be a stronger insurance component in accident compensation legislation, and that claims and compensation for medical misadventure needs to be monitored to ensure that claimants are treated fairly. We believe that the process definitely needed to be streamlined. The system needs to be fair and equitable, and to have a no-fault component, because it takes away the punitive environment that has reigned previously. Nobody expects to go to hospital for an operation and then leave hospital with a totally different injury as a result of his or her treatment. We are very aware that that can happen. Under the current system, a claimant is expected to prove fault by a medical professional, who then has to be found to be at fault in order for any compensation to be considered or awarded. This is a very lengthy process and it does not work well, at all. We want to see compensation awarded when and if it is needed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000282\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220daaf9fb-1a1f-4d31-848a-fd13cb1a2c5a\u0022\u003EWe realise too that this is a very significant bill, with a significant cost for New Zealand and for New Zealanders. Accident compensation is already hugely costly to everyone, although we are very aware that the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) itself has significant investments right throughout New Zealand. It is to be hoped that this bill does not increase the costs again to businesses and to the self-employed. We do not want to see the costs associated with this legislation being greater than those already anticipated by the Government. I know that the Department of Labour has calculated that the costs will increase by $8.6 million annually, and that there will be a one-off transitional cost of $12 million. So we do not want to see those costs skyrocket. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000283\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220daaf9fb-1a1f-4d31-848a-fd13cb1a2c5a\u0022\u003EWe are pleased to see that this bill does specify a general no-fault approach to accident compensation for treatment injuries, because this is a big step forward. At the Health Committee we heard from many submitters who were totally dissatisfied with the ACC and with the treatment that they had received from the ACC when they were trying to establish a claim of medical misadventure. In most cases the claimants just gave up and did not proceed further. They basically put it into the too-hard basket. The long delays in the process and the stress suffered by the claimant and by the practitioner can be very negative. It is not pleasant to hear stories of people going into hospital with high hopes of having an injury corrected, and then coming home with something far worse or more debilitating. Hopefully, this bill will assist many of those people. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000284\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220daaf9fb-1a1f-4d31-848a-fd13cb1a2c5a\u0022\u003EThe accident compensation law has not been very helpful in the past. It has actually stopped professionals from learning from the mistakes made, because of the blame emphasis that previously existed. We believe it is absolutely vital that health professionals be very proactive, that they demonstrate that their organisations take the provision of very high-quality service seriously, and that when they identify any faults\u2014as inevitably they will\u2014they act very promptly to rectify them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000285\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220daaf9fb-1a1f-4d31-848a-fd13cb1a2c5a\u0022\u003EWe will be most interested in the day-to-day management of the new section 33. We will be watching that area with interest, because this section defines \u201Ctreatment\u201D with the broadest possible scope. It includes treatment, diagnosis, and even the decision not to provide treatment in a timely manner. So potentially any situation where a health professional fails to diagnose a condition immediately and correctly and then to treat it correctly could be construed as treatment resulting in a treatment injury. That could even apply, perhaps, to the non-treatment of the thousands of people waiting for elective surgery throughout this country. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000286\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220daaf9fb-1a1f-4d31-848a-fd13cb1a2c5a\u0022\u003EThe new section 32(2)(c) effectively ensures that there is no fault on the part of the district health boards, as it excludes from the definition of \u201Cpersonal injury caused by treatment or treatment injury\u201D, \u201Cpersonal injury that is solely attributable to a resource allocation decision:\u201D. This is the area where all the debates will arise. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000287\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220daaf9fb-1a1f-4d31-848a-fd13cb1a2c5a\u0022\u003EThe 26 February issue of the Listener gave two very good examples that fit into this category. Two women went to the doctor for an examination. In one case the doctor\u2019s diagnosis missed the woman\u2019s malignant tumour, and her surgery was delayed for 6 months. If as a result of the delay some treatment injury occurs, she will be entitled to compensation. In the second example the woman\u2019s doctor identified a tumour, but because of resource shortages she waited 6 months for treatment\u2014about three times longer than is recommended. In this instance the woman has no compensation entitlement, because of the legislation\u2019s resource shortfall exemption, although this woman had exactly the same treatment experience as the other. There is no mechanism under this new scheme to compensate the victim for such a failure or to assess the competence of the manager who fails. Nor has there been in the past an incentive to improve managerial performance. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000288\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220daaf9fb-1a1f-4d31-848a-fd13cb1a2c5a\u0022\u003EThe question of what is a result of a resource allocation decision is a very grey area, and we can see why. It is a very technical area that we would like to discuss further in the Committee stage. Where will this end? We can see that lawyers and litigators will be very tempted to take many such cases into the courts and to fight them long and hard. It is really to be hoped that after the new scheme has been put into place the Government will take the next step of investigating how it can remove this unfair resource exemption clause from the legislation, as eventually this does need to occur. Any injury that is caused by a failure of resources should be considered a treatment injury and should also be covered under this legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000289\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220daaf9fb-1a1f-4d31-848a-fd13cb1a2c5a\u0022\u003EWe would also like to see the acupuncture groups in New Zealand agree on a unified professional body to represent their professional standards so that they can come under the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act. We discussed this aspect throughout the select committee process. That really has to happen. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000290\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220daaf9fb-1a1f-4d31-848a-fd13cb1a2c5a\u0022\u003EThis bill is a step in the right direction, and New Zealand First does support its going to the Committee of the whole House. We want to see a better outcome for patients who are disadvantaged by medical misadventure. We want to make the system more streamlined, we want to see a better outcome for these people, and we want to see doctors actually learning by means of the no-fault component of the legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022 data-id=\u0022f340a3ab460545ce816b80f19f178344\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000291\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f340a3ab460545ce816b80f19f178344\u0022\u003EHEATHER ROY (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E ACT New Zealand opposes the passage of the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill (No 3) for a variety of reasons, which I will go into in a moment. First, I will just say a word about the select committee process. It was very rigorous, although a disproportionate number of the submissions heard came from the various acupuncture groups. There are four main groups in the country. Although many of the groups are working together very well and productively, some are not entering into discussions as we would perhaps hope they might. It would be encouraging to see the discussions continue and to see those groups form a united front and, as the previous speaker said, come to be regarded as one body under the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act. I think that that would be to the benefit of everyone. As I said, the bulk of the submissions came from the acupuncture groups, and this took up a huge amount of the time for the submission process. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000292\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003EAs other members have outlined, the bill relates to quite a few technical amendments to the original Act, but the main reason for bringing this amendment bill before the House was to make changes to the medical misadventure provisions. ACT agrees that in theory the proposed changes to the medical misadventure provisions in the original Act are a good thing. But there will be many unintended consequences, I think, that have not been investigated fully and that will lead, in particular, to costing the country a good deal of money. ACT is concerned about the increased costs that will result from the removal of the rarity and severity definitions in relation to medical misadventure, and about the likely increase in levies for the earners and non-earners accounts. At the moment they roughly share the cost of producing the funding for people who claim accident compensation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000293\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003EThe Department of Labour gave us a lot of information. Some of it was about the cost of the bill. As the previous speaker said, it is estimated that an annual cost of $8.69 million will arise from the changes to the original Act in this amendment bill, with a one-off transitional cost of $12 million. Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) actuaries estimated that in relation to these changes the ACC would accept around 1,000 additional treatment injury claims each year, with an average fully-funded cost of approximately $9,000 per claim. That is where the $8.69 million increase in funding that the Department of Labour told us about comes from. However, I have had representations from various health providers who are involved in the scheme as it exists at the moment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000294\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003EIt was interesting to hear the Minister say there was a high level of satisfaction among medical practitioners about this. Certainly, the ones who came to see me, not just one or two but quite a substantial group, were very concerned about the increase in costs they fear will result from this legislation. I think it is important that we look realistically at the costs to the country. The Department of Labour itself admitted that it would be very difficult to predict the increase in numbers of claims, and their costs, despite the fact that the ACC actuaries have, in fact, given us a rough estimate. The department said that it was very, very difficult to try to estimate these things. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000295\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003EThe new definition of treatment injury could stimulate a large increase in the number of claims after the bill comes into being, including unlimited, retrospective claims for treatment injury, as long as a previous claim has not been lodged with the ACC. That is something that, I think, no other member has raised yet\u2014the retrospective nature that can occur. We believe that claims will be made for conditions that are not foreseeable and are not the fault of any party involved, but rather the unintended, but statistically predictable, consequence of normal treatment. That is an issue that the medical practitioners have raised, too. Normal treatment is very difficult to define. So there may well be those consequences. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000296\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003EWe are not arguing that ACC coverage should depend on fault, but when the scheme is operating at the boundary between sickness and accident\u2014and I will talk about that in a moment\u2014the scheme will be vulnerable. It will be in the interests of patients and health providers to classify complaints as treatment injury. It is just human nature for everybody to want a good outcome for the patients; both the patients themselves, and their health providers. When grey areas exist, and there is no clear definition, the boundaries suddenly become unclear, and it is often easy to convince oneself, whether patient or professional, that somebody qualifies when perhaps the person should not. The removal of the disciplines could mean that the boundary will, in practice, depend on highly subjective decisions, or even\u2014sadly, I might say\u2014to some collusion. There is no provision within the bill, as it stands at the moment, to prevent that. So there may be some collusion with, and loss in, the integrity of the scheme. I believe that is something that nobody in the House would want to see. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000297\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003EOne of the main reasons ACT is opposing the passage of this bill is the division of treatment, and that its funding depends on whether a condition is, in fact, due to injury or to illness. This is problematic. Anybody who has worked in a hospital setting, and I think in particular of orthopaedic wards, will know the difficulties that exist and the unfairness\u2014the unfairness that New Zealanders do dislike\u2014that exists between those with an injury and those with an illness. I can think of my own days of working in orthopaedic wards when I would have two patients lying side by side. One would be an older person who had worked right through from a young age, had been a productive member of society and paid taxes, but because he or she suffered from osteoarthritis and needed a hip replacement, was not eligible for accident compensation. In the next bed there was frequently a young fellow who had had a motor vehicle or motorbike accident, often of his own causing. There they lay, side by side, with completely different circumstances, but often the same condition, yet only one was eligible for compensation Although accident compensation has many benefits and largely removes litigation from the whole equation, this unfairness between injury and illness exists in this country. ACT has always contended that accident-based insurance schemes are a very fair way of getting around this problem. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000298\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003EI would like to back up the point made by the previous National Party speaker that choice is actually very important with regard to accident compensation. ACT contends that choice of insurer for both individuals and employers is imperative to the success of the scheme as it stands. If the scheme were extended beyond that, it would manage to get around that barrier between injury and illness. We would like to see a return to the choice that existed for that brief period of 9 months in 1999. Of course, when the Labour Government swept into power it swiftly changed the provisions. That was a shame, because really it could only be considered as an experiment. There was not time for the changes to be totally absorbed by the medical area. That choice and the competition it provided both to employers and to workers was a very good thing. We saw a drop in the number of accidents and, by and large, a drop in the amount of claims. That was for the good. We believe that the private sector should be able to compete for this insurance cover. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000299\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003ESo to sum up, ACT New Zealand does not support this bill, although we acknowledge that the changes to medical misadventure provisions in the original Act, in theory, look good, but we worry about the cost to the taxpayer, and we worry significantly about the distinction perpetuated between those people who suffer from a condition and those who suffer from an illness. That distinction is not there. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003EI look forward to the Committee stage where we can explore this amendment bill in more detail, particularly the proposed costs, which are very difficult to estimate, as the Department of Labour has said. It is unfortunate to see another Supplementary Order Paper slip in. Submissions cannot be heard on those amendments, so the public will not have their say. ACT will be opposing those amendments.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022 data-id=\u002278f0bcf1ebf347dfb0e35747a7e4bab3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002278f0bcf1ebf347dfb0e35747a7e4bab3\u0022\u003ESUE KEDGLEY (Green):\u003C/span\u003E In general, the Green Party, like most other parties in the House, supports the intention of this legislation to remove fault from the accident compensation medical misadventure provisions to simplify the scheme, to make it more efficient, and to move away from the punitive system that operated in the past of finding fault when reporting medical misadventure decisions. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000302\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EIn the past, trying to prove medical misadventure often put people through a lengthy, stressful process of having to prove that the medical profession was at fault, or that what had happened was rare, severe, and had happened in no more than 1 percent of cases. We always felt that those were extremely arbitrary criteria that were completely unfair. They resulted in very long delays for individuals who were trying to get help, at a time when many of them may have been suffering significantly from incapacity and pain caused by the injury. That seemed extremely unfair. I know that it certainly put off hundreds of people\u2014and probably thousands of people\u2014from lodging medical misadventure claims, and that it created all sorts of tensions. It created a situation whereby doctors saw every claim as a potential threat to their professional practice, and that was very unfortunate. So we do congratulate the Minister on bringing about these long-needed changes to the way that the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) deals with medical misadventure. Now, when an injury results from medical treatment or medical misadventure, people will be treated in the same way as they are for other injuries, and we welcome that very much. It will establish a new category for personal injury caused by treatment. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000303\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EBut like the speaker from New Zealand First, we are concerned that the legislation will exclude from personal injury those matters that are solely attributable to resource allocation decisions. We believe that the failure to treat a person for whatever reason should be considered to be a treatment injury and should be covered by ACC. We think it is unfair and inequitable that someone who develops an injury because he or she has not been treated properly by a medical professional is covered by this bill, whereas someone who becomes ill because his or her treatment is delayed as a result of resource shortages will not be covered by the bill, and will therefore be excluded from compensation under the principal Act. To give just one example of what that could mean, a patient who developed a cancer because of treatment delays caused by the failure to diagnose a primary cancer would be covered by the bill, soon to become legislation. However, a patient who developed a cancer because appropriate treatment was unavailable due, for example, to a shortage of radiation therapists, would not. That does seem to us to be unfair, so we will be proposing an amendment to allow an injury caused by the failure to treat a person, for whatever reason, to be considered a treatment injury. We hope that amendment will receive support in the House. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000304\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EAs the representative from ACT said, there was a lot of concern about acupuncturists in terms of this bill. We continue to believe that it is inappropriate to amend the definition of acupuncturist in a bill that is about accident compensation. We strongly support acupuncturists having one scope of practice and coming under the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act. We are worried that the amendment to the definition of acupuncture in this bill will undermine progress in that regard, and that the changed definition could effectively create two scopes of practice for acupuncturists and is therefore contrary to the spirit of the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act. But the Minister seems to be assuring me that our concerns will be allayed, and we are absolutely delighted to hear that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000305\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EAll of us on the Health Committee were incredulous at the degree of antagonism between the different groups of acupuncturists. We could not understand why the different segments of the acupuncture profession could not work together, resolve their differences, and put acupuncture under one particular scope of practice and under the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act. Given that acupuncturists as a profession have been trying to get statutory regulation for over a decade, we were deeply disappointed that our amendment to allow acupuncture to be put under the scope of the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act was turned down in this House. I think it was only New Zealand First that supported that amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000306\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ed1945f993014357b2477d0e7f4ed9d8\u0022\u003EHon Annette King\u003C/span\u003E: They weren\u2019t agreed, though. That was the problem. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000307\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002289ee412c4ba449b4be73ca09794758cb\u0022\u003ESUE KEDGLEY\u003C/span\u003E: The Minister of Health is saying that the concern at the time\u2014a concern of all of us\u2014was the lack of consensus within the profession. We are absolutely delighted if the Minister is assuring us\u2014and maybe she will just confirm this later on\u2014that there is now agreement within the profession to have one scope of practice and to be brought under the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000308\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EI want to correct, for the record, a statement in the Green Party\u2019s minority report on the bill. We stated in our minority report that we were \u201C\u2026 concerned that the New Zealand Acupuncture Standards Authority offers only a local diploma, not one that is national in scope.\u201D We were genuinely confused about that\u2014as, in fact, most of the committee was, because the whole thing became thoroughly confusing. We acknowledge that the New Zealand Acupuncture Standards Authority is just an authority, and that the Auckland University of Technology offers the course and administers it, even if the personnel involved in both bodies are, I think, more or less the same. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000309\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EWe had considered proposing a further amendment because we were so concerned about ensuring there would be one scope of practice for acupuncture, and that there would not be, in effect, two scopes of practice because of this bill. However, because of the assurance of the Minister, we will no longer seek to make an amendment to that effect. Instead, we say how pleased we are that we have finally reached this resolution\u2014and I am sure the whole select committee is, because the issue took up a huge amount of time, and I think all of us were sick of it and could not comprehend why the two different groups could not sit down and reach a resolution. It is good news that a resolution has been reached. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000310\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EFinally, we are concerned that an amendment to clause 52(2) of schedule 1 of the principal Act would mean that anyone who has suffered a gradual process injury before April 2002 would not be entitled to lump-sum compensation, no matter how clear-cut or apparently justified his or her claim was. Given that gradual process injuries normally have a long period of latency, we believe that it is totally unfair to set an arbitrary cut-off date before which such injuries will not be covered, and we will seek to make an amendment to that when the bill comes before the Committee of the whole House. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000311\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EOther than that, we are very pleased with the bill. We think it is a great step forward. It will simplify things and remove some of the climate of fear whereby doctors were always worried that a medical misadventure claim would be brought against them. It is a very stressful business to try to prove over long periods of time that something was a medical injury that happened only to less than 1 percent of cases. All of that was, frankly, foolish, and we are delighted that this bill will change that. We are very pleased to support 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=\u00224025cacd4e284d99ae57f0f22b1c1016\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000312\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224025cacd4e284d99ae57f0f22b1c1016\u0022\u003EJUDY TURNER (Deputy Leader\u2014United Future):\u003C/span\u003E I rise on behalf of United Future to speak in support of the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill (No 3). It is a bill that seeks to tidy up the medical misadventure provisions of the Act so that these provisions become consistent with the rest of the accident compensation scheme. Currently we have two categories of injury: medical error and medical mishap. This is confusing and unhelpful because the current provisions are predicated on establishing blame in regard to the practitioner or the health provider involved. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000313\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022\u003EThe problem that this creates is that Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) clients have had lengthy waits for the process of blame to be settled. Once that was established, their claim was able to go ahead, but that process took considerable time. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000314\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022\u003EWith the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act and the work of the Office of the Health and Disability Commissioner\u2014including the fact that the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act strengthened the ability for hospitals, for instance, to run safe quality assurance activities for their staff\u2014we believe that health professionals are now well able to be held to account for their competency and their practice and there is now no need for ACC clients to have to suffer in a climate of uncertainty. This means that they can get on with securing the treatment and the rehabilitation they need. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000315\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022\u003EIt has been important for us to make sure that the term \u201Ctreatment injury\u201D is carefully defined so that it does not end up having unintended applications. We can understand, for instance, that when people go for surgery there are intended injuries by way of a surgeon\u2019s blade. We have to be careful to differentiate very clearly between injuries that were intended for the ongoing good of the patient, and unintended injuries. Over the last couple of years the media has been full of stories about people who have had tubes, pieces of metal, swabs, and all sorts of things left inside them during surgery, with the ongoing obvious complications that that has meant for patients. So it was very important for us, and we did take some time, to make sure we got the definition and the terminology correct. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000316\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022\u003EThe bill also gives additional flexibility to ACC in terms of using its discretion to provide additional entitlements. In relation to decisions in these areas where there is quite a bit of flexibility, I can anticipate some angst as claimants compare notes and try to determine why one person has received discretionary payments, rehabilitation services, or equipment of some kind, and somebody else has not. I suspect that the outworking of this provision will need to be closely monitored because it is unable to be reviewed or challenged.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000317\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022\u003EThere is also a change to the way in which weekly contributions are calculated for the self-employed. What will happen is that all sources of income over the previous 52 weeks leading up to the injury will be considered. That is particularly good news for newly self-employed people, who often found themselves assessed against the low income their new business was making, and really out of pocket and unable to survive on what ACC could pay them. So that is a really positive move. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000318\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022\u003EOther speakers have mentioned the issue of acupuncturists. It was intended that the definition of acupuncturist would be extended so that a greater range of providers could be registered with ACC and able to claim accident compensation payments. The problem that developed was that the new group being included was not recognised by the groups currently recognised as accident compensation providers. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000319\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022\u003EThe Minister has reassured us that all is well and near completion, and I hope she is right, because what concerned me a little bit with this bill was that there was an attempt, and I do not think it was intentional, to use this bill to achieve an outcome that was really only possible under the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act. It is not an easy thing to come to terms with. For instance, we were given briefings about the number of organisations that currently consider themselves acupuncturists, the number of practitioners that each group has registered with it, and the kinds of qualifications each group requires. The range is quite considerable and I can see the problems the group was having. However, I do believe that it is definitely the job of the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act, which has set up the legal mechanism so that any health practitioner group can become registered, to find commonality between the different disciplines within their own discipline, and put out a set of qualifications and scopes of practice that they will recognise. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000320\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022\u003EThere seem to have been some real problems in the ability of acupuncturists to work together, and if they are making headway on this, then we are very, very pleased. Often when one is a spokesperson for another party in health, one asks oneself: \u201CIf I were the Minister of Health, or the Minister for ACC, what would I do about such an issue?\u201D. I have to say that the frustration I felt on that matter was that I wondered why we were providing accident compensation for practitioners who had not yet reached some sort of agreement under the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act. If this is about to resolve itself, then that is great, but I would like to give acupuncturists a time frame and say: \u201CIf you cannot reach agreement and come under the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act by a set date, you are no longer entitled to be an ACC registered practitioner.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000321\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022\u003EI suspect that the financial incentive would mean that they would very quickly find some common ground and would get their act together. We are talking about putting patients at risk if we are allowing people who are not competent to practice. We are talking about inserting needles into people\u2019s bodies as a treatment, and if they get that wrong they could create a whole set of other problems. It is really important that we call for this group to get their act together. Certainly, I was concerned that there was an opportunity for this legislation to act in a counter-productive way to the recently passed, very good, Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000322\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022\u003EWe are very keen and very happy to support the second reading of this bill. We look forward to the Committee stage and working through the Supplementary Order Paper of the Minister, and those proposed by other members on the committee. I congratulate those who have worked with us on the Health Committee on this matter. I think we worked extremely well on this bill. There was a genuinely good intention around the table to get it right. We look forward to its passage.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022 data-id=\u00222aa4ffb0ccd84783ba959b0da9683986\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222aa4ffb0ccd84783ba959b0da9683986\u0022\u003EHon PAREKURA HOROMIA (Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs):\u003C/span\u003E I rise to support this well-endowed bill. It certainly is an improvement in relation to access to accident compensation. We have heard people wax lyrical at length about how people who have been attending counselling sessions at the Accident Compensation Corporation get frustrated. The bill speeds up cover decisions, and encourages a culture of learning and improvement amongst health professionals. It reduces delays\u2014not that there are many\u2014and it improves patients\u2019 safety. But I think the key issue I want to bring to members\u2019 notice is that this is the third accident compensation bill since this great Labour Government has been in Parliament.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cfdabe42-521a-4dca-afab-3e781731a130\u0022 data-id=\u002257a5f8c7845541f487ccbd158e2b23d8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000324\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cfdabe42-521a-4dca-afab-3e781731a130\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002257a5f8c7845541f487ccbd158e2b23d8\u0022\u003EDr PAUL HUTCHISON (National\u2014Port Waikato):\u003C/span\u003E Thank you for the opportunity to speak on this Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill (No 3). I must compliment Parekura Horomia on his very short speech. It was excellent because of its shortness, I believe.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000325\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cfdabe42-521a-4dca-afab-3e781731a130\u0022\u003EThe National Party will support this bill, because of the clear difficulties with the current regime of medical mishap and medical error, which is, unfortunately, very confusing and unfair on patients. However, we do have reservations about this bill, and those that are particularly important are the financial ones. I see Dr Cullen over there, representing this lackadaisical Labour Government, which does not care about quality health spending, and which we know has great worries about lack of productivity in the health sphere. Here we have another bill on accident compensation\u2014the third one, as was said by Parekura Horomia\u2014brought in by the Labour Government, and it did not even have ready a financial impact statement. Since then, during the select committee process, we had a rough stab at how much it will cost. The stab is about $10 million. I predict that the cost will be considerably more than that. Once again, we have a Labour Government that is just not worried about quality spending of scarce health dollars. Nevertheless, I must say that the select committee worked well under the chairperson, Steve Chadwick. Essentially, its members were in agreement as to the need to pass this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000326\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cfdabe42-521a-4dca-afab-3e781731a130\u0022\u003EIt is important to talk about the other reservations that we as a National Party do have about the State monopoly of accident compensation, which provides little choice. There is no doubt that when the legislation came in in 1998 that allowed choice of provision, premiums came down, rehabilitation efforts were increased enormously, and efforts at prevention in a whole range of fields were markedly improved, and, fortunately, that caused the Accident Compensation Corporation to take notice and improve. But undoubtedly, as with all State monopolies, there is every chance that with time it will become, once again, inefficient. There is no doubt that, by its nature, there is no individual risk rating. The monopoly tends to conceal real incentives, and it also tends to conceal real problems.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000327\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cfdabe42-521a-4dca-afab-3e781731a130\u0022\u003EHowever, I think most New Zealanders have accepted the loss of the right to sue, although as a constituent MP I find that among the most poignant\u2014and not infrequent\u2014submissions I get are those from people who have had a terrible time with the Accident Compensation Corporation. They have had horrendous injuries, and, unfortunately, the provisions that are available do not cover them fairly. It does happen time and time again. However, I think there is consensus in New Zealand that the system prior to 1974 was a lottery. As I understand it, something like 5 percent of those who were injured, and went through the courts, finally came up with an award, and it was years and years later before they did. In modern-day Boston, for instance, I understand that people who are subject to this sort of accident go through a legal lottery. The figure is about 5 percent, but the difference is that the payouts are ridiculously out of perspective\u2014often in the tens of millions of dollars. There is no doubt that, worldwide, accident insurance has gone berserk. I understand that Rugby School was seriously thinking of stopping the boys from playing rugby, because of the fear of being sued by parents for accidents that their boys might suffer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000328\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cfdabe42-521a-4dca-afab-3e781731a130\u0022\u003EThere is no doubt that in New Zealand we have agreed that a no-fault scheme does on the whole, with the checks and balances, produce a workable system that is reasonable. But there are occasions when, because of the fact there is no right to sue, gross injustices do occur. I think it would be very useful in the future for parties to think about how we can address those rare and exceptional circumstances where an unfairness happens.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000329\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cfdabe42-521a-4dca-afab-3e781731a130\u0022\u003EI note that the Government\u2019s review on this bill did not include the private sector. The Insurance Council was not asked for a submission; nor were other individual insurers from the private sector. However, there were a large number of submitters, and there was wide agreement that these provisions should be addressed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000330\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cfdabe42-521a-4dca-afab-3e781731a130\u0022\u003EA couple of points are worthwhile mentioning. Firstly, medical mishap criteria are arbitrary and often bear little relationship to the circumstances of the patient, resulting in claimants unfairly missing out on cover; and, secondly, the medical error criteria require it to be established that an individual practitioner or organisation is at fault, and that is clearly at odds with the no-fault system. I know that, in my own practice, there were quite crazy anomalies in this respect. If, for instance, during the course of a hysterectomy, ureters were damaged or injured, which is not unusual, and if the practitioner had a rate of injury of less than 1 percent, it would be regarded as a rare event and the patient could seek compensation through the accident compensation system. If, on the other hand, the practitioner had a high rate of injury, then the patient could not seek compensation. Clearly, two patients side by side can be treated differently by the system, and that has to be sorted out.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000331\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cfdabe42-521a-4dca-afab-3e781731a130\u0022\u003EI note, however, that the review of the medical misadventure provisions noted that the Accident Compensation Corporation cover decision, and the requirement that the corporation must report individual practitioners involved in accepted medical error cover claims, as well as patterns of medical mishap claims, to the relevant registration authority, resulted in health practitioners\u2019 reluctance to participate in the claims process. With the new Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill, this will not happen so often. What is hugely important, however, if the medical error option is taken away, is that the professions take on the responsibility to ensure that they are very vigilant with their quality assurance regimes, with their continuous quality improvement, and that they participate in them extraordinarily vigilantly. Just recently the New Zealand Orthopaedic Association produced an excellent report of all the morbidity that had occurred with hip operations over the last 5 years. This was an excellent example of a profession being prepared to take on quality assurance on a continued basis and going into the future. If this bill is to work well, it is very important that pressure is maintained on the professions to continue with high standards.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000332\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cfdabe42-521a-4dca-afab-3e781731a130\u0022\u003EI must say that the acupuncturists are in a bit of a shambles. I agree entirely with Judy Turner that it is up to them to organise themselves into a unified body that takes on a professional attitude towards quality assurance, towards education, and towards being a collegial organisation that can be addressed by the competence assurance legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000333\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cfdabe42-521a-4dca-afab-3e781731a130\u0022\u003EYes, National members do support this bill, but with some reservations. It does address some important areas of medial mishap and error that have been unfortunate for patients right around New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222a849ed4-a817-45a7-8b86-dbc9dd210193\u0022 data-id=\u0022b332eee46fa64e62bd47019bc5e4becf\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000334\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222a849ed4-a817-45a7-8b86-dbc9dd210193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b332eee46fa64e62bd47019bc5e4becf\u0022\u003EJILL PETTIS (Labour\u2014Whanganui):\u003C/span\u003E I am pleased to take a very brief call on this bill. The debate this afternoon has been interesting and very constructive, but I do want to point out to the House that since the Accident Compensation Corporation regained its monopoly it has reduced levies. Accident compensation is an area that sometimes attracts a lot of misinformation in the reporting of it. I do not know why Opposition members want to put out incorrectly worded press statements, but never mind; that is their wont. The average composite levy now stands at $1.21, which means that under the system in New Zealand it is still less than half the cost of the average levy in the Australian private system. So our accident compensation levies are very attractive, compared with those of our nearest neighbours. Of course, we did not suffer the dreadful situation caused by the collapse of HIH in Australia, which left many people uninsured. Many of us remember the disaster that befell many innocent people in Australia, upon the collapse of that company. So competition, privatisation, is not always able to deliver the nirvana that some people like to promise. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000335\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222a849ed4-a817-45a7-8b86-dbc9dd210193\u0022\u003EThis is a good bill. It is the third accident compensation bill since Labour has been the Government, and we continue to make excellent progress.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022 data-id=\u00227411a2f0efee493eac80ff84c8bac3b9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000336\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227411a2f0efee493eac80ff84c8bac3b9\u0022\u003EPETER BROWN (Deputy Leader\u2014NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E I have to respond to the honourable member who has just resumed her seat. She gloated on what the Government has done in terms of accident compensation. I can tell members that it has taken a backward step, in quite some significant measure. If she does not believe me, she should talk to a few accident victims to see whether they think accident compensation is the be-all and end-all that she seems to think it is. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000337\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EI have to tell the honourable member that if an employer wants to get fixed-income insurance for his or her employees, or a self-employed person wants to get fixed-income insurance, the corporation will tell them to go and talk to the private sector. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000338\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EI would like to respond to a few of the comments that my colleagues in other parties have made. First of all, I say to the Greens\u2014are they still here?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000339\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b53f6ca657394f43beff06ff864e1d36\u0022\u003EKeith Locke\u003C/span\u003E: Yes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000340\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228d06f3df09784b90bfd7f8bd3ca0320a\u0022\u003EPETER BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, they are. If the Greens are serious about producing a clause to rectify the situation that arises when a patient is not treated because of lack of resource\u2014in other words, the patient does not get treatment in hospital or by a doctor, and gets worse\u2014and if the Greens are serious about wanting to produce a clause to make that a treatment injury, then I am pretty confident in saying that New Zealand First would look at it in a realistic manner. My colleague Barbara Stewart raised the matter in her contribution earlier, and the Greens obviously have taken it up. They have said they will produce a clause that will address the issue, and we would look at it fairly reasonably. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000341\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EI thought Judy Turner, particularly towards the end of her speech, made some very good remarks about acupuncturists. I wrote them down; I thought they were very relevant points. She said they should be getting their act together if they want to be covered by accident compensation. That sits very comfortably with me. I have not discussed it with my colleagues but I am almost certain it would sit comfortably with them. But why does not United Future take a lead on this? They are propping up the Government. Why do they not say to the Government that this is a worthwhile action to take? Let us get the thing done. We should not stand here and make hollow noises to the House. I have to say that that sat comfortably with me; I think the member should show a little bit more gumption and go along and put a bit more pressure on the Government to do something along those lines. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000342\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EI am absolutely disappointed by ACT and National. They have put dollars ahead of patients. Heather Roy said that this will cost $8.6 million annually\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000343\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223f372ca33cc34dacadd02e295f28044b\u0022\u003EHeather Roy\u003C/span\u003E: I never said that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000344\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b9f4cbf15c39483aa358cc54cfa423fb\u0022\u003EPETER BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: The member gave the impression that it would cost a lot more than that\u2014I think she referred to transitional costs of $12 million. The National Party spokesperson made reference to a $10 million cost. I was not on the Health Committee so I do not know, but I presume that it will cost somewhere along those lines, as indicated by the Department of Labour. ACT and National seem to think that it will cost more. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000345\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EThe ACT member said she had spoken to some doctors, medical clinicians, or what have you. I have not\u2014not on this bill\u2014but I have spoken to a few patients and accident victims who have gone through the hospital system and have come out much the worse for wear because of an accident that occurred in hospital. One lady in particular who came to see me\u2014I knew her some years before when she was fit and well\u2014could hardly walk. She is permanently on drugs, and she said that that was a result of a stuff-up\u2014my words\u2014in hospital. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000346\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EI can tell members that if we get people like that, then we should have legislation like this. The sad thing about this legislation is that it should have come into being 5 years ago, when the Government came into power and changed the accident compensation legislation. It should have ensured then, not now in 2005, that medical misadventure was encompassed by the legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000347\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EAt that time New Zealand First put a strong case to Government Ministers to address this sort of issue. It is a very serious issue. As I understand it, a person working in a hospital is covered by accident compensation legislation, but patients going in are not\u2014until this bill goes through. They have to prove medical error or medical mishap, and quite often they are much the worse for wear and do not have the ability, wherewithal, and goodness knows what else they need, to prove that there has been a stuff-up in a hospital as a result of some medical treatment. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000348\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EThis legislation pleases me no end. There is still much to do on accident compensation. I take the point that the honourable member from the National Party made that the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) has a monopoly. I think he said that it is not very flexible. I add that it has little or no discretionary power in dealing with individual patients, and that it fails in many respects to deal with social issues. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000349\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EThere needs to be a degree of competition in the system. Competition breeds efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and initiative. There needs to be some form of competition in the ACC\u2019s workplace insurance regime. New Zealand First will, in its policies, be releasing in due course exactly how that can be achieved. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000350\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EI just want to spend a few moments talking about Supplementary Order Paper 365, because I am quite intrigued by it. I received it only today. It states in the explanatory note that it will \u201Cprovide for funds in the Employers\u2019 Account, Residual Claims Account, and Self-Employed Work Account to be applied to meet the costs of entitlements for certain personal injury caused by work-related gradual process, disease, or infection:\u201D. I thought: \u201CGreat stuff! We are actually recognising a person who has had an accident but who is then told by the doctor that the backache or whatever has happened because he or she has arthritis or some other such disease that the patient did not know he or she had until the accident happened.\u201D I thought that this bill was meant to cover that. But then I noted that new clause 28A applies when the employment task giving rise \u201Cto that personal injury was performed or occurred before 1 July 1999;\u201D. That is before the Government came into power. That is 6 years ago. The funding for this has come about in the last few years, yet it will apply only to people who had their accident 6 years ago. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000351\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EThere is something wrong there. This Supplementary Order Paper should have gone to a select committee for that very reason. New Zealand First will support it because, again, we recognise it as a move in the right direction, but it is not enough. There are people suffering badly as a result of an accident, and it adds insult to injury to find out that they are not covered because of gradual process, or something like that. They cannot work, so they lose their income. When it is taken into account that the legislation the Government passed in 2000 provides for compensation for a person injured whilst committing a crime, the House will understand why New Zealand First gets so het up about these sorts of loopholes in legislation. New Zealand First supports this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002213f9fdaf39ff4193be7414c647f75400\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 Health Committee by majority be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 111\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; M\u0101ori Party 1.\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\u003EQuestion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022b9951ab3537f47e28eb027001f227946\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 Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill (No 3) be now read a second time. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 111\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; M\u0101ori Party 1.\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\u003EBill read a second time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000352\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00221b4ecafd72a741a2a3ce6dd7e0d97eed\u0022\u003EOffices of Parliament\u2014Address to Governor-General\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000354\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00222d5c113e64c148cd94bb38a2a1b752a2\u0022\u003EOffices of Parliament\u2014Address to Governor-General\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022 data-id=\u0022e06649421058460095643401d43bc662\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000353\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e06649421058460095643401d43bc662\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That a respectful Address be presented to Her Excellency the Governor-General commending to Her Excellency the alterations to the appropriations for the 2004/05 financial year in respect of Vote Audit, Vote Ombudsmen, and Vote Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment and the appropriations and information for the 2005/06 financial year in respect of those Votes and Offices of Parliament. Very briefly, this is a special procedure followed for Offices of Parliament to ensure their independence. The Officers of Parliament Committee considers the appropriations and makes recommendations. I then move a motion in the House and, if the House agrees, that then becomes the appropriation for those offices. That ensures, therefore, that the Minister of Finance does not operate, in effect, a political control over the budgeting of those offices. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022 data-id=\u0022ec1ccf59a65147718d5bf28e856567c0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000355\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ec1ccf59a65147718d5bf28e856567c0\u0022\u003ELINDSAY TISCH (National\u2014Piako):\u003C/span\u003E National will be supporting this motion. I was on the Officers of Parliament Committee that looked very closely at the appropriations. There are just a couple of points I want to make concerning this report. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000356\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003EFirstly, I draw the House\u2019s attention to the Office of the Controller and Auditor-General\u2019s proposed retirement plan. The retirement plan was based on the 2004-05 Budget round submission in which the Office of the Controller and Auditor-General indicated it was investigating its eligibility to be part of the State Sector Retirement Savings Scheme. Circumstances prevented the office from becoming a member of the State Sector Retirement Savings Scheme, so a separate retirement savings plan was created in September 2004. This plan replicates, with two minor exceptions, the terms and conditions of the State Sector Retirement Savings Scheme. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000357\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003EThose exceptions were, firstly, that members of the current Government Superannuation Fund scheme are entitled to join the Office of the Controller and Auditor-General\u2019s plan, but would not be eligible under the State Sector Retirement Savings Scheme. Secondly, the scheme does not create any obligation on the office to increase the employer\u2019s contribution beyond the initial 1.5 percent. The State Sector Retirement Savings Scheme commits all member employer organisations to increasing their contribution in line with the overall scheme. The Office of the Controller and Auditor-General cannot make such a commitment, as Audit New Zealand is required to fund its employer contribution from fee recoveries. Any increased contribution across the whole of the office, including Audit New Zealand, can be considered only in light of its ongoing and sustainable affordability. That was the case that the Office of the Controller and Auditor-General put up. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000358\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003EOur committee disagreed with that and said that there was no foundation for it, and that the funding provided for the Office of the Controller and Auditor-General\u2019s retirement plan should reflect the funding that would be available under the State sector scheme. It was very clear that we disagreed with the case put up by the office. The Office of the Controller and Auditor-General is entitled to depart from the policy of the State sector scheme. We considered that the cost of doing so should be met from existing funding and should not be treated separately. So we recommended an appropriation of $97,000, GST inclusive, for 2004-05 and the out-years, to fund provision of the office\u2019s retirement plan to all employees, except those who are members of the Government Superannuation Fund. That was where we departed from what the Office of the Controller and Auditor-General asked for at the time. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000359\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003EI also bring the House\u2019s attention to the Office of the Ombudsmen, because there was much discussion about what was happening about the office\u2019s prison investigation support. If we look at the background of the prison complaint investigation support, we see that in 1995 the office was resourced for three full-time prison investigators to enable it to undertake more focused work dealing with prison complaints and incidents in custody, such as deaths and specific concerns from inmates. Then a regular plan of prison visits was instigated, where each institution is visited, on average, nine times each year to supplement direct demands from inmates in the specific inmate-related incidents in penal institutions. Since then we have seen a huge increase in the demand from prison inmates for such a service. In the report from the Office of the Ombudsmen it is noted that the number of complaints received from inmates has increased significantly, from 760 in 1994 to 2,598 in the year ended 30 June 2004. That is an average of 866 per prison investigator. Those numbers are conservative as all telephone inquiries of complaints are not recorded. So there has been a huge increase in prison complaints, and the office is expected to provide a service for dealing with them. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000360\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003EThe issues one needs to consider are that prison investigators are specialists in their particular field, that their workload is both high and demanding in the number of complaints required to be actioned, and that they have considerable and growing work stress relating to the constant need to deal with many difficult and very often unreasonable individuals. There are some pretty substantive statistics to show which prisons the complaints to the Office of the Ombudsmen are coming from. Where we are seeing a huge increase in prison complaints the question has to be asked whether the Office of the Ombudsmen should be handling them? There was a view within the committee that the Department of Corrections should be looking at those complaints. We do not know the nature of the complaints, but the demand on the Office of the Ombudsmen is increasing, because it is a facility available to the inmates. We ask whether the Department of Corrections should not have some responsibility for dealing with those areas.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000361\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003EAnother issue the office raised was that it also carries out two visits to each of the 40 tertiary institutions throughout the country. So that, once again, is a demand on the office. There is also an increase in parliamentary requests. As we move into election mode there is an increasing demand from various political parties\u2014all political parties, no doubt\u2014and they will be seeking extra support from the office with regards to information they require. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000362\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003EFinally, I will move to the Office of the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment. One of the areas that we found quite strange was that the office was doing report reprints and was asking for a one-off appropriation of $67,000 with GST inclusive for the year 2004-05 to meet the costs of additional print reruns. The question that comes out of this is why it is not user-pays. If someone wants a report after the initial runs are done, why should there not be a user-pays system in place whereby money can be sourced in that area? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000363\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003EThe other interesting point is the increased baseline funding of $400,000 that has been recommended. The increased funding should allow the office to expand its capacity to address Resource Management Act issues, which have been increasing over the period of time, as well. Last year the office had 150 complaints under the Resource Management Act, so there are some issues there. The increase in funding was recommended by the majority in Committee. National is happy to support the appropriations and the Government motion.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022 data-id=\u0022bcb5e11d5de248b8ae355fb72b8d3dea\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000364\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bcb5e11d5de248b8ae355fb72b8d3dea\u0022\u003EKEITH LOCKE (Green):\u003C/span\u003E The Greens are supporting this report on the alterations to the appropriations for Audit New Zealand, the Ombudsmen, and the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment. I have been representing the Greens on the Officers of Parliament Committee, which is a committee that works very well. We clearly support the adjustments for the Office of the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment. The office does a tremendous job and needs a bit of improvement on its current baseline. As the committee members agreed, the office has put out some very effective reports. We had quite a bit of discussion about how to get those reports out into the community more effectively. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000365\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EOne of the important reports that has come out over the last year is called Growing for Good: Intensive farming, sustainability and New Zealand\u2019s environment. It is about sustainable farming, and the problems of the degradation of the environment, and in particular of waterways, as a result of intensive farming, particularly dairying. The Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment brought out in that report the importance of getting agriculture to be sustainable, not just to have a nice environment but also for the economic interests of farmers. As water quality declines, so effective dairying declines. The commissioner wrote in that report that the application of nitrogen fertilisers to land has gone up 160 percent in 6 years. If we are to protect our waterways, that is not sustainable. Another issue is that nitrogenous fertilisers are produced by using oil-based products. The oil is getting more expensive, and our farming may become more expensive in the future if we do not take that in hand. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000366\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EAs a result of the report of the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, Fonterra and various other agencies bought into a Dairying and Clean Streams Accord a few months later. The accord is yet to be fully implemented, but the idea is that the dairy companies, the dairy farmers, and the Government are working together to try to get cleaner water and cleaner lakes, and to have a much more sustainable system. The Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment has an ongoing role to monitor that. The Greens certainly support the increased provision in this report. There is a provision for report reprints\u2014and the Growing for Good report may have to be reprinted. It is of interest not only to New Zealanders but to people in other countries. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000367\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThe international links of the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment are very important, too, because if one wants the best practice in a commission like this, one has to maintain those overseas links. The committee was a bit distressed that the overseas study tour, which was planned by the commissioner to check out the evolution of thinking on environmentalism and sustainability, had to be postponed because the commissioner did not have enough money. So we recommended that the commissioner be given another $15,000 to enable that study tour to proceed, and hopefully that recommendation will be passed today. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000368\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThere is also another provision of $400,000 to maintain the capability and capacity of the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment. When one reads back through some of the work the commissioner has done, one can see that it is very current. A lot of the questions that he has addressed are ongoing issues that we as a society and as a Parliament are addressing. For instance, in last year\u2019s annual report, there is discussion of vehicle emission controls. The Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, like the Greens, was very hopeful that this Government would address the question of emission controls. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000369\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThe report states: \u201CA vehicle emissions\u2019 screening policy is also to be phased in over the next two years, with standards to be set based on vehicle age and recognition of the emissions capability of older vehicles.\u201D Unfortunately, we have learnt over the last week that the only track that the Government was going down on vehicle emission controls at the time of warrant of fitness tests has fallen over, because it is deemed to be too expensive and too inaccurate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000370\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b1b5881-3b86-4894-ac77-72905f786141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002255ae7490091b49078e51b477cdbcef58\u0022\u003EHon Judith Tizard\u003C/span\u003E: Nonsense. You\u2019re determined to misrepresent it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000371\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227db40de1641e4c1bb1f832ef260e7f00\u0022\u003EKEITH LOCKE\u003C/span\u003E: The Minister is calling out, but I see that the Auckland Regional Council, in a statement in the last couple of days, has also expressed some concern that there has been such a delay in this area. We will certainly be working with the Minister and the Government, and hopefully getting advice from the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment on how to proceed with this a bit better and how to take in some of the best practice overseas. Perhaps, when the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment goes overseas on his study tour, one of the things he could look at is how vehicle emission controls work overseas so that we can build on other people\u2019s good work in Europe and places like that where they do good testing. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000372\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThe other issue that is very current in the report of the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment is the whole question of the Albany to P\u016Bhoi motorway. He played quite a role in that. As he pointed out, there was a big problem with adverse effects both on the environment and on some of the native bush and wetlands. He was rather disturbed that Transit New Zealand had advised him that road tunnels were perhaps not the best way to go. The report states: \u201CI was particularly concerned about this line of argument as it removes tunnelling as an option for New Zealand, even where it may have clear environmental, social, or economic benefits. I subsequently urged Transit to develop a more explicit policy process for evaluating roading developments that may involve tunnelling.\u201D He states later on that he was pleased to report that Transit has since reviewed the tunnelling options and, on 6 August 2004, announced that there would be a tunnel as part of the plan. So I think that just shows the importance of having that provision in the appropriations in order to enable the capability of the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment to be maintained. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000373\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThere was a previous speech on the Office of the Ombudsmen about the extra $126,000 that has been put into prison investigation support, with $191,000 being added in the 2005-06 year. The increase of prison visits, from 760 to\u2014in 2004\u20142,598, is quite dramatic. I disagree with the National Party speaker that perhaps that means the Department of Corrections should take more responsibility for that, and take a load off the Ombudsman, because the increase in the number of complaints shows deficiencies in the prison system. There is the whole history of the \u201Cgoon squad\u201D and, hopefully, the legacy of that is being rectified now. There is the court decision whereby a number of prisoners have gained compensation because of their mistreatment in solitary confinement. I know from my own experiences in visiting Ahmed Zaoui in P\u0101remoremo prison that he suffered abuse of his human rights in that respect, too. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000374\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003ESo there is certainly a need for the Office of the Ombudsmen to continue its considerable role in that area, although there is now talk in Parliament of establishing a prison inspectorate. If that inspectorate were independent, it might take some of the load off the ombudsmen, which would be a very good thing. There are 1,300 Official Information Act requests that the ombudsmen have to deal with, and the average time taken to fulfil an Official Information Act request is 69 working-days\u2014which is quite a long time\u2014so if we want to reduce that, we have to resource the Office of the Ombudsmen properly, in the way the committee has suggested. As the previous National Party speaker suggested, it is in the interests of parliamentarians too, who generate a lot of those requests. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000375\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThere have been only 15 requests under the Protected Disclosures Act, a statute that the Ombudsman is responsible for helping to implement. That may be indicative of some problems with that legislation. People have to go over all sorts of hurdles before they get to the Ombudsman, and that may put off some people who wish to whistle-blow. Perhaps the Office of the Ombudsmen could enlighten us as we go down the track as to whether it is working as it is supposed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225cee6a89-68e3-40fd-b2d8-d8adb0ba5da0\u0022 data-id=\u0022e416e210d43b4ba8ad36b89af49543fb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000376\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225cee6a89-68e3-40fd-b2d8-d8adb0ba5da0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e416e210d43b4ba8ad36b89af49543fb\u0022\u003EGORDON COPELAND (United Future):\u003C/span\u003E United Future supports the Government motion in respect of Vote Audit, Vote Ombudsmen and the vote for the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment. I take the opportunity to make a few brief comments about Vote Audit. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000377\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225cee6a89-68e3-40fd-b2d8-d8adb0ba5da0\u0022\u003ERecently I was privileged to be in London as part of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association seminar. During the time I was there, a very important commission, the Commission for Africa, was announced. That commission devotes a lot of time to figuring out ways to reduce poverty in Africa, including the write-off of debt for those nations that are now so indebted that they have no way of repaying their debts to the international community. The central issue that came out of that was the issue of governance. When I heard about that issue, my thoughts immediately went back to events such as those in relation to Te W\u0101nanga o Aotearoa that we have had here recently in New Zealand. They really emphasised the same point: that governance is now a very key issue in the distribution of funds from a large entity like the Crown to smaller entities such as non-governmental organisations, and in the way they apply that money. It brought home to me how important that is, so I am therefore delighted to see in the draft plan for the next year that the Auditor-General intends to look very deeply and analytically at the whole area of governance, and at how we can improve that in New Zealand. I think we need to take that on board. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000378\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225cee6a89-68e3-40fd-b2d8-d8adb0ba5da0\u0022\u003EThe second thing that emerged from that seminar for me, to do with the role of the Auditor-General in particular, was that we are very privileged in New Zealand to have an Audit Office with such high standards. That is not the case in many parts of the world, and we do indeed need to maintain, if you like, our world-leading position in relation to the audit of all the Crown\u2019s expenditure. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000379\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225cee6a89-68e3-40fd-b2d8-d8adb0ba5da0\u0022\u003EThis is a very key vote, and with those remarks I signal again that we will support the motion. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022 data-id=\u00223fc9bb40ca2b47c990f5eb5707344249\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000380\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223fc9bb40ca2b47c990f5eb5707344249\u0022\u003EDAIL JONES (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E Just briefly, I suggest to the Green member Keith Locke, in so far as emissions from motor vehicles are concerned, that he comes along to the Regulations Review Committee, a very exciting committee that sits at 8 or 8.30 on a Wednesday morning, as we are looking at that particular issue at this very moment in terms of the regulations that are before us.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000381\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EIn relation to the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, I tell members that I read with interest the article from Dr Morgan Williams on the protection of the Waitakere Ranges. He made the very good point that the draft bill is imprecise. I notice that even the Mayor of Waitakere has said that the bill needs to be worked up. But the important point made by Dr Morgan Williams was that some aspect of compensation should be considered, and I hope that, in any working up, that point is considered, as well. If we want to quote the Great Charter, the Magna Carta of 1215\u2014and I notice Mr Copeland\u2019s comments\u2014we see there is some provision even in the Magna Carta for the protection of persons\u2019 property rights, and that particular right goes back to 1215. [Interruption] Yes, I know. I am just quoting the member\u2019s bill. I have read the explanatory note and the reference to the Magna Carta.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000382\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EThe other point I make in relation to Dr Morgan Williams is that the phrase \u201Cdeath by a thousand cuts\u201D actually goes back to the Sung Dynasty of about 905 AD. It is not a phrase that Dr Williams coined; it relates to a person being killed by a thousand cuts. I would say, on behalf of the people who live in the area bounding the Waitakere Ranges, that they are the people being killed by a thousand cuts\u2014by various forms of Government taxation and various Government measures that are preventing them from enjoying their properties. If this bill were passed\u2014a bill that affects the outskirts of the ranges, the land leading up to the ranges\u2014we would see the people themselves dying by a thousand cuts, rather than the ranges.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000383\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EEveryone in Auckland supports the ranges; there is no one who does not support them. It is an Auckland right\u2014[Interruption] I am not sure whether Mr Prebble has been to any of the meetings; he has shown a total lack of interest in those meetings. The Government should keep its sticky hands off the Waitakere Ranges. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b0d8b0e0-3ece-4865-9145-5eb5983fc54c\u0022 data-id=\u00227d78e4fca9ca4848927a4a291239916b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000384\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b0d8b0e0-3ece-4865-9145-5eb5983fc54c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227d78e4fca9ca4848927a4a291239916b\u0022\u003EHon RICHARD PREBBLE (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E I rise on behalf of the ACT party to speak to the debate on Vote Audit, Vote Ombudsmen and Vote Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment. Those are all Offices of Parliament, and I think it is appropriate we debate those matters. In the Officers of Parliament Committee I actually moved a number of reductions in these votes, some of which were accepted by the committee. But in relation to others, I was unsuccessful. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000385\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c4e45fc017b94b03a48264b8a0ccad53\u0022\u003EHon Dr Michael Cullen\u003C/span\u003E: Shame.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000386\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b0d8b0e0-3ece-4865-9145-5eb5983fc54c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cda7e5baab2b48769b7cc5678d358ce2\u0022\u003EHon RICHARD PREBBLE\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. As the Minister of Finance has said, it is a shame. It was possibly as a former Minister of Finance that I did move those reductions, because the motion still concerns substantial amounts of money, and we should look at it just as hard as we look at the vote of any other Government department. These Officers of Parliament perform what I would like to think is an important role, but I am concerned about whether they are doing so. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000387\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b0d8b0e0-3ece-4865-9145-5eb5983fc54c\u0022\u003EI will start first with the ombudsmen. New Zealand was one of the earlier countries to have the position of an ombudsman. When we analyse what the ombudsmen do today, we see that over half the work is about dealing with prisoners\u2019 complaints. Now, here is an Office of Parliament set up to look after complaints by members of the public in dealing with the civil service, yet what are the ombudsmen doing? They are dealing with complaints from citizens who are in jail. One may say that citizens in jail are entitled to make complaints if they have not been dealt with properly. That is true, but within our prison service and under our\u2014I think namby-pamby\u2014Corrections Act, there are a whole string of ways in which prisoners are entitled to make complaints if they have not been treated properly. But that is not enough for prisoners. They are entitled to pick up their freephone and ring the Office of the Ombudsmen. So many prisoners ring that office that we are being asked by the ombudsmen to put in what is really a call centre, so that New Zealanders who are in jail can ring them. Well, naturally they do that. One of the penalties of being in jail is that there is nothing to do, so prisoners who have nothing to do decide to complain. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000388\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b0d8b0e0-3ece-4865-9145-5eb5983fc54c\u0022\u003EWhat do prisoners complain about? Apparently, one of the terrible complaints, which the ombudsmen get a lot of, is that there is a lot of thieving in prison. Well, why are we not surprised at that? We have put the crims in jail and they pinch from one another, so they ring the ombudsmen. What are we doing? We, as a Parliament, are voting the ombudsmen more money. Now, I said to the Chief Ombudsman at the committee, and I will say it here, that that is not what his office was set up for. The ombudsmen should not be taking complaints from prisoners; the ombudsmen ought to be saying to prisoners that they should complain through the procedure this House has put in place for them. We did not set up the Office of the Ombudsmen for that reason, and that is one of the reasons why I will vote against this motion today. I am opposed to it, and I say that the ombudsmen need to send a signal to prisoners. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000389\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b0d8b0e0-3ece-4865-9145-5eb5983fc54c\u0022\u003EThe second thing that worries me about the Office of the Ombudsmen is that one of the things the ombudsmen are supposed to do is to enable law-abiding citizens to have their official information requests actioned. The ombudsmen are supposed to keep an eye on the Government. Does the Chief Ombudsman do that? No, he does not. The Chief Ombudsman is the most gutless one that we have had. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000390\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b0d8b0e0-3ece-4865-9145-5eb5983fc54c\u0022\u003EWe have Ministers\u2014Mr Maharey in particular, but also the Minister of Education\u2014who now say, when MPs ask for information under the Official Information Act, that they think it will cost a huge figure to be able to provide the information. That may even be true, as they are so incompetent! Those Ministers say that if members of Parliament pass over a great part of their salary, then they may make the information available. Now, that is contrary to the spirit of the Official Information Act, and we would expect the Chief Ombudsman to be on television every night, severely criticising Mr Maharey and Mr Mallard for saying that. But, does he criticise them? No, he does not. He is too busy taking telephone calls from people who are in jail. That is what he thinks his job is. Well, it is not. His job is a much tougher one than answering the complaints of rapists and the like, who are concerned they can no longer get a good view from their prison cell. The Chief Ombudsman\u2019s job is actually to hold Ministers accountable. That may be uncomfortable, but it is what he ought to be doing. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000391\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b0d8b0e0-3ece-4865-9145-5eb5983fc54c\u0022\u003EThen, of course, we come to the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, who wants us\u2014and unfortunately I persuaded the committee of this\u2014to chop down more trees in order to print more copies of his reports, which, he tells us, no one will actually buy but which people want. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000392\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b0d8b0e0-3ece-4865-9145-5eb5983fc54c\u0022\u003EWell, the demand for free services is infinite, and if we are prepared to let the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment send his free report to anybody he can think of, of course he can justify his position. Then, when he has sent them all out\u2014and, as I say, the demand for free copies is infinite\u2014he will then say that there are a lot of people who want to hear his views on various things. Maybe they do, and maybe they do not. But if people at least had to pay a nominal amount for the reports\u2014perhaps just pay for the cost of the paper\u2014I predict that we would find that the demand for the commissioner\u2019s reports was much lower than he would have us believe. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000393\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b0d8b0e0-3ece-4865-9145-5eb5983fc54c\u0022\u003EI believe that if each one of these departments, which grow in number every year, was to come in front of us, it would tell us that the demand for its services was such that it should have more staff, office space, and money. However, I would also draw the attention of the House to the fact that a lot of the work that the Officers of Parliament do is actually the work of MPs. When I first arrived in this House there were 87 MPs, and now there are 120. I would like to think that the extra 30 members of Parliament are doing some work. If they are, it would follow that we would probably need fewer of these various parliamentary officers. It seems to me that at some point someone has to get up and ask when the whole process comes to a halt, because we could put up an argument for any amount of expenditure on things like the ombudsmen and suchlike. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000394\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b0d8b0e0-3ece-4865-9145-5eb5983fc54c\u0022\u003EI know I must sound like a Minister of Finance again, but I was extremely unimpressed by the Audit Office coming along and saying to us that although there have been superannuation requirements that have been met for the whole of the civil service, the Auditor-General has decided that they are not adequate for his department. That is a very, very serious matter for a head of a department to do, because he is actually saying the superannuation requirements that have been given to the rest of the civil service are unfair. If he thinks that, he ought to make that case properly. But what the Auditor-General has done is to take money we have given him to audit the Government accounts, and he has decided to give it to some of his staff. I think that is absolutely wrong. It has been my experience as an MP that no one is trustworthy with his or her own superannuation. MPs have been through that lesson, and the Audit Office is no better than us. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000395\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b0d8b0e0-3ece-4865-9145-5eb5983fc54c\u0022\u003EWho guards the guardians? Well, in this case the Auditor-General is our guardian, and I express to him my strong disapproval of that move. The committee did not agree to approve that extra funding. The Auditor-General can still provide it, but what is outrageous is the way that he will do so, which is by not doing the job that he is actually employed to do, because one cannot spend money twice. I am very critical of a very important senior Government servant like the Auditor-General\u2014I think that he cannot have thought the issue through\u2014deciding to reach a different sort of superannuation arrangement for his staff from the arrangements we have for the rest of the civil service. If the whole civil service system is unfair\u2014I do not think that it is, although anyone could make an argument for better superannuation\u2014then that matter ought to be taken up on behalf of the whole of the civil service. It should not be done in this cavalier way. I think that it was an abuse of the Auditor-General\u2019s position. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000396\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b0d8b0e0-3ece-4865-9145-5eb5983fc54c\u0022\u003EAccordingly, we will vote against the whole report, in order to indicate that view to the Officers of Parliament. They should set a high standard, and should not be the first to jump over for extra money. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022da78a93fe6ab450fb063c6e3084ebcda\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 111\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; M\u0101ori Party 1.\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\u003EACT New Zealand 9.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to, and Address adopted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000397\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a8d32b5855654593a413e191bb845045\u0022\u003EMembers\u2019 Bills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000399\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00225b0aba5f9b6c4c70ac64521f4256af85\u0022\u003EMembers\u2019 Bills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022 data-id=\u0022dfd85aa5cb87413a97e3fc4daab47d87\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000398\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022dfd85aa5cb87413a97e3fc4daab47d87\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House):\u003C/span\u003E Pursuant to an agreement in the Business Committee that had the support of all parties, I seek leave for there to be a ballot to draw two members\u2019 bills tomorrow.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000400\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b6022f4d0d424e76804f2c0da52adda2\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Is there any objection to that course of action being followed?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000401\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b0d8b0e0-3ece-4865-9145-5eb5983fc54c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227118334806924ff5a16be6995e69e733\u0022\u003EHon Richard Prebble\u003C/span\u003E: I apologise to the Minister, but I could not quite hear what he was saying. Did he say that everyone has agreed?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000402\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225600023e0d66454bbf5b384438a80d89\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: Yes; Ken Shirley agreed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000403\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b0d8b0e0-3ece-4865-9145-5eb5983fc54c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a36708e816354586905a2781fa197f2c\u0022\u003EHon Richard Prebble\u003C/span\u003E: God, we\u2019re getting soft! OK.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000404\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022acbe053deee248e4947b7cf410db5ae2\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: I take it from that there is no objection? Thank you very much. There will be a ballot to draw two members\u2019 bills tomorrow.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000405\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00224867663d76c94162a01d3a5cd3fdeaa8\u0022\u003EAppointments\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000406\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022cde0ef381e154b6f85a31be35a0bec57\u0022\u003EJudicial Conduct Commissioner\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022 data-id=\u002232584fe0543a4250a7dc8f6eb825f2f8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000407\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002232584fe0543a4250a7dc8f6eb825f2f8\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Attorney-General):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That, pursuant to section 7(2) and clause 1(1) of schedule 2 of the Judicial Conduct Commissioner and Judicial Conduct Panel Act 2004, this House recommend Her Excellency the Governor-General to appoint Ian Leslie Haynes ONZM, of Auckland, as the Judicial Conduct Commissioner for a term of 5 years commencing on 1 August 2005, having noted that the Attorney-General advises this House, in accordance with section 7(3) of the Act, that the Chief Justice has been consulted about the proposed appointment. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000408\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EThe principal Act was passed last year, but it does not come into force until an Order in Council has been passed. My predecessor as Attorney-General received universal cross-party support for the appointment of Mr Haynes as Judicial Conduct Commissioner, but he is unavailable to take up the position until late July this year, hence the delay in the process. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000409\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EMr Haynes is a very senior lawyer. He has been a partner in Kensington Swan and its predecessor firms for something over 35 years, a specialist in commercial property law, but also in a range of other areas. He has a special interest in the reform of the profession, and professional ethics, and was president of the New Zealand Law Society from 1997 to 2000 while the New Zealand Law Society reform model was pushed through with the support of the district law societies. So I think that Mr Haynes is eminently qualified to fulfil this role, which is designed to be the first port of call for all complaints about judges in the future.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022 data-id=\u002270af7c4f46c54ddab648625aa11e40ec\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000410\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002270af7c4f46c54ddab648625aa11e40ec\u0022\u003EDr RICHARD WORTH (National\u2014Epsom):\u003C/span\u003E On behalf of National I indicate support for the appointment of Ian Leslie Haynes, an appointment made under the Judicial Conduct Commissioner and Judicial Conduct Panel Act of 2004. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000411\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003EThis legislation has been generally in place for almost a year, but\u2014and this has been made clear\u2014National members judged that legislation to be a complete mishit, and strongly opposed it. There were a number of good reasons for that. The key reason was that the primary focus of the Act was, and is, a more formal structure for the removal of judges, yet we have never ever removed a judge, and there is already an established pathway for the removal of judges. That is contained in the Constitution Act, in section 23, \u201CProtection of Judges against removal from office\u201D, which provides that no judge shall be removed from office except by \u201Cthe Governor-General, acting upon an address of the House of Representatives \u2026\u201D. So there was no need for this legislation, and, of course, if this legislation had not been passed, there would be no need for the appointment of the first Judicial Conduct Commissioner. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000412\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003ELegislation should be remedial in nature. It should seek to deal with a mischief, and the short point is that there is no current mischief relating to judicial conduct justifying removal from office. It is interesting to reflect that the Justice and Electoral Committee received advice that it would be within the scope of the bill to provide a range of sanctions falling short of removal from office, such as censure, public apology, or required counselling. But the Labour Government was not prepared to make such changes. Many complaints about judges would not seek the sanction of removal from office; they are complaints that fall well short of that threshold. But the role of this Judicial Conduct Commissioner is to investigate complaints with a view to a process being followed that might result in the removal of such errant judges. Small wonder, then, that the judges expressed real concern that this was a threat to their judicial independence. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000413\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003EI do not doubt that there are cases where judicial conduct causes concern to parties, to witnesses, to lawyers, and to the public. But the Act, despite its name, is not about that at all; it is about setting up a process to remove judges from office. As I have said, the Act contains glib references in section 4 to protecting the requirements of judicial independence, when, in fact, it does completely the opposite. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000414\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003EWho is Mr Haynes? He was the second employer of Simon Power, who is the ever-competent senior Opposition whip seated alongside me. But Mr Haynes can probably point to a track record that is even better than that, because for a long time he has been a commercial partner with Kensington Swan, specialising in commercial property and commercial matters. He is well known throughout New Zealand courts as an expert witness; he gives evidence in property-related litigation matters, for instance. I certainly know of his commercial acumen and expertise in drafting and interpreting contracts. He is well known and respected in Law Society circles both in New Zealand and internationally. He is a past president of the New Zealand Law Society and of the Auckland District Law Society. He is, it is fair to say, the architect of a model for the governance of the legal profession, which is contained in the Lawyers and Conveyancers Bill\u2014a piece of legislation that will probably bite the dust today. So here we have a man with formal legal qualifications matched by substantial legal experience, a former president of the Auckland District Law Society, a former president of the New Zealand Law Society, a fellow of the college of law practice management of the University of Denver, a council member of Lawasia, and a member of the executive committee of the New Zealand Law Society\u2019s property law section. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000415\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003EIt is possible that on assuming office as the next Government in September 2005 National will look to review this legislation\u2014will look to take a more principled position in respect of judicial complaints and judicial appointments. That might bring Mr Haynes\u2019 short career in this particular office to a close. It would be a happy outcome, though, to have had the opportunity to judge his performance in this role. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000416\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003ESo it is that National supports the appointment of Ian Leslie Haynes, Officer of the New Zealand Order of Merit, to this high, exalted, but completely unnecessary station.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022 data-id=\u0022c350ef84ae464163b99be2022fa62b8d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000417\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c350ef84ae464163b99be2022fa62b8d\u0022\u003EDAIL JONES (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E New Zealand First opposed the Judicial Conduct Commissioner and Judicial Conduct Panel Act 2004, and we still do not support its principles. We have made it clear that, on a change of Government involving New Zealand First, this Act ought to be reviewed. However, the Act is the law and it must be given effect to in one way or another. The appointment of Ian Leslie Haynes as the Judicial Conduct Commissioner has the support of New Zealand First, although whether the appointment will be for a term of 5 years remains to be decided after the outcome of the next election. Mr Ian Leslie Haynes is highly regarded amongst all members of the legal profession, and, I would say, in the wider community as well, and he has the support of New Zealand First in this position.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b0d8b0e0-3ece-4865-9145-5eb5983fc54c\u0022 data-id=\u0022a8610fee06874a4abdcf9b929d786164\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000418\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b0d8b0e0-3ece-4865-9145-5eb5983fc54c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a8610fee06874a4abdcf9b929d786164\u0022\u003EHon RICHARD PREBBLE (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E I want to make just a few comments on behalf of the ACT party. We will not oppose this provision, but we do have some reservations with regard to it. Although I do not say that the judiciary cannot be subject to checking, it seems to me that these sorts of measures have a measure of political correctness.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000419\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b0d8b0e0-3ece-4865-9145-5eb5983fc54c\u0022\u003EI raise this point as well. I am sure that Mr Haynes is an excellent person, but it appears to me that his CV lacks court experience.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000420\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e58eaa4f9e2047169103adb3b9dd3b88\u0022\u003EDr Richard Worth\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s so.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000421\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b0d8b0e0-3ece-4865-9145-5eb5983fc54c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002205ae0d223d494fd08e0e3450106993b4\u0022\u003EHon RICHARD PREBBLE\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Worth tells me that that is so. Well, it does seem a bit odd that the person we are appointing to comment about the conduct of judges will do so from the point of view of a lack of knowledge. I assure the House that within the legal profession there is a split between those who operate in the courts\u2014and they are very few; I used to be one of them\u2014and those who do not. Frankly, those who do not do not realise what it is like\u2014any more, I think, than it would be a good idea for many barristers to be doing conveyancing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000422\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b0d8b0e0-3ece-4865-9145-5eb5983fc54c\u0022\u003EI am a bit concerned. It makes me wonder about this position. If the Government started looking\u2014as no doubt it did\u2014for someone with court experience and could not find someone with court experience who was prepared to fill the position, surely that is sending it a bit of a signal that perhaps this is not the right way to go about it. I have some concerns.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000423\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b0d8b0e0-3ece-4865-9145-5eb5983fc54c\u0022\u003EI will express just one more, which is more a personal concern than one of the ACT party, and fits in with an earlier comment. I think the whole country has too many commissioners, and here we are appointing yet another one.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000424\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b0d8b0e0-3ece-4865-9145-5eb5983fc54c\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=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000425\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002248030637443243e4b2ac1cbdd045cbc7\u0022\u003ENg\u0101ti Tuwharetoa (Bay of Plenty) Claims Settlement Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000426\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00229a33824af90b443a882ad1e196c8add2\u0022\u003EInstruction to Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221a4a99a7-292a-4829-ade5-e825f9be4940\u0022 data-id=\u0022665604c3807544dfb48340dc6ae17046\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000427\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221a4a99a7-292a-4829-ade5-e825f9be4940\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022665604c3807544dfb48340dc6ae17046\u0022\u003EHon TAITO PHILLIP FIELD (Minister of State):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That it be an instruction to the Committee of the whole House on the Ng\u0101ti Tuwharetoa (Bay of Plenty) Claims Settlement Bill that it take the bill part by part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000428\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221a4a99a7-292a-4829-ade5-e825f9be4940\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000429\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a3696dc9895a434497f573de5e3da66a\u0022\u003EIn Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000430\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022e3e25aebf24a4e1784e171b3d2f8a246\u0022\u003EPreamble\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022 data-id=\u00229dad37dda5804e2b988e4b486cbad49c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000431\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229dad37dda5804e2b988e4b486cbad49c\u0022\u003ESIMON POWER (National\u2014Rangitikei):\u003C/span\u003E I look forward to making a contribution during the Committee stage on the Ng\u0101ti Tuwharetoa (Bay of Plenty) Claims Settlement Bill. The Committee will recall that there has been some debate at various points over different translations with respect to the preamble, and the like. In fact, a reasonably prolonged discussion was held in the M\u0101ori Affairs Committee on that exact point. That is why we see at this point a reasonably large portion of the preamble having been struck out. This is a portion that is largely contained in te reo. It goes on for some pages. Not until we get to page 21 of the bill do we find the new, unanimous preamble to be contained in the legislation. I do not profess to be an expert in matters M\u0101ori, but it seems to me that we as a Parliament have worked our way through, both in this Chamber and outside it, to ensure that a M\u0101ori version of the preamble appears together with its English translation. The portion of the preamble that refers to the conflict in the Eastern Bay of Plenty is contained on page 33, some 12 pages on from the start.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000432\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003EI welcome the arrival of Georgina te Heuheu to the Chamber to take a call on matters relating to the conflict in the Eastern Bay of Plenty. I am sure that any contribution that she and Dr Mapp will make will dwarf my small contribution in this process. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000433\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003EThere is no doubt that I am in a position to signal National\u2019s ongoing support of this legislation, but we will, during the Committee stage, be raising some issues from time to time that have captured the imagination and the attention of those in the National Party who sat on the M\u0101ori Affairs Committee. With that short introduction, I welcome the contribution to follow by Georgina te Heuheu.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022 data-id=\u0022125b12f3684548a7bcfc8eda0d96fb90\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000434\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022125b12f3684548a7bcfc8eda0d96fb90\u0022\u003EHon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU (National):\u003C/span\u003E I am very pleased to follow on from my colleague, and contrary to his suggesting that this will somehow be way above what he has suggested, that, of course, is quite wrong. In the National Party caucus we are all committed to the resolution of historic grievances, and so each and every one of us basically\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000435\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224efc10bf43534563b0cebae28541c008\u0022\u003ESimon Power\u003C/span\u003E: Who was that member who was known for doing all the work?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000436\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c7ca6210de874373b04426f753d58e35\u0022\u003EHon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU\u003C/span\u003E: That is right, Douglas Graham basically paved the way in this area. He formulated and developed a treaty settlement framework that has stood the test of time, and but for this Government with its tendency to push the boundaries further than what the New Zealand public really want, that model is basically in place here in the bill before us today. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000437\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EAs I say, we support this debate, as we will be supporting the passage of the bill. Two or three issues arose during our consideration of the bill, but by and large one of the issues that caused quite major concern arose in one of the schedules, in which the Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa Bay of Plenty people wanted to have their association with the geothermal resource recorded in the bill. Fortunately the M\u0101ori Affairs Committee, as a whole, decided that that probably was not appropriate\u2014and I will come to the reasons for that in a minute\u2014and that this was to be a new schedule. It is now no longer in the bill, because what the claimant tribe wanted can be adequately accommodated in the deed of settlement. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000438\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EThe reason that this bill, I suppose, caused a unique difference was that Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa Bay of Plenty is one part of the total Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa tribe. I am Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa and I hail from the centre of the North Island, which is often referred to as Ng\u0101ti Tuwharetoa, the principal part of the tribe. This issue has not arisen in any settlement that we have had to deal with before whereby one has the same stories applying to both ends of the tribe, but clearly sometimes the versions do not always coincide. The other issue is that as much as Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa Bay of Plenty may have wanted to tell the main Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa story and have that put into legislation, it was felt by the select committee, and by National in particular, that that might pre-empt the way in which claims were settled when it comes to the settlement of the T\u016Bwharetoa claims where I hail from, and there was no reason at all to be pre-empting anything that might be done in respect of any subsequent settlement. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000439\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003ESo that was one issue, and I certainly will talk on that in more detail as we go on with the Committee debate. Another issue arose relative to the geothermal resource itself. We had submissions from the Pukaki Trust in the Bay of Plenty, which will be looking to do its own settlement. It actually owns a piece of land in which the geothermal resource sits. The trust had some very clear objection to Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa Bay of Plenty being given a statutory acknowledgment over that resource, particularly in so far as the resource sits on land that the trust owns. I think that it does, in a way, highlight a problem that may or may not arise in the future, and which the Government should give some attention to. It is that, essentially, while a group may indeed rightly lay claim to a particular resource in terms of kaitiakitanga, or sense of stewardship over that resource, the reality is that it will be the case that others within the same rohe, or boundary, will also be able to lay a similar claim. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000440\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EWhere neither of those groups has an ownership stake in the land, possibly no problem arises, but when one of them actually owns the land through which the resource runs, then clearly it is a problem. If I own a block of land and there is a resource\u2014in this case, a geothermal resource\u2014sitting plonk in the middle, and some other group, not my tribe, says: \u201CWell, we\u2019ve got a stewardship right, or a cultural association with that resource, we want that recognised by way of a statutory acknowledgment.\u201D, I would then say: \u201CHang on, it\u2019s sitting on my land.\u201D How does that sit? We had some discussion on this. We were assured that no one particular group is pre-empted from also seeking a statutory acknowledgment over a particular resource, a particular site, or a piece of land, just because another group already has one. That is what we are told. We have to have faith, I suppose. I do not know what will happen if, one day, an issue arises and we find that the statutory acknowledgment granted to one group somehow pre-empts the other group from also being able to raise his or her particular interest in the resource, as well. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000441\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003ESo that was another issue that has been dealt with. As usual we had the issue around doubts about sufficient mandate and doubts about sufficient agreement on the deed of settlement itself. National, and I think New Zealand First as well, regularly raise the issue of how much efficacy there is in the support of a people for a settlement when one is not getting what one might say would be optimum buy-in, and that would be at least above 50 percent. The long-term issue with this problem is that none of us would want to see any of these settlements revisited at some future date because some section of a tribe could come back later and say: \u201CWell look, there was only a 48 percent buy-in to the settlement, and that wasn\u2019t us, we\u2019re part of the balance of the tribe that didn\u2019t agree.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003ESo I implore the Minister to be conscious of this issue and to make sure the Office of Treaty Settlements is doing everything it can to ensure increased buy-in, both for mandating and for ratification of the Government\u2019s entity and, particularly, for deeds of settlement. Because what we all want to be certain of, as parliamentarians, is that once a settlement is completed there are no legitimate grounds for bringing it back to the House. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000443\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EOther issues that were raised when we were considering the bill during the whole select committee process were things like the fact we are now translating these settlement bills and having quite a considerable amount of legislation in te reo. That in itself adds a focus for debate, but the issue we want to be sure of is that the more te reo is used in legislation, the more care is taken by those concerned with putting true meanings into the legislation to really ensure that the M\u0101ori matches the English. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cba965bb-864f-4e06-99dc-6fcdfd007ad5\u0022 data-id=\u002253279ee24f9e4c0bba2c1e26ae04a6eb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000444\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cba965bb-864f-4e06-99dc-6fcdfd007ad5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002253279ee24f9e4c0bba2c1e26ae04a6eb\u0022\u003EPITA PARAONE (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E I stand on behalf of New Zealand First\u2014which, as I have said before and will say again, is the only non - politically aligned party in this House\u2014to speak on this bill in the Committee stage. I also want to take the opportunity to thank my whip for giving me this time, because I know all the people who are caught up in the Auckland gridlock will be listening to this debate. Mrs Rene Peach, who lives in Cambridge, will be listening as well, and I would just like to say t\u0113n\u0101 koutou. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000445\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cba965bb-864f-4e06-99dc-6fcdfd007ad5\u0022\u003EI want to reiterate our position with regard to the inclusion of the words \u201Cthe principles of the Treaty of Waitangi\u201D, particularly where they are set out in clause 14(a)(i)(A) of this bill. During the second reading I indicated on behalf of the New Zealand First members our support for this bill in spite of the inclusion of the words that I have just mentioned. I should say that that actually caused some surprise to both officials and some members in the House at the time. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000446\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cba965bb-864f-4e06-99dc-6fcdfd007ad5\u0022\u003EHaving said that, I just want to talk on the preamble, and in particular on Supplementary Order Paper 367 sponsored by the Minister in the chair, the Hon Mark Burton, in terms of an amendment to recital (32) of the bill. The Government-sponsored Supplementary Order Paper seeks an amendment to the English text of that recital. On perusal of the M\u0101ori text, I note that no amendment to it is sought. I am sure that that does not mean the M\u0101ori text is right, but in order to ensure there is a true translation of the English text, I have proposed a Supplementary Order Paper. This may be seen to be a bit premature, given that the Supplementary Order Paper has not been put before the Committee for consideration. However, I seek that in recital (32) of the M\u0101ori text, the words \u201Ci waenga te rohe o Kawerau\u201D be substituted for the words \u201Cki Kawerau\u201D. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000447\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cba965bb-864f-4e06-99dc-6fcdfd007ad5\u0022\u003ESome people may say that that is being just too particular, but I think it is important not only for this Parliament but for this nation that the translations of the two official languages should match. I suspect that in the future, students of the language will see legislation that has been passed in the M\u0101ori language as a learning resource. So I would like to think that the Committee will give consideration to that proposal. Although I would like to see the whole bill written in M\u0101ori, given some of the occurrences in the recent past when the M\u0101ori language has been introduced into previous bills, I think this is a small but very important step, not only for this Parliament but also for our country, in terms of recognising the tangata whenua language of New Zealand. It is very interesting to note, as I look across at the Government benches, that I am not sure whether there is anyone sitting there who has the ability to speak or understand M\u0101ori. It is important that I make these points, because when future bills of a similar nature come before the House we will be asking that the M\u0101ori language be used. Hopefully it will be used more fully than it has been in this bill, so that there will be no doubt in the minds of all New Zealanders that we are a country that recognises and utilises the two official languages\u2014that is, M\u0101ori and English.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022 data-id=\u00227d46132559ee4dfba513b54d23a0e3e2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000448\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227d46132559ee4dfba513b54d23a0e3e2\u0022\u003EMETIRIA TUREI (Green):\u003C/span\u003E The preamble contains a description of the Compensation Court process that was established to deal with the return to T\u016Bwharetoa of wrongly confiscated land. The preamble talks about how approximately 87,000 acres of confiscated land was divided into blocks. The Compensation Court, after hearing various evidence, decided to return some of that land. It did so by returning a couple of blocks. One block was given to 10 people and one block was given to 13 people. Those awards were made on the basis that those people were the rightful owners and were not implicated in the so-called rebellion. At the time, T\u016Bwharetoa considered that the returned land was to be held in trust for the iwi as a whole. But because of the nature of the Compensation Court\u2014the cultural milieu out of which it was developed\u2014there was in fact never any mention of those people holding the land in trust, and those blocks were granted to those 10 and 13 people respectively as individual owners.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000449\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022\u003EThe preamble goes on to describe how difficult that was and what that meant for the iwi. In fact, it meant the further loss of the land by placing the land, effectively, under individual ownership rather than collective ownership, and enabling it to be on-sold. One of the signals that that shows for all of us is that when those processes by which restitution is made are developed in isolation from the tangata whenua for whom the restitution is designed, or when the processes are developed in isolation from the tikanga and the values of the people affected, huge mistakes are made. Part of making the mistake is identifying and picking winners and leaving losers. The Compensation Court process established in 1863 was a clear and classic case of the Crown establishing a process without tikanga and consultation, then leaving M\u0101ori bereft when they were supposed to be restored.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000450\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022\u003EWhat I would like to see and be made clear in this Committee tonight is the fact that we are, again, seeing that exact same process. The process for restitution of wrongs done in the past, through Crown settlements and via the Office of Treaty Settlements, is again a process that has been established within the cultural milieu of the Government of the time. It does not involve, and never has involved, any real consultation with the tangata whenua. It is not based on tikanga; it is based primarily on the policy of Governments and the desires and needs of Governments. It is not based on the real justice that should be attributed to the tangata whenua, or to the mana whenua who have been wronged, whose land has been taken wrongly, and who deserve to have justice restored to them. It is just one example of how the same process is again occurring here in the T\u016Bwharetoa bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000451\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022\u003EI refer now to submitters who came to the M\u0101ori Affairs Committee, such as the Ng\u0101ti Rangitihi and their story about their attempts to do the best for their own people and to find a way to develop and progress their claims through the mechanisms available to them\u2014established by Governments over time and supported by this Government\u2014like the Waitangi Tribunal and the claims process. I refer to their efforts to ensure that the land within their rohe is protected from the settlements that are occurring around them, particularly that of Ng\u0101ti Awa and of T\u016Bwharetoa as well. The Crown, through its settlement process, has picked T\u016Bwharetoa as a winner in this regard over this area of land, so that Ng\u0101ti Rangitihi have been unable to secure funding even for their research. Ng\u0101ti Rangitihi told the select committee that Ng\u0101ti Awa had received $3 million and T\u016Bwharetoa $1.5 million to help with the research of their claims, yet they were entitled only to $200 per witness to help with witness costs, and no money to help them with their research.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000452\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022\u003EIf Ng\u0101ti Rangitihi cannot get support even to research their claim, then their losses and the injustice done to them as an iwi within that area cannot be properly dealt with through the Government\u2019s own processes. Therefore, they are being robbed of their capacity, and of their access to the justice system through the settlement process and through the process of restitution and restoration of lands to the iwi from whom it was taken. We are again seeing Government process being used to pick winners and identify losers, which leaves those who are not yet ready to claim, those who cannot yet secure funding yet to prepare research in order to pursue their claims, and those who are choosing alternative paths to settlement, again to be without justice.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022 data-id=\u0022335ef1b39fd44fa08859f6c1e69fe9ec\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000453\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022335ef1b39fd44fa08859f6c1e69fe9ec\u0022\u003EDr WAYNE MAPP (National\u2014North Shore):\u003C/span\u003E I was going to speak on the preamble and perhaps the philosophy that underlies the preamble, because it has now become pervasive. It really speaks about the attitudes that the Crown has towards M\u0101ori, and that, perhaps, some M\u0101ori might have to themselves and their position in life.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000454\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003ERecital (33) of the preamble refers to the loss of traditional lands through confiscation, Crown purchases, etc., and includes, and I quote directly: \u201Csuch as the coast and the swamp that traditionally provided food, medicine, and shelter.\u201D Further on, recital (40) refers to the fact that lands had been drained\u2014the drainage of the Rangitaiki wetlands. That seems to imply that M\u0101ori are a Stone Age people\u2014that they were at the time of confiscation, and are now. We clearly know that that is truly absurd. Yet the preamble almost envisages that. Surely, we would recognise\u2014and, given that we are lawmakers here, legislation and preambles ought to be careful about this\u2014that, just as anyone who is a landowner in the modern world seeks to develop the land for economic advantage where it is appropriate and desirable, we would reasonably expect M\u0101ori to have done the same themselves.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000455\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EFor instance, could it really be considered a loss today that people have lost the use of a swamp for food, medicine, and shelter? People do not live today in raup\u014D huts made from raup\u014D gathered from a swamp, neither do they primarily use swamps for food. In fact, what happened right throughout the Hauraki Plains, the Eastern Bay of Plenty, and many other parts of New Zealand is that those wetlands were reclaimed\u2014admittedly, not by the M\u0101ori owners from whom they were confiscated, but by subsequent settlers\u2014and turned into productive dairy farms, which is arguably one of the world\u2019s most profitable uses of such lands. M\u0101ori who own such lands do the same themselves; one has only to look at Northland, around Ruawai, to see the reality of that. We should not make references in these kinds of preambles as if M\u0101ori were still a Stone Age people and lamented the loss of resources that a Stone Age people would use. Let us recognise the benefits of developments. In fact, the ILO conventions that I know the Green Party is very fond of talk about the right of development. Development does actually mean using new technology. Similarly with the Hui Taumata; it would have had exactly the same values.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000456\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EI say to the Government that when it is preparing its preambles let us not have a rose-tinted approach to a past when people lived in a state of nature\u2014if one will\u2014but let us talk about how people really live and how they want to live. Let us talk about aspiration; that would be a lot more relevant and, dare I say it, would have a lot more credibility amongst the wider community. When the public read about this kind of thing in our legislation\u2014and they do; it gets out there, generally\u2014frankly, it causes frustration. It causes people to wonder why we are so focused on the past, as if it was frozen, rather than looking forward to development.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002272e48ab0-e7ae-427f-bedc-793b7a91adba\u0022 data-id=\u0022214da61e5cd949a1bf926a5390557ee8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000457\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002272e48ab0-e7ae-427f-bedc-793b7a91adba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022214da61e5cd949a1bf926a5390557ee8\u0022\u003EHon MARK BURTON (Minister in charge of Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations):\u003C/span\u003E I shall take a short call to respond briefly to a number of points made by members.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000458\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002272e48ab0-e7ae-427f-bedc-793b7a91adba\u0022\u003EFirstly, Dr Mapp\u2019s comment about the preamble and the historical account missed the point that this is an agreed historical account of what was. It records what was lost to the people at the time, and arguably records, therefore, in a sense, his point that the opportunity for such development that he talked about was lost to those people as a consequence. So it is not a lamenting of that, in the sense of wanting to go back to it, but, rather, simply a matter of recording clearly that that is the nature of what was lost.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000459\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002272e48ab0-e7ae-427f-bedc-793b7a91adba\u0022\u003EIn response to the member from the Green Party who talked about access to funding, I think the matter she raised is far more complex than she said, in terms of some of the issues within the group of people concerned. But it is important to note that the funding she referred to was not direct Government funding; it was Crown Forestry Rental Trust funding, and that does put a slightly different complexion on it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000460\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002272e48ab0-e7ae-427f-bedc-793b7a91adba\u0022\u003ETo go back to the comments from the first member who spoke, the Hon Georgina te Heuheu, I have to comment on two points. Firstly, on the encouragement of optimum participation and mandating, I absolutely agree that through each of the participatory processes everything that can be done should be done to encourage participation, but we cannot require that people exercise their choice. As legislators, we must be confident that the opportunity did exist genuinely, easily, and freely for those who are eligible to participate in votes and to have their opinion recorded and heard.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000461\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002272e48ab0-e7ae-427f-bedc-793b7a91adba\u0022\u003ESitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022 data-id=\u0022dd88b121ea9e4c94b200dd40e37aff8f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000462\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022dd88b121ea9e4c94b200dd40e37aff8f\u0022\u003EHon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU (National):\u003C/span\u003E In relation to the preamble, I wanted to take a call to support my colleague Dr Wayne Mapp in so far as he urged that the Government recognise that the preamble was largely the wish of the iwi concerned, which is what I took the Minister to say. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000463\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EI still think that Dr Mapp had a very valid point. I know, from my short experience as an Associate Minister in charge of Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations to the Hon Sir Doug Graham, that the preamble is extremely important to a claimant tribe, for the reason that these settlements are important. For nearly 140 years, for some of them, they have carried this hurt, because that is the way a lot of them see it. They suffered this hurt so long ago and have tried for generations to get redress to find some way of securing justice. Basically they see the preamble as giving credence to the hurt they have carried for many years, so it is understandable that all preambles will, first of all, state the history as has been recounted by the claimant tribe, but also will probably reflect a lot of the hurt and the sense of injustice that most tribes have carried since the 1860s. Of course, that is why we have the preambles couched in the way they are. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000464\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EThat is understandable, and I appreciate why tribes would want to have their preamble couched in the terms that they normally are. But in support of my colleague Dr Mapp, it does not mean that the Crown needs to buy into that mode. While it is proper for the Crown, on behalf of New Zealanders, to acknowledge the injustice, because that is what these claims are about\u2014an injustice to sectors of our community; a longstanding injustice to be rectified\u2014none the less I think there is a point to be made, that the Crown needs to try to strike a balance and that there is also an aspirational component to these settlements, because that is what they are about, too. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000465\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EHopefully settlement legislation brings grievances to an end, but it also signals the start of a better future. If, as my colleague Dr Mapp has signalled, he does not see that necessarily in the preamble, then I think that is an issue for the Minister in charge of Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations and the Minister in the chair, Mita Ririnui, to bear in mind. In the future they should see whether there is a way of stating the history and imparting the deep sense of injustice that particular tribes\u2014in this case Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa Bay of Plenty\u2014feel in relation to what happened to them and to their ancestors so long ago, couched in terms that we all genuinely hope will signal that this settlement is the start of movement forward. We should not look like we are just mired in the past, because of course nobody is\u2014certainly not members in this Parliament. We in the Parliament, more than anybody, need to ensure that these settlements project a forward-looking view, that they lay the basis for forward momentum, for acknowledging and giving credence to the hurt that has been suffered by a particular tribe, but also signal our understanding\u2014an aspirational signal\u2014that things will be better and, indeed, things will be different because what we are doing in this settlement is giving a basis on which to move forward.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022 data-id=\u002203231c6ad199423581f64969077c6cdb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000466\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002203231c6ad199423581f64969077c6cdb\u0022\u003ESTEPHEN FRANKS (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E I found very interesting the thoughtful comments\u2014some of the most thoughtful I have heard on this topic\u2014made by the Hon Georgina te Heuheu and Dr Mapp, in looking seriously at what many people have regarded as mere formalities. Part 1 is the part with the text of the acknowledgments, the historical recital, and I was pleased to see that those members took it seriously. I think future generations may well look at this part\u2014and look at it in absolute amazement that we could have a long recital of history, going back 140-odd years, and that the Crown on behalf of the people of New Zealand is apologising for things that can scarcely be known and for wrongs that are done daily, today.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000467\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EI draw attention to clause 8(3)(f), in which there is an apology, effectively, for eroding \u201Cthe traditional social structures, mana, and rangatiratanga of Ng\u0101ti Tuwharetoa\u201D, and for failing to \u201Cprotect Ng\u0101ti Tuwharetoa \u2026 from the impact of these actions\u201D\u2014presumably, that means eroding the social structures, mana or pride, and rangatiratanga of Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa. Well, there is nothing whatsoever in the treaty that says that social structures, mana, and rangatiratanga will not be eroded. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EThe treaty said that the protections of English property law would be given to property, and those were rights that M\u0101ori did not have. Those were concepts of ownership that M\u0101ori did not have. It is perfectly in order for the Crown to apologise for confiscating land without compensation, for taking rights by fraud, or for punishing people who had not rebelled and giving their land away to others. That is perfectly in order, but for this Parliament now to be turning round and grovelling because traditional social structures have been eroded is something the ACT party simply will not be party to. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000469\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003ETraditional social structures may be good, they may be bad; they simply are. There will be parts that we all regret to see gone. I regret the loss of the sense of community that I grew up with before television, but I do not expect any Government to start apologising for the erosion of the institutions of civil society that occurred because the State started a television service that meant people stayed at home instead of going out. I do not see any reason why the anglicisation of property rights, which of course did erode traditional society and the power of chiefs, is something to apologise for. In just about every place where that has not happened, traditional society has eroded just as corruptly.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000470\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EIndeed, when the treaty was signed, the missionaries would have been very well aware, from the crusading investigative journalism of The Times of London, of just what the traditional power of the chiefs had done in Scotland. Indeed, I think that article 2 of the treaty was a direct reflection of concern about the abuse of chiefly power that took for itself the value that should have been available for all ordinary people. The traditional social structure did not protect many of the people, who had none of those so-called erosions, when it became a new market economy. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002273f60731-048d-4a21-81c5-52d588de2325\u0022 data-id=\u002287fca53f88554dca8dd67d298f37c1ca\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000471\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002273f60731-048d-4a21-81c5-52d588de2325\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002287fca53f88554dca8dd67d298f37c1ca\u0022\u003EHon MITA RIRINUI (Associate Minister in charge of Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations):\u003C/span\u003E I first acknowledge the contribution made by National member the Hon Georgina te Heuheu, and her comments in relation to this bill that it is a positive step forward for T\u016Bwharetoa ki Kawerau. I also remind the previous speaker, Mr Stephen Franks, that the Crown is not apologising for the actions he referred to, but for the fact that by its actions the Crown was in breach of the Treaty of Waitangi\u2014hence the apology.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000472\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002273f60731-048d-4a21-81c5-52d588de2325\u0022\u003EI stand also to respond to the amendment tabled by New Zealand First member Pita Paraone. He proposes to amend the preamble by removing the words \u201Cki Kawerau\u201D and adding the words \u201Ci waenga te rohe o Kawerau\u201D. That is what we might call a semantic matter, in that the English translation means very much the same thing. Why would we add six words when one is sufficient? The reference to Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa ki Kawerau is the preferred wording in the description of that particular claimant group and, to that end, the Government will not be supporting the amendment. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022 data-id=\u002217e0e1b602f54b07a3528a093f099d51\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000473\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002217e0e1b602f54b07a3528a093f099d51\u0022\u003ESTEPHEN FRANKS (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E I am glad that the Minister in the chair, Mita Ririnui, took a call to respond. The argument he made, though, that the Crown is not apologising for eroding traditional structures, is not consistent with the wording of clause 8(3)(f), which states: \u201Cthese actions\u201D\u2014referring to the individualisation of title and loss of the use of swamps and land, etc.\u2014\u201Ceroded the traditional social structures, \u2026 The Crown failed to adequately protect Ng\u0101ti Tuwharetoa \u2026 from the impact of these actions and this was a breach of the Treaty of Waitangi \u2026 and its principles.\u201D My questions are: how, where\u2014and what principles?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000474\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EThere is no definition of those principles. They were weasel words used by this House in a moment of infamy, and subsequently the courts have had to try to give them some meaning. The courts have struggled. We have no authoritative statement of what those so-called principles are, yet in this provision we see the Crown acknowledging having eroded social structures, etc., and then in clause 10 apologising for the matters it has acknowledged. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000475\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EClause 10(4) states: \u201CThe Crown profoundly regrets its failure to acknowledge the mana and rangatiratanga of Ng\u0101ti Tuwharetoa (Bay of Plenty).\u201D Clause 10(5) states that the Crown \u201Cseeks to atone for these wrongs and to begin the process of healing \u2026\u201D. Clause 10(2) states: \u201CThe Crown profoundly regrets and unreservedly apologises for the breaches of the Treaty of Waitangi \u2026 and its principles.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000476\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003ENone of us know what those principles are. The Prime Minister, when directly requested, has never managed to tell us what those principles are. No speaker from the Government has ever told us exactly what principle says that the traditional social structures of M\u0101ori should not be eroded. For all peoples, traditional social structures evolve. Erosion is a way of talking about it pejoratively, but evolution is the action of every human social structure.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000477\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EIndeed, I suggest that if the Government offered Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa who are living in the Bay of Plenty now an opportunity to exchange their position for what they had then, very few would take it up. Who would want to be subject to a traditional social structure in which slavery had only just gone? Who would want to be subject to a traditional social structure whereby the ability to utilise land did not have the reforms or efforts that Sir Apirana Ngata brought to it in order to make collective landholding economically worthwhile? It took a great deal of erosion\u2014or evolution\u2014in traditional social structures to get to the position where people could be confident even that they would get to harvest a crop they had sowed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000478\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EI think it is a disgrace that this Committee is sitting here tugging its forelock, and asking where it can sign and when it will vote, when those apologies are historical nonsense and are for conduct that has nothing whatsoever to do with the treaty. If that apology had been for the fraudulent procuring of land, for the wrongful punishment of people for rebellions they were not involved in, or simply for collective punishments when English law required that people were found guilty of individual crimes, then it would be something the ACT party could support.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000479\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EInstead, in clause 10(3) we have an apology for \u201Cthe cumulative effect of its actions over the generations, which have had a damaging effect on the welfare, economy, environment, and development of Ng\u0101ti Tuwharetoa \u2026\u201D. What blithering nonsense! The damaging effect that would have been the lot of Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa if land had not been individualised, if swamps had not been cleared, and if people had not been able to participate in the export economy, would have been far more profound. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000480\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EFor New Zealand First to have the ability to trumpet its opposition to the so-called principles, and then for us to come across a bill like this that has this Parliament apologising for wrongs we cannot define, and for actions we should be applauding in many cases rather than rejecting, is to say that this country is lying to itself. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022749a724d-1ef9-49cb-9ba2-2610403653ea\u0022 data-id=\u00227cf68e8a063c4de098f43f18624dc73e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000481\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022749a724d-1ef9-49cb-9ba2-2610403653ea\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227cf68e8a063c4de098f43f18624dc73e\u0022\u003EDIANNE YATES (Labour\u2014Hamilton East):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000482\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022749a724d-1ef9-49cb-9ba2-2610403653ea\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000483\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022749a724d-1ef9-49cb-9ba2-2610403653ea\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Pita Paraone to recital (32) of the M\u0101ori text be agreed to:\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000484\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022749a724d-1ef9-49cb-9ba2-2610403653ea\u0022\u003Eto omit the words \u201Cki Kawerau\u201D, and substitute the words \u201Ci waenga te rohe o Kawerau\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022aac8dc98aaeb4ddfba497f1283e3b309\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 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 9.\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=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000485\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 367 in the name of the Hon Mark Burton to recital (32) in the preamble be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000486\u0022\u003EAmendment agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002282ed7e033e514f6b81d35cf3b48aa2cb\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 preamble as amended be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 111\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; M\u0101ori Party 1.\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\u003EACT New Zealand 9.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPreamble as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000487\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022d4f5757de30341dd8c4fdc4e3a2f9927\u0022\u003EPart 1  Acknowledgements and apology by the Crown to Ng\u0101ti Tuwharetoa (Bay of Plenty), and preliminary provisions\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022 data-id=\u00221a245394a6ac4b63a5757abc174cc6a7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000488\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221a245394a6ac4b63a5757abc174cc6a7\u0022\u003EHon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU (National):\u003C/span\u003E Part 1 outlines the purpose of the bill, which is essentially to record the acknowledgments and apology given by the Crown to Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa Bay of Plenty in the deed of settlement. It also gives effect to certain provisions of the deed of settlement signed between Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa Bay of Plenty and the Crown in respect of historical claims. In so far as it gives the outline of the bill, Part 1 signals that Part 3 will provide that the settlement of the claims of Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa Bay of Plenty is final, and deals with related issues. It is important for the members of the public who are listening to know that the objective of settlement legislation is always to make sure that the settlement of the historic injustice that has been suffered by any one particular tribe is regarded as being full and final for the matters that are dealt with in the legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000489\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EClauses 7 and 8 set out both in M\u0101ori and in English the acknowledgments to Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa Bay of Plenty in respect of their grievances. This House should never underestimate the importance of this part of any settlement legislation to the tribe in question, particularly when a tribe has suffered raupatu, or confiscation, at the hands of the Crown for standing up for hearth and home, so to speak. Those people who are of English extraction, and I am one of them as well, will understand clearly what that means. There is an understanding that the hearth and home are sacrosanct to the family, and that is why I think those confiscations were such an unhappy time in our history. In essence the tribes were basically standing up for no more than their hearth and their home. In other words, they were saying: \u201CThis is my home. I have a right to stand and protect it.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000490\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EWhen the Crown acknowledges and apologises for unlawful confiscations it is an important matter for the tribe concerned. Although much is made of the treaty grievance gravy train and the money that is tied up in settlements, members must believe that a public apology set in legislation is a huge thing for tribes, and in this case it will be no less so for Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa Bay of Plenty. It is basically a recognition by the Crown of the struggles of the ancestors of Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa Bay of Plenty. It states that \u201CThe Crown profoundly regrets and unreservedly apologises for the breaches of the Treaty of Waitangi (Te Tiriti o Waitangi)\u201D, and particularly for the confiscation of Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa Bay of Plenty lands and for the cumulative effect of those actions over the generations. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000491\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EI was listening to the member for ACT, Stephen Franks. M\u0101ori society was built upon the ownership of land\u2014tribal ownership. Once that was taken away, there was little chance for the societal structures to remain.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022 data-id=\u002283efe62146bf46b2b20a8f85d3c0f4ba\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000492\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002283efe62146bf46b2b20a8f85d3c0f4ba\u0022\u003EJUDY TURNER (Deputy Leader\u2014United Future):\u003C/span\u003E I will take just a brief call on Part 1 of the Ng\u0101ti Tuwharetoa (Bay of Plenty) Claims Settlement Bill, because it relates to the apology. In a way, I want to counter the speech made by Mr Franks, who was concerned that the Crown was apologising merely for the erosion over time of traditional structures that may have changed anyway, as traditional structures do when societies progress and move on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000493\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022\u003EHowever, the nature of this apology is that it is based on a specific moment in history when a group of people were traumatised through land confiscation and an accusation of collective guilt. At that point in time a process of the erosion of traditional structures began, which can be dated from a traumatic event for which the Crown now chooses to apologise\u2014and rightly so. I think it is wrong somehow to water down the very essence of this apology, by saying that that erosion was some sort of natural process that could have occurred over time anyhow because traditional structures in society do change. That is not what we are dealing with here; the apology is about a traumatic event that happened to those people, from which we can now date a process of erosion.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000494\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022\u003EThat process could have happened in a different way and in a different manner. Societies do change, cultures do change, but that is not what is being apologised for here. The apology is for the fact that the people in that group were required to make changes and to have their traditional structures eroded through a traumatic event imposed on them by other people. I think we need to remain supportive of this aspect of the legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022 data-id=\u00229b914735f58746c38567c4b699dd0d97\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000495\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229b914735f58746c38567c4b699dd0d97\u0022\u003EDr WAYNE MAPP (National\u2014North Shore):\u003C/span\u003E I turn to the apologies and acknowledgments set out in Part 1 of the Ng\u0101ti Tuwharetoa (Bay of Plenty) Claims Settlement Bill, and in particular to the text of the acknowledgments in English. Clause 8(3) states that the Crown acknowledges that the return of land to individuals rather than to iwi and hap\u016B was a breach of its obligations and caused harm. In particular, clause 8(3)(e) states: \u201CThis was not consistent with customary tenure and made those lands more susceptible to partition and alienation;\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000496\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EI would suggest that in many circumstances\u2014not all circumstances, but in many\u2014the collective ownership of land, without variation, has caused serious problems. It is difficult in a modern economy for people to advance their interests if all their property is owned collectively. The reality is that in the modern economy people do not act as iwi or hap\u016B, to a marked extent. By and large, individuals are responsible for their own economic welfare. I believe that the Hui Taumata 2005 recognised that by putting so much stress on the advancement of skills\u2014skills that are acquired by individuals. People have to study for themselves in order to gain an education. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000497\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EWhen that theory is applied also to land, we are aware that farms are not farmed by large groups; they are farmed by small groups of people\u2014typically individual families. That is why the huge strength of the New Zealand agricultural base has been the family farm. Notwithstanding the fact that there has been an increase in the size of farms, the family farm is still the building block of our agricultural success.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000498\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EI would suggest that, for M\u0101ori, in part the individualisation of title gave people opportunities. Rather than harming them, it actually helped them. People say that it then led to partition and alienation. One of the requirements of a modern economy, though, is that people can actually sell things and not just retain them, so that people can use their resources in ways that suit them. That is not to say that there is not a place for iwi-owned lands. I recognise that. But it is wrong to suggest that all land under the Te Ture Whenua Maori Act should, essentially, be held collectively. That would actually be harmful. Some land may have to be and, indeed, should be held collectively; a fair measure of it should not be.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000499\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EIndeed, an increasingly recognised problem is the growing number of owners of quite small parcels of land. That is not helpful, but one of the strengths of the partition and individualisation of title is that it enables people to sell, and to seek new economic opportunities. I acknowledge that those opportunities were not always available to M\u0101ori in the past for a variety of reasons, but surely in the 21st century they are. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000500\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EAs I said in the debate on the preamble, those acknowledgments essentially have a Rousseauean view of M\u0101ori\u2014that of the noble savage, if you will. The view simply does not meet contemporary needs or, dare I say it, the needs of that time, either. Economies and peoples are dynamic. Our acknowledgments and statutes should also recognise that reality.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000501\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EWhat we are often seeing now is land actually undeveloping. One of the reasons it is undeveloping is because in many cases land that was held a generation or two ago by one or two individuals\u2014normally the head of a family or wh\u0101nau\u2014is now held by large numbers of people. So we are seeing those same farms, which are essentially family farms in the traditional sense of that term, now being owned by large numbers who are the descendants of those people of two or three generations ago. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000502\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EThat is actually harming the development of those farms, because what they do not have is reinvestment. People are not willing to put a portion of their income\u2014for example, a person using his or her income as a teacher\u2014into the development of the farm. Large amounts of money are expended on the administration of what is, after all, a family-sized unit that may perhaps have 300 owners. It is not efficient; it is not effective.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EWe need to acknowledge therefore that it was not always harmful\u2014although in some cases it might have been\u2014for titles to be partitioned and individualised. In many cases that actually laid the foundation for M\u0101ori farming enterprise. It enabled a whole lot of M\u0101ori back in the early part of the 20th century, in the first 50 years, to build individual farms, and that has laid much of the foundation of the economic strength of many M\u0101ori families. Yet today\u2014and I know this from personal experience\u2014some of those farms are going backwards because they are no longer owned by a small number of people; instead, they are owned by a large number of people. I noted the proceedings of the Hui Taumata, and saw that some of that was recognised, which is one of the reasons people are saying we should move on from the M\u0101ori Land Court. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000504\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EThat is one of the problems with the way we are doing treaty settlements. Unlike ACT, National is not saying we should not do treaty settlements. We say that we should do them, and we want to accelerate them, but the way we do them is crucially important. The way the acknowledgments are made should not just reflect the past but should also reflect aspirations for the future. I believe that those acknowledgments and apologies do not embrace the fullness of the task ahead of us. They are too one-dimensional.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000505\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EThe Government knows it will have more of those settlements to do over the next 2 or 3 months before the election, and my request is that it takes a broader view and reflects aspiration and looking forward as well as looking back. I fully understand that both elements are important, but I do not see them reflected in this legislation, and that is a pity.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cba965bb-864f-4e06-99dc-6fcdfd007ad5\u0022 data-id=\u0022cdd4b669566646f19ebd89aad4ba08ae\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000506\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cba965bb-864f-4e06-99dc-6fcdfd007ad5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022cdd4b669566646f19ebd89aad4ba08ae\u0022\u003EPITA PARAONE (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E Part 1 of the Ng\u0101ti Tuwharetoa (Bay of Plenty) Claims Settlement Bill is one of the more important parts of the bill. It lists the acknowledgments and apology by the Crown to Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa Bay of Plenty. Part of its importance is that it acknowledges the breaches of the Treaty of Waitangi\u2014I will just leave it there\u2014and it also acknowledges the confiscations made by the Crown of those lands belonging to Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000507\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cba965bb-864f-4e06-99dc-6fcdfd007ad5\u0022\u003EI pick up on a comment made by the speaker from United Future, who talked about the erosion of traditional structures. During the debate on the Ng\u0101ti Awa Claims Settlement Bill, we heard about an example of traditional structures being broken down, and that process was actually supported by United Future. So while on the one hand it is all very well to say that the Crown should not be contributing to the erosion of traditional structures, on the other hand neither should this House be doing so. [Interruption] Even if it is a deliberate choice by iwi, as mentioned by that member, it should be a decision only of the iwi concerned. It should not be made by this House or by any other outside group or organisation. That is why it is important to ensure that we do not contribute to the erosion of the traditional structures of M\u0101ori; it should be left up to them to make that decision.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000508\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cba965bb-864f-4e06-99dc-6fcdfd007ad5\u0022\u003EI also make the point that Part 3, \u201CSettlement of historical claims and miscellaneous matters\u201D, talks about the settlement being final. New Zealand First supports that, but we do not support the premise that in the process of dealing with this particular historical claim we are not contributing to any future contemporary claims that people might want to make. I suggest that there should be some opportunity for that sort of claim to be made in the future. Although we might pat ourselves on the back that this is a historical claim that will have its finality in the passing of this bill, there is no assurance that we will not see contemporary claims in the future.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000509\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cba965bb-864f-4e06-99dc-6fcdfd007ad5\u0022\u003EWe also note that there is some reference to the principles of the treaty, outlined in clauses 7(2)(c), 7(3)(f), and 9(2), and translated into English in clauses 8(2)(c), 8(3)(f), and 10(2). I understand that amendments are set out on a Supplementary Order Paper to provide that those references be omitted, but I restate the position of New Zealand First: if we perceive that the use of the phrase \u201Cthe principles of the Treaty of Waitangi\u201D affects the operational and functional purpose of the bill, then we will certainly support its omission. But I believe, and New Zealand First certainly believes, that the inclusion of those words in Part 1 does not affect the operational or functional purpose of the 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=\u0022e326f8d9cdb8403f813e4cfffae2d3fc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000510\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e326f8d9cdb8403f813e4cfffae2d3fc\u0022\u003ESTEPHEN FRANKS (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E A number of speakers have made reference to the position of the ACT party on this legislation. We do vote against these settlement bills, but we do not vote against them because we do not want to see settlement of claims for land wrongly and fraudulently taken and for property rights breached\u2014breaches of article 2 of the treaty\u2014we vote against them because they do an awful lot more than that, and an awful lot less than that. This particular part is instance of that. I have an amendment that I am hoping New Zealand First will vote for, which removes the subclauses that refer to the so-called principles. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000511\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EThe leader of New Zealand First is making great play\u2014indeed, he has a bill on the Order Paper\u2014to remove references to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi in legislation. But then, for years since New Zealand First\u2019s leader first realised that ACT New Zealand was speaking the truth when it pointed to the complete lack of definition of, and the strife being caused by, those references, he has joined in that chorus and has demanded definition. Yet New Zealand First has voted for clauses in legislation passed by this Parliament that still contain those references. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000512\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EI would have liked my amendment simply to omit the phrase, in each place where it occurred, \u201Cand its principles\u201D. That would have been quite sufficient, but my problem was my inability to work out exactly what words referred to the principles in the M\u0101ori version. So in the speed of drafting the amendment, I thought the safer thing was actually to omit the subclause as a whole. But if New Zealand First simply wants to put forward an amendment to my amendment so that it is only the words \u201Cand its principles\u201D that are omitted from each place they appear, instead of the entire text of the subclause, I would be very happy to support an amendment from New Zealand First along those lines. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000513\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EI want to refer also to the comments of Dr Mapp, where he, too, suggested that ACT did not support settlements. We are very conscious that New Zealand as a whole, and not just M\u0101ori, or M\u0101ori making treaty claims, may have a very wrong idea of what constitutes wealth in a modern world. It is not ownership of land that marks the countries that are rich. The Singapores and the Switzerlands are either amongst the most densely populated, the most land-short, or the most scruffy and unproductive land areas of the world. There are vast areas of natural wealth that is being under-used. What marks rich countries is almost the opposite of land wealth. It is the fact that, as peoples, they have had to work out how to be rich without land. I think that these treaty settlements are in fact directing M\u0101ori down a very sad path. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000514\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EThe worst example of a major settlement totally ruining an indigenous people must be very close to New Zealand, on the island of Nauru. Its people became rich beyond all dreams of avarice, and in one generation not only have they blown it but they have blown their health, as well. That is not to say that that will happen as a result of these settlements, but it does say that ownership of assets has next to nothing to do with either cultural or material wealth. Ownership of assets, as the Bible says, may in fact mean the very opposite. It may be harder for wealthy families to ensure that their children maintain the sorts of habits and the willingness to work that constitute true wealth, than for those who are poorer. If the Government is going to apologise for eroding traditional social structures, why is this Government not apologising for the welfare system that has totally devastated the M\u0101ori family? That is not a historical thing. This Government is doing it daily.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000515\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cbc6023d0703411bbf9ace812c11e5ff\u0022\u003EHon Georgina te Heuheu\u003C/span\u003E: This is another treaty breach.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000516\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a11ea5de14ff4095a4cf24c86928f000\u0022\u003ESTEPHEN FRANKS\u003C/span\u003E: It is an absolute breach. If there was a breach of the Treaty of Waitangi and its principles because there was a transfer of land into personal ownership, what about the breach that means that 70 percent of M\u0101ori kids are growing up without a father? What kind of social erosion is that? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022 data-id=\u0022d3fb6ccf271b478eb4aab6b99682df60\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000517\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d3fb6ccf271b478eb4aab6b99682df60\u0022\u003EHon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU (National):\u003C/span\u003E I want to make some comments. Stephen Franks has proposed amendments that provide for clauses 7(2)(c), 7(3)(f), and three other clauses to be omitted. They are the \u201Cprinciples of the treaty\u201D clauses. I can understand why they are there, because the jurisdiction of the Waitangi Tribunal under section 6 of the Treaty of Waitangi Act is based on the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi. The officials need to take note of that, as well. Having sat on the tribunal for 10 years, I am pretty much aware of what the jurisdiction is, and it is the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi. So I suggest the reality is that unless a claimant tribe can come and show there has been a breach of the principles of the treaty, then its claim will fail. After succeeding on that basis, either through the hearings process or through discussions with the Crown, it is understandable why that clause, referring to the principles of the treaty, will appear in the settlement bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000518\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EHaving said that though, that clause has clearly become a\u2014what can one say?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000519\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002224998004635c450398fc88b61ce51be6\u0022\u003EDail Jones\u003C/span\u003E: A template.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000520\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022177b4992ede7489b8c41676ca7b103bb\u0022\u003EHon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU\u003C/span\u003E: Well, it is certainly a template, but it has been a template for some time. I think that what one could say is that that reference has become a bit of a millstone around the neck of this Parliament. That situation has occurred only since the advent of the Labour Government in 1999, because of course that term, \u201Cthe principles of the Treaty of Waitangi\u201D, has been seen to appear in all manner of things since 1999, and the reality is that it does not always apply. National has severe reservations about the inclusion of that statement in legislation\u2014no less in treaty settlement legislation than elsewhere. As I said earlier, it has become a millstone because the Labour Government has tried to push it everywhere\u2014absolutely everywhere. It is in employment legislation, health legislation, and in local government stuff\u2014you name it. The Government has plonked the phrase \u201Cthe principles of the Treaty of Waitangi\u201D everywhere, and it does not apply\u2014it is not applicable everywhere. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000521\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EIn coming into the new dawn it is basically incumbent upon the Government to think hard about what it has done in this area, and to consider whether that is the best way of dealing with the claims. I guess that if something is a breach of the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi, then it is probably a breach of the treaty itself. I think that is probably why ACT has come out so strongly against that phrase, so National would have to support the amendment from ACT. However, we do recognise that the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi form the jurisdiction for claims to the Waitangi Tribunal, and therefore we can understand why the phrase is now part and parcel of settlement legislation. Going forward, National has already signalled, as has Winston Peters through his treaty deletions bill, that that may not be the case in future. But M\u0101ori should not be disadvantaged by the removal of that phrase, because if something is a breach of the principles of the treaty, it is hard to fathom why it would not also be a breach of the treaty itself. That statement is present in a number of clauses throughout the bill, and the Minister in the chair at this moment, Mita Ririnui, should turn his mind to whether it is the proper basis on which to settle claims. There is no harm in thinking about that and it is certainly appropriate to debate the issue, particularly since National has raised the issue that it may not be appropriate to use that phrase in these modern times. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022 data-id=\u00227ff94c273bfe447fb86a052fcfda60a5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000522\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227ff94c273bfe447fb86a052fcfda60a5\u0022\u003EDAIL JONES (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E New Zealand First would much prefer not to have the words \u201Cprinciples of the Treaty of Waitangi\u201D in the legislation, but the amendment that has been put forward by Mr Franks wants to delete a whole clause and it is really looking at the matter in isolation. We have to look at all the clauses together; there is a package. We have to go on and look at clause 14 and at clause 15 to understand how it all works. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000523\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EEssentially what we have in the legislation are these clauses in Part 1 that relate to an agreement that has been entered into. New Zealand First and, I am sure, the National Party do not want to go back and say to everyone: \u201CRenegotiate the whole thing, otherwise we will not agree to it.\u201D, because if we go on to clauses 14 and 15\u2014and I hope the Committee will bear with me\u2014they state that where the expression \u201Cprinciples of the Treaty of Waitangi\u201D has been used, it is a historical claim. It is something in the past. Then clause 15 states that the settlement of those historical claims is final. So that is the last use of the phrase \u201Cprinciples of the Treaty of Waitangi\u201D for historical claims in so far as this particular group is concerned. That is a package. It is completed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000524\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EIf I were pleading this case in a civil claim, I would say that we do not agree with those principles and we deny that they exist but, in all the circumstances, they have no effect whatsoever because this matter is now at an end. This bill brings the concept of the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi in this context to an end. We have to look at the whole package to understand it. I think that is what Brian Donnelly was trying to explain, in his way, the other night when he followed what Mr Franks had to say on this legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000525\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EWe do not accept that the words \u201Cprinciples of the Treaty of Waitangi\u2019 add anything to this, but even if they did, it is almost irrelevant because this thing is at an end. It is finished now. It is over and done with, so what is the point in arguing about it? When we had the Ng\u0101ti Awa case, of course, we then had a situation\u2014as my friend and colleague Pita Paraone has explained\u2014where some new groups were created that had never existed before, even in the 1985 M\u0101ori regulations. We objected to that new breach of the M\u0101ori traditions, as Pita Paraone was saying to Judy Turner. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000526\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003ESo while we would prefer to see the principles of the treaty not included, we accept that an agreement has been reached. New Zealand First wants to see this treaty process brought to an end. The last thing that we want is to have these things going back again for ever and a day. We are satisfied that the way in which the bill has been drafted, taking into account clauses 14 and 15, brings it to the end. The words \u201Cprinciples of\u201D are really irrelevant. They do not mean anything. We believe that they mean nothing and, as they mean nothing, they cannot have any effect on anything, anyway. If we look at it in that context, they are meaningless. So why argue about something that is meaningless in this particular context, where the matter is at an end? We will go along with it in this particular context and situation, bearing in mind that, for example, in a State services piece of legislation or in some other new legislation that is continuing into the future, this ends it\u2014this finishes it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000527\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EWe will always oppose any new legislation that looks at the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi being brought in for future reference. But this settlement is a finalised matter; it is ended, and I think that is the way in which it should be considered. New Zealand First wants to bring the treaty process to an end, and this is bringing it to an end. I think that people like those members of the ACT party who want to continue moaning and groaning about what M\u0101oris do and what M\u0101oris are claiming become very upset when we do have a settlement, because it gives them one less thing to moan and groan about when it comes to election day. We want to see this finished, we have set dates for when these matters should be finished, and we are pleased that this settlement is being given effect to by Parliament.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022 data-id=\u0022a34c24d706ec4490b8de11a428f9eaaa\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000528\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a34c24d706ec4490b8de11a428f9eaaa\u0022\u003ESTEPHEN FRANKS (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E I think it is probably a shame for the honourable member who has just resumed his seat that he was not around 140 years ago. He would have been a very good land purchasing agent. He could have been out there, basically persuading M\u0101ori that what they were getting was valuable and that black was white. It is the sort of sophistry I expect. Here is a man saying: \u201CWe need to do this. It doesn\u2019t mean anything, so therefore it does not matter if we vote for something that is against our principles. Don\u2019t you worry about it.\u201D That was the snake oil salesman\u2019s logic. \u201CDon\u2019t worry about all those reservation that you have. Don\u2019t worry about the fact that the title is being transferred to the Crown. We will look after you. We will set up reserves.\u201D It is the same kind of \u201Cjust don\u2019t worry about the detail\u201D statements that got this country into the position where there were differing expectations and where there were such gross breaches of faith.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000529\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EWe do believe that there should be settlements of stolen property and of property taken without proper compensation. But we certainly do not believe that this Parliament, in 2005, should be passing law when it does not know what it means. If there is anything we can glean from what the Rt Hon Winston Peters has said about the so-called principles, it is that no one knows what they mean. And here we have a spokesman for New Zealand First standing up and telling us that it does not matter that we vote for four or five references to the so-called principles, because we do not know what they mean and they do not matter. Well, they do matter. There is simply a question of legislative integrity. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000530\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EThe member who has just spoken went forward to clause 14. I will not do that, but when we look at further clauses we find that kind of legislative drafting technique throughout this deed. We will hear about the so-called Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa values, which are spiritual, but there is no definition. We do not know what they are. A whole set of statements and mythology\u2014what legal effect do they have? There is a dishonesty about this approach that I believe will condemn future generations to another round of complaint. If we can apologise and pay compensation for eroding the social structures of 160 years ago\u2014and if the senior Government whip, Jill Pettis, can say that it is completely irrelevant that the social structure of M\u0101oridom is being eroded by the welfare system, yet the inevitable individualisation of title 160 years ago is highly relevant\u2014what kind of compensation will we have to pay one day for what has happened to the social structure as a result of the welfare State\u2019s imposition? What will we pay to M\u0101ori families who have lost authority over their kids because they are not allowed to smack them? What will we say to the families where kids can go and leave home, and give the fingers to their parents, because they receive a living-alone allowance\u2014where the State has stepped in and usurped the authority of parents entirely? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000531\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EThis bill is apologising for eroding the social structure because of land transactions 100 years ago. What a lot of drivel! If there is any apologising that should be done by the Government of this country right now, it should be for eroding the social structure of all the people of this country through a welfare system that rewards kids who do not listen to their parents, rewards not working, and discourages those who do work. For me to hear a New Zealand First speech that tells me not to worry about voting for the so-called principles because we can put it all behind us, when in fact the very same words that are used in that apology could well apply in two generations\u2019 time to a whole series of apologies to people for having destroyed their social structure, then I do not think that New Zealand First values its vote, at all. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000532\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EHere is a chance to put a stake in the ground. Here is a chance for those members to say: \u201CWe will vote for this settlement, but we will omit the three words, \u2018and its principles\u2019, wherever they appear.\u201D If the Crown has to go back and ask Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa whether it wants to re-ratify this deed without those words, it should put it to the test. I would be very surprised indeed if Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa is wedded to those words.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022749a724d-1ef9-49cb-9ba2-2610403653ea\u0022 data-id=\u002212ed308c57c942cc9eeed597ad480761\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000533\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022749a724d-1ef9-49cb-9ba2-2610403653ea\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002212ed308c57c942cc9eeed597ad480761\u0022\u003EDIANNE YATES (Labour\u2014Hamilton East):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000534\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022749a724d-1ef9-49cb-9ba2-2610403653ea\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000535\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229736874aed534078972a4fa7c78edfaa\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: We have to deal with some amendments. The amendment in the name of the honourable member Stephen Franks is out of order under Speaker\u2019s ruling 102/4 by Chairperson Simich: \u201CAn amendment that purports to amend an agreement reached between the Crown and other parties is out of order in a bill to give effect to that agreement.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000536\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 367 in the name of the Hon Mark Burton to Part 1 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022fdfb48745a414a84a3e26ad268fdec40\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 109\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 26; 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 9\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EACT New Zealand 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=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000537\u0022\u003EPart 1 as amended agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000538\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00220771c12d557546aeb8b5430080b4213b\u0022\u003EPart 2 \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000539\u0022\u003E Interpretation\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022 data-id=\u00220661810dd8774a2aaa20c0d7e24f8ed0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000540\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220661810dd8774a2aaa20c0d7e24f8ed0\u0022\u003EHon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU (National):\u003C/span\u003E I want to make some comments about clause 13, \u201CMeaning of Ng\u0101ti Tuwharetoa (Bay of Plenty)\u201D. I will just make a preliminary comment. Originally the bill dealt with this on the basis that the claimants, or the settlees, were Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa. What has happened is that the bill is now properly named the Ng\u0101ti Tuwharetoa (Bay of Plenty) Claims Settlement Bill. That is basically to differentiate the claimants from those Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa living beneath Mount Tongariro. The claimants here, the Bay of Plenty families, originally wanted the bill\u2019s title to say just \u201CNg\u0101ti Tuwharetoa\u201D, but the M\u0101ori Affairs Committee saw that as being designed to cause confusion unnecessarily, and now we have the bill named as it is. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000541\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EI now come to clause 13, in which the group itself defines who are to be regarded as T\u016Bwharetoa people. Clause 13 states: \u201C(1) In this Act, \u2018Ng\u0101ti Tuwharetoa (Bay of Plenty)\u2019\u2014(a) means\u2014(i) the collective group composed of individuals \u2026\u201D and \u201C(b) includes\u2014(i) the hap\u016B of Ng\u0101ti Tuwharetoa (Bay of Plenty); and (ii) any hap\u016B, group, family, or wh\u0101nau composed of individuals \u2026\u201D of those hap\u016B. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000542\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EThe issue I want to make some comments about is the meaning of wh\u0101ngai in clause 13. Wh\u0101ngai, as members will know, is a type of M\u0101ori adoption where there is a recognition that a child has been taken into the home of a particular family and for all intents and purposes, but without the legal trappings of a formal adoption, has come to be regarded as being of that family. Some tribes, unless that wh\u0101ngai child is actually related by blood to the family who have taken him or her into their home, do not necessarily regard that child as being of that tribal entity. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000543\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EIt seems that Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa Bay of Plenty have settled upon a definition in clause 13 that states: \u201C \u2018wh\u0101ngai of Ng\u0101ti Tuwharetoa (Bay of Plenty)\u2019 means a M\u0101ori who is recognised as Ng\u0101ti Tuwharetoa (Bay of Plenty) in accordance with Ng\u0101ti Tuwharetoa (Bay of Plenty) tikanga (customary values and practices).\u201D I wonder whether the Minister could just confirm for this Committee and for those who are listening in to this debate whether that definition is limited strictly to wh\u0101ngai who are descended by blood from their original family, or whether it includes a wh\u0101ngai child who has been brought into the family and is being brought up by that family, and is a M\u0101ori none the less but not of that same kin group.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000544\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cba965bb-864f-4e06-99dc-6fcdfd007ad5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bccd3684ae8d4906959f15078373bc57\u0022\u003EPita Paraone\u003C/span\u003E: Could be Chinese.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000545\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222eb2caeb742e46b7b0126e5f1671924a\u0022\u003EHon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU\u003C/span\u003E: The child could very well be Chinese. He or she could be, but, on the other hand, as the provision states \u201Cin accordance with Ng\u0101ti Tuwharetoa (Bay of Plenty) tikanga\u201D then surely the child could not be Chinese. But I do not think it is clear, and that is why I would ask the Minister to take a call and clarify for us whether that includes Chinese people. Does it include Gerry Brownlee? If I recall correctly, Gerry Brownlee raised this as a matter of real concern in the select committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000546\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cba965bb-864f-4e06-99dc-6fcdfd007ad5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f6c035dd89ab4978b3d4d8067a09878f\u0022\u003EPita Paraone\u003C/span\u003E: He\u2019d be a good wh\u0101ngai.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000547\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002258a33fd11ec74090a2ce959d2e9fec69\u0022\u003EHon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU\u003C/span\u003E: He would be a good wh\u0101ngai, yes, but does it include him? I am sure my colleague Gerry Brownlee would not mind me bringing him into the debate because, as I say, this was an issue of real concern to the committee members and it took up quite a lot of our discussion.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002273f60731-048d-4a21-81c5-52d588de2325\u0022 data-id=\u0022849a103515e94f9c8919f66b360785a7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000548\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002273f60731-048d-4a21-81c5-52d588de2325\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022849a103515e94f9c8919f66b360785a7\u0022\u003EHon MITA RIRINUI (Associate Minister in charge of Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations):\u003C/span\u003E I thank the member Georgina te Heuheu for her contribution and for her desire to seek clarification on wh\u0101ngai according to the tikanga of Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa ki Kawerau. As she will be aware, and as I am sure every M\u0101ori member in this Chamber is aware, respective iwi have their own tikanga in terms of wh\u0101ngai. Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa ki Kawerau have been inclusive in the interpretation of their tikanga. Whether that would make a Chinese person, Gerry Brownlee, a P\u0101keh\u0101 person, or anyone else of any ethnicity eligible for the benefits of the settlement will be entirely up to Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa ki Kawerau to decide in accordance with their tikanga. I do not think it is appropriate for any iwi that is not connected with this settlement to challenge their right to do so. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000549\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002273f60731-048d-4a21-81c5-52d588de2325\u0022\u003EI have family members who have been legally adopted, and who have been wh\u0101ngai-ed according to tikanga, who are not of M\u0101ori descent. They\u2014meaning my brothers, sisters, cousins, or whoever\u2014will enjoy the benefits of any settlement that comes through their adopted parents. Those benefits come through that line\u2014they do not come any other way\u2014as would be the case for a natural child of any beneficiary of any settlement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022 data-id=\u00220387fc21b7e24ef581fa20c4fc6499a9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000550\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220387fc21b7e24ef581fa20c4fc6499a9\u0022\u003EHon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU (National):\u003C/span\u003E I am very pleased with that explanation made by the Minister. I think the further important point to be made and to become part of the record relates to the phrase: \u201Cin accordance with Ng\u0101ti Tuwharetoa (Bay of Plenty) tikanga (customary values and practices)\u201D. The Minister is quite right. If Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa, according to their tikanga, want to include Gerry Brownlee or a Chinese person, kei te pai. I think that is what the Minister is saying. That is fine.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000551\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002273f60731-048d-4a21-81c5-52d588de2325\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e95cec46d152465eaf4a0be650c5260b\u0022\u003EHon Mita Ririnui\u003C/span\u003E: That is their concern.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000552\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226e1c27b5748c4e9f8edfaba7a6e9980e\u0022\u003EHon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU\u003C/span\u003E: The Minister is saying that that is not for us as parliamentarians to question. That is fine as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000553\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EBut I flag a concern that some future Government would suggest that. Well, if it is good enough for Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa ki Kawerau to include Gerry Brownlee, a Chinese person, or any other person\u2014we are not picking just on Chinese people, and I hope any Chinese people who are listening understand that; it is just by way of an example\u2014then it should be good enough for any other tribe settling subsequently. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000554\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EBut that will not be the case, because the settlement is limited by the words: \u201Cin accordance with Ng\u0101ti Tuwharetoa (Bay of Plenty) tikanga \u2026\u201D. The tikanga of Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa Bay of Plenty is bound to be different from the tikanga of, say, Ng\u0101ti Hine up north\u2014it may be different. If it is different, and if Ng\u0101ti Hine, or any other tribe that comes to settle, decide that some person outside of the kin group or blood group is not to be a beneficiary, then that is their right, too. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000555\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EI think the importance of this discussion is the recognition that these settlements are distinctive and unique to the tribe that is settling. In this Committee tonight we are dealing with Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa Bay of Plenty and no other tribe, and what is their right to decide cannot, or ought not to, in the future be taken as something generic to be applied to all other tribes settling. As long as we all understand that, and as long as it goes into the record, then no harm is done. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000556\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EAs I said, I appreciated the explanation from the Minister, and I appreciate the Chair giving me that extra time to put that into the record. It is very important. Other tribes, of course, are already starting to grapple with the issue. The Adoption Act makes adopted children beneficiaries whether or not one wants them to be, and whether or not they are blood or kin. In respect of wh\u0101ngai, without a legal adoption there is still room for the tikanga of a particular tribe to apply.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022 data-id=\u002203e1e286a9df406d941c7dfdaa50ed57\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000557\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002203e1e286a9df406d941c7dfdaa50ed57\u0022\u003EDr WAYNE MAPP (National\u2014North Shore):\u003C/span\u003E I particularly want to refer to clause 14 and, frankly, I have to say, for a party that has made so much of the inclusion of the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi, how bad it is that it is not taking a call on this part. The New Zealand First Party is apparently not taking a call on Part 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000558\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022369a59055af146f0ae4d56c7cdf6d7b8\u0022\u003EDail Jones\u003C/span\u003E: That is a lie\u2014you wait and see.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000559\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225e082e2a90774179b5d0b0cd9809147f\u0022\u003EDr WAYNE MAPP\u003C/span\u003E: Oh well, I will be pleasantly surprised if the New Zealand First Party does choose to take a call on Part 2\u2014[Interruption] I tell the member that I do not need cross-interjection. I just wish to make the point that a party that is serious about eliminating references to the principles of the treaty should take calls when they arise, as they do, in clause 14. National\u2019s policy, announced by Dr Brash in the now famous speech at \u014Crewa, is to remove inclusion to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi from legislation. I wrote about that in the New Zealand Law Journal in May of 2003. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000560\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EWhat is wrong with the inclusion of the principles? It is this. The principles do not exist in reality. What one actually has are provisions of the Treaty of Waitangi\u2014clauses that are quite simple on the face of it\u2014both in English and in M\u0101ori. Normally one would expect, would one not, in interpreting an agreement\u2014and the Treaty of Waitangi is an agreement\u2014reference to the terms of the agreement itself; not some judicial fiction invented by the Court of Appeal trying to do its best about some appallingly drafted legislation by the Lange-Palmer Labour Government. Because that is what it all stems from: that appalling inclusion in the State-Owned Enterprises Act, which has now infected our law to our disadvantage. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000561\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003ESo we are saying: \u201CLet\u2019s revert back to first principles.\u201D Let us remove reference to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi; and in this case we are in agreement with other centre-right parties in this Parliament\u2014New Zealand First and the ACT party. We do believe in a reference to black letter law\u2014one lets the law say what it means, and one makes reference to the terms of the treaty, which are precisely the issues raised in clause 14 of the bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000562\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EClause 14(a)(i)(A) states: \u201Cfrom the Treaty of Waitangi (Te Tiriti o Waitangi) or the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi (Te Tiriti o Waitangi);\u201D. It should be one or the other. Only reference to the treaty is required. That would be of enormous benefit to the law. In substantive terms it would make no difference to the way we do our settlements, because we recognise that settlements are for breaches of the treaty\u2014in other words, confiscations and other actions that remove the property rights of M\u0101ori. That is the very essence of the preamble, the acknowledgments, and the apologies within this document. Land was confiscated, in essence illegally, in breach of the terms of article 2 of the Treaty of Waitangi. So we say that the rule should be quite clear. In claim settlements one is acknowledging breaches of the law. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000563\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EThe only reason M\u0101ori cannot sue on the basis of the Treaty of Waitangi is that essentially it is outside the statute of limitations; there are other reasons as well, but that is the main reason. If, for instance, the breach had occurred 12 years ago, people would simply sue for breach of the law. In reality these breaches occurred much longer ago, so one has to make reference to the breach of the Treaty of Waitangi itself\u2014not a document that is part of the law of the land, I might add\u2014and that would be the answer to these vexed issues. We say this: the Government makes consistent and persistent errors by continuing to include these provisions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022 data-id=\u00221ca0a5203e0344288353e8299d92fc63\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000564\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221ca0a5203e0344288353e8299d92fc63\u0022\u003EDAIL JONES (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E Dr Mapp was not in the Chamber when I spoke on this bill a short while ago, but I am now speaking again. I note the interest that Dr Mapp has in the use of the words \u201Cor the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi (Te Tiriti o Waitangi)\u201D in clause 14(a)(i)(A). I appreciate his concern and Mr Franks\u2019 concern about that. Of course, Mr Franks\u2019 previous amendment, to a whole clause rather than to a part, was ruled out of order. Just to be consistent, I am putting forward an amendment to delete the words \u201Cprinciples of the Treaty of Waitangi (Te Tiriti o Waitangi)\u201D, and we will see whether the National Party supports it. I got the impression from the previous speaker, Georgina te Heuheu, that National was quite happy with what I said a little while ago. But perhaps Dr Mapp was not listening to what I said, and now he is saying \u201CAll right, let\u2019s put it in.\u201D So I am putting in an amendment, and we will see where we go with Dr Mapp on that particular issue. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000565\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EThe issue does not make any difference either way to me or to New Zealand First, in the context of only this legislation. As I said, this legislation brings something to an end, and whatever the people of Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa Bay of Plenty are getting\u2014on the basis of whatever principles may exist, on the basis of the Treaty of Waitangi, on the basis of this confiscation or that confiscation, or on the basis of whatever somebody said 100 years ago, 50 years ago, or 25 years ago\u2014we really do not know what finally drove people to come to this decision. One has a negotiation, and one ends up with a compromise. I doubt whether anyone who sat around the committee table, in coming to this conclusion, said it had to be worked out on the basis of the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi. I am sure that when people look at the settlements set out in the schedules, they will see that none of those settlements relate to anything to do with the so-called principles of the treaty. It came down to people making a decision, reaching a compromise, and saying that at the end of the day they have argued about the issues for 100 years, and finally the Government and the various political parties have decided to do something about them. So those people have reached this decision. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000566\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EIt is really academic and a matter that is in the past tense to go into the reference to the principles of the treaty in this particular bill. However, I appreciate the concern that other members have expressed, so I have asked for the words \u201Cor the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi, (Te Tiriti o Waitangi)\u201D in clause 14(a)(i)(A) to be deleted. I really look forward to receiving the support of Georgina te Heuheu and Dr Mapp on that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000567\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EThis bill has had a considerable amount of time spent on it already, and New Zealand First wants to bring all these matters to an end and have the issues resolved. That is the basis of our policy. I do not intend to take any further time on this issue, and look forward to the clause being dealt with at the appropriate time. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000568\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ed9ad81-05c1-4171-80c6-24fa02cade42\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fe0c0e5cf20f4a0bbe4880d1bcdc5ca5\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich)\u003C/span\u003E: I call Stephen Franks.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022 data-id=\u0022e4a4fe9365844754929162e1a38f5bc6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000569\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e4a4fe9365844754929162e1a38f5bc6\u0022\u003EDr WAYNE MAPP (National\u2014North Shore):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I am sorry to interrupt Mr Franks at this point. I realise I am slightly beyond the time, but I have taken the time and trouble to check the order of speaking. I said in my speech that New Zealand First had not taken a call in Part 2 on the principles of the treaty. I was accused, in an unparliamentary term, of not being correct. I have since checked the record and seen that, in fact, a call had not been taken in Part 2 at that time. I therefore ask Mr Jones to withdraw the comment he made about me.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022 data-id=\u0022782fb986a99a4a76a51be61ae9a1e1c9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022782fb986a99a4a76a51be61ae9a1e1c9\u0022\u003EDAIL JONES (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E The comment that my friend Dr Wayne Mapp made was that New Zealand First is not taking a call. That was in the future tense, and I said to him that he could not tell us what we were going to do. As you know, Mr Chairman, the National Party is entitled to two calls, and New Zealand First is entitled to one call, in the Committee stage. Georgina te Heuheu had one call, Dr Mapp had another call, and then it was my turn to get the call. Dr Mapp should learn a little more about the Standing Orders and about tenses before he gets carried away.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000571\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229bb63373c25f4ec7bd19f5d72c979893\u0022\u003EDr Wayne Mapp\u003C/span\u003E: I wish to reply to the accusation just made. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000572\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ed9ad81-05c1-4171-80c6-24fa02cade42\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b6a393ffd2bd4bd180d524b8d022bf43\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich)\u003C/span\u003E: No, we are getting into a debate between the two of you, and I do not think we need to take it any further. In regard to the matter of the speaking order, everything is OK.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022 data-id=\u0022016b34a405484826948d5c3c7605631e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000573\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022016b34a405484826948d5c3c7605631e\u0022\u003EDr WAYNE MAPP (National\u2014North Shore):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. It is a fresh point of order. It is an issue of tense. I did not use future tense; I used past tense. I am absolutely clear on that point, and I invite Mr Jones to reflect upon that point. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000574\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ed9ad81-05c1-4171-80c6-24fa02cade42\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221a3de49b1fd84ab394e08c5b2fdc214f\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich)\u003C/span\u003E: I take your point, Dr Mapp.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022 data-id=\u0022f4240be2f6ea4265b08d1900f97396d5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000575\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f4240be2f6ea4265b08d1900f97396d5\u0022\u003ESTEPHEN FRANKS (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E I want to address an amendment that Mr Dail Jones, for New Zealand First, has proposed and just spoken on. The effect of his amendment is to remove from clause 14 the reference to the principles of the treaty. That would leave clause 14(a) defining historical claims as being every claim that is founded on a right arising from the Treaty of Waitangi, or arising under legislation, common law, aboriginal law, or fiduciary duty, in relation to Acts before 21 September 1992. Now, this may seem like simple party point-scoring\u2014and I would like to be able to support the amendment, because I do not like those words\u2014but I think that New Zealand First has the order of things around entirely the opposite of what it really intends. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000576\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EThere is only one place in this bill that should refer to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi, and that is clause 14, because that clause is the definition that tries to state that the settlement is full and final. When parties state later on, in the operative clause, that they accept there will be no more historical claims, that is defined in clause 14. Unfortunately, clause 14 refers to the Treaty of Waitangi Act, where section 6 uses the phrase \u201Cthe principles of the Treaty\u201D. In other words, the only reason we are having this settlement is that there was deemed to be a breach of the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi. So this is the one place where those words have to stay, simply in order to get rid of them. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000577\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EIn the earlier part, the words were redundant. If we believe there is no such thing as the principles and there is only the treaty, the words are utterly redundant and should have been removed, in order to make sure that we were not endorsing and continuing that redundancy. In clause 14 the situation is the opposite of that. In clause 14 we have to refer to the principles of the treaty because we are actually getting rid of them. Therefore, although I would very much like to vote for a New Zealand First change of heart to get rid of these principles, in this particular case clause 14 is the one place where it is necessary to refer to them. I believe that is what the Hon Georgina te Heuheu would say, too. She has looked at this issue and, as a former member of the Waitangi Tribunal, she knows that however much the words \u201Cthe principles\u201D confound things\u2014however hard it is for people to decide exactly what they are supposed to cover\u2014that is the wording that the legislation used, and it is what the tribunal had to apply. Therefore, when we settle a claim those are the words that need to be used in order to state that it is all over, and that people cannot settle it any further. When we remove the words \u201Cthe principles of the Treaty\u201D from the Treaty of Waitangi Act, then we will never again need this kind of loony definition. Mr Jones\u2019 instinct was right; it is a loopy thing to have in our law. But, as a technicality, clause 14 is the one place where we need to use it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000578\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EI am glad to see that New Zealand First will bring forward an amendment of this kind. That is courageous, and I wish that I could support it. I think that possibly with a bit more time, and if we had had time to sort this matter out not in sight of the microphones, we might have reached agreement on just what should be done with regard to the references to the principles of the treaty. But as the situation has turned out, New Zealand First has found the courage to propose the elimination of the reference to the principles of the treaty one part too late in this debate. I will, of course, watch very closely to see how National votes on this amendment, and to see whether the Hon Georgina te Heuheu takes a call again to explain just how National will vote on this move by New Zealand First. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000579\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EI have found the speeches made by the National members very interesting. Dr Wayne Mapp\u2019s very thoughtful speeches show just how long he has been thinking and what a long trip he has had to take to get to where he is at today, from the position he was at 3 years ago. But that is something to be commended, and he has made it obvious that it is not just a reflex backflip but is reasoned.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u0022c6dc119c2b3d4bfeb3ae36f425acbf9e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000580\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c6dc119c2b3d4bfeb3ae36f425acbf9e\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader\u2014National):\u003C/span\u003E That was an interesting speech from Stephen Franks. It went to the heart of the issue of what the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi are, and what references to those principles in any law mean.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000581\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EIt is interesting that even today in the select committee we were discussing with the Office of Treaty Settlements an interpretation of the principles set out by the Crown Minerals agency. We discovered that many Government agencies have their own set of principles that are to be applied to the Treaty of Waitangi. There is no doubt that it is appropriate for the Government at some time in the future, presumably immediately after the next election, when Don Brash is the Prime Minister, to go through an exercise of removing those references from legislation where they have multifarious meanings\u2014where they have meanings that cannot be considered consistent from one piece of legislation to another.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000582\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EThe question that arises here is whether we should do as New Zealand First would have us do and remove from clause 14 references to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi. I think we have to be very careful about a blanket removal of such statements, particularly if those statements in some way constrain an activity that is normally available to a claimant group. That is exactly what is in clause 14. Effectively, it means that T\u016Bwharetoa Bay of Plenty cannot come back to Parliament using a Treaty of Waitangi grievance, or picking up on any principle of the Treaty of Waitangi that may be garnered from the smorgasbord of principle opportunities scattered throughout our law, to have another go at settlement. That is understood by T\u016Bwharetoa Bay of Plenty. That is part of the agreement that has been reached with the Crown. In that circumstance I am of the view that, by referring to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi, we are simply extending the concept beyond just the grievance process that might be taken to a tribunal, into a statement that says: \u201CDon\u2019t try using any of those other options that many laws currently provide to you.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000583\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EAll that National members want to make clear is that, at the same time, we will support, encourage, and lead moves to get unnecessary reference to treaty principles out of legislation. The question is whether it is necessary here. In the uncertain environment that we have at the moment, we can have the Office of Treaty Settlements happily tell us that although numerous Government departments will have their own interpretations of what the treaty principles mean, it is OK just to fire them into bits of legislation here and there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000584\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EIn this case the legislation is very clear, and is worth reading. Clause 14(a) states: \u201C\u2026 every claim (whether or not the claim has arisen or been considered, researched, registered, notified, or made on or before the settlement date) that Ng\u0101ti Tuwharetoa (Bay of Plenty) (or a representative entity) had at, or at any time before, the settlement date, or may have at any time after the settlement date, that\u2014(i) is, or is founded on, a right arising\u2014(A) from the Treaty of Waitangi \u2026 or the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi \u2026; or (B) under legislation or at common law \u2026; or (C) from fiduciary duty;\u201D and so on. Effectively, avenues that could exist at the moment in the law for another look at a settlement are closed off by that coverage.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EIt really points to the need for Crown Law to do the major exercise of going through legislation. I hope the Rt Hon Winston Peters\u2019 bill does make the floor of the House. National members will support that. We want it to go to a select committee. I cannot understand why the man has never sought leave to have it come before the House, but he does not really want it to come up before the election, because he knows that it will be treated in a fairly discursive manner by the current Government, and it deserves a great deal better treatment than that. So the new Government will pick up that concept. It will have Crown Law go through legislation fastidiously, looking for places where there is blanket reference to the Treaty of Waitangi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000586\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EThe incident I mentioned before was that of a settlement bill that dealt with the potential for the particular iwi to claim mineral rights. It said that in future Crown Law had to deal with that iwi according to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi. The question was asked of it as to which principles those were. The answer was the principles that that department has established as being relevant to it in relation to the treaty. Well, that really means that some bureaucrat somewhere\u2014poor fellow, or woman, whomever it might be\u2014has an awfully large duty upon him or her to respect not only the interests of the settling party but the wider interests of the New Zealand taxpayer, the New Zealand citizen. I think that is unacceptable. Parliament should be much more prescriptive than that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000587\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EIn conclusion\u2014and thank you, Mr Chairperson, for the extra time\u2014I just want to make it clear that National is supporting the statement in this clause about treaty principles, because it is a restriction on all other references to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi that are scattered throughout our law. We understand what New Zealand First is trying to do. We applaud it for calling to attention the extent to which reference to treaty principles litters our law, but we feel strongly that by this statement being included here greater protection and greater clarity are given to the finality of this particular settlement. If settlements are to be full and final, then there should be no opportunity in those settlement bills for another look at them. Without the specific exclusion of reference to the principles of the treaty, then it is fair to say there could be just a glimmer of opportunity for a successive generation of T\u016Bwharetoa Bay of Plenty descendants to have another look at it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022 data-id=\u00223c3616028d814a9ab69e562ef603c3e1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000588\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223c3616028d814a9ab69e562ef603c3e1\u0022\u003EHon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Minister of Communications):\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=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022 data-id=\u0022ab3fdede24814106a6b6b451467b51bf\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000589\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ab3fdede24814106a6b6b451467b51bf\u0022\u003EDAIL JONES (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E It is a funny old Parliament, is it not? There we were on Part 1, and I was getting\u2014shall we say\u2014attacked by Mr Franks about supporting the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi, and we learnt that we could not put forward that amendment anyway, because it was an agreement. So New Zealand First called everybody\u2019s bluff and we put forward an amendment to remove the phrase, \u201Cthe principles of the Treaty of Waitangi\u201D, because I had heard from Dr Mapp that he seemingly supported the removal of that phrase. I had had that very strong impression from Dr Mapp. He had challenged me to take a call, and had made the point that I had not taken one, so I took a call and said that I would put forward an amendment to delete references to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EThen what did we have? We had the deputy leader of the National Party make the speech that I had made on Part 1. That is what it boiled down to. He had seen the light. So we have almost three views from the National Party: we have the Gerry Brownlee view, the Dr Wayne Mapp view, and the Georgina te Heuheu view.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000591\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EOf course, I was amused by Mr Stephen Franks. He accused me of being a snake oil salesman. What was his second speech if not a speech from a snake oil salesman\u2014with all due respect to Mr Franks!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000592\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EWell, we have put forward the amendment and we will be arguing for it to continue. Interestingly for the future, exactly the same sort of wording is used in the Ngaa Rauru Kiitahi Claims Settlement Bill that is coming up. Perhaps we will take a different view on that legislation but, having established this sort of trial on the wording this time, I will still persist with my amendment and perhaps next time things will be different\u2014the view having been confirmed around the Chamber on this occasion.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000593\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Dail Jones to clause 14 be agreed to: \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000594\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4da5811-fb5a-4721-b57a-518446bd7796\u0022\u003Eto amend paragraph (a)(i)(A) by omitting the words \u201Cor the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi (Te Tiriti o Waitangi)\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002249a4d4ee388b4967b07bd7cc9ef19283\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 13\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand First 13.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 107\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 9; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2; M\u0101ori Party 1.\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=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000595\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 367 in the name of the Hon Mark Burton to clause 12 be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000596\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to, and Part 2 as amended agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000597\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022c5933a5b010d4b69b93eb648e9995196\u0022\u003EPart 3  Settlement of historical claims and miscellaneous matters\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u0022c30c7999538843d7b21ff9c5ca3091d5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000598\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c30c7999538843d7b21ff9c5ca3091d5\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader\u2014National):\u003C/span\u003E This, of course, is the part of the bill and these are the clauses of the bill that give effect and weight to the previous part, which was discussed just a few minutes ago. It is the part that makes it absolutely clear that Parliament considers this to be a full and final settlement and that Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa Bay of Plenty also accept that this is a full and final settlement. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000599\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EBut I want the Minister to tell the Committee how many members of the Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa Bay of Plenty iwi who are eligible to vote for the acceptance of this bill or of the deed of settlement, did so. We are very concerned that only a small number of this iwi\u2014well less than half of those eligible\u2014have voted in favour of this settlement. I know that the Government will have an answer for us, and I would like to hear it. It is important, when we reach the final stages of these settlements, that those who are being settled accept the deal in overwhelming numbers. We have to remember that much of the historical research etc. that was carried out to reach this point of the claim being settled originated in the oral history of Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa Bay of Plenty. Certainly the documented evidence that was available was considered. But in a society that values its oral history, I think it is very, very important that a large number of eligible people participate in the first place, and ultimately ratify any settlement. Low numbers participating leaves the option open for successive generations to say: \u201CLook, Parliament settled that on us but a large number of us weren\u2019t too keen on it. A large number of us never expressed a view on whether this was full and final settlement.\u201D So, I would like the Minister to give us the numbers and convince us that enough voted. I see the United Future member holding up a piece of paper and waving it around. It is of no significance whatsoever. The member, I think, yelled out before that 55 percent of those who voted, voted in favour of the settlement. But how many did not vote? I am happy to be convinced; if the Minister has compelling evidence, that would suffice. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000600\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EIn accepting this part, I do think it is worth saying that the generosity of Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa Bay of Plenty should be recognised. Once we go past the point of saying that there is something to settle, the questions then become: \u201CWhat is the cost? What has to be done to redress the grievance that is deeply felt?\u201D. The reality is that in 2005 terms, measured against 1840 and subsequently, it is impossible to compensate adequately or appropriately for loss. Members should remember that these are land losses. In most cases these are rights losses. They are quantifiable. So, we reach a figure that is large enough to allow the iwi to maintain their mana, to hold up their heads, and to move forward. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000601\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003ESo we simply say to Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa that this is a significant acceptance on their part. It is an opportunity, not only for their part of the world but also for the whole country, to take one more step towards the end of grievance and towards all New Zealanders focusing on a better future.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002272e48ab0-e7ae-427f-bedc-793b7a91adba\u0022 data-id=\u0022a23c88cc68ff4f48b7d197c8436f079e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000602\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002272e48ab0-e7ae-427f-bedc-793b7a91adba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a23c88cc68ff4f48b7d197c8436f079e\u0022\u003EHon MARK BURTON (Minister in charge of Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations):\u003C/span\u003E I would like to start by echoing the comments just made by Mr Brownlee. I think accepting this part is an act of generosity by Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa Bay of Plenty. As he said, this part is at the heart of the bill. It is about providing for full and final settlement, and it should be treated with the seriousness that the member gave it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000603\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002272e48ab0-e7ae-427f-bedc-793b7a91adba\u0022\u003EAs to the comparisons of results, I can reassure the member. I want to echo what I said earlier in response to his colleague, which was that I agree entirely that it is highly desirable to have the maximum possible level of participation. Our obligation is to ensure the opportunity is there for that participation, but we cannot force people to exercise their right to participate\u2014it is, after all, a right. But by way of reassurance to the member, in comparison, I can think of two good examples that have stood some test of time. In the case of Waikato-Tainui the participation rate was 40 percent, of which 65 percent voted in support of the final settlement. In Ng\u0101i Tahu there was a 50 percent participation rate, of which 94 percent voted in support of the final settlement\u2014somewhat higher than for Waikato-Tainui. In the case of Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa Bay of Plenty, there was a 55 percent participation rate, and 95 percent approval. So it stands well in that company. I agree with the member that we should always pursue the best level of participation, but participation in this settlement process was certainly better than in the two largest settlements that have stood some test of time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022 data-id=\u0022f0fdb44f219c404ab29377e11e120a4c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000604\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f0fdb44f219c404ab29377e11e120a4c\u0022\u003EHon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU (National):\u003C/span\u003E First of all, I speak on the matter that my colleague Gerry Brownlee remarked on, and the importance of why National voted against New Zealand First\u2019s amendment regarding the principles. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000605\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EThis bill arises because Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa brought a claim, the jurisdiction of which is based on the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi. There is no other jurisdiction that exists at this point in time upon which a tribe can bring a claim for a breach by the Crown. Of course there are parties in this House\u2014ours included\u2014that intend to change that jurisdiction in the future, but for the moment that is the jurisdiction that exists. I sat on the Waitangi Tribunal for 10 years and our brief was exactly that\u2014the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi. That is why it is important under clause 14 that the historic claims are defined, because in Part 3, which is the part we are dealing with, we come to the settlement of the historic claims of Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa Bay of Plenty. Part 3 basically says that on that basis this tribe cannot at any time in the future return to this House for redress on the claims now being settled. As I say, we all must bear in mind that the settlement now proceeds on the basis of breaches of the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000606\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EI want to make a comment in regard to what Mark Burton said about the improvement in the buy-in rates of the tribes as we move along the process, first of all for the ratification of the governance entities, and for a particular tribe to approve of the deed of settlement itself. Although I agree that 95 percent of a 55 percent voter record is a vast improvement on particularly the first two settlements\u2014Waikato-Tainui and Ng\u0101i Tahu\u2014the Minister should bear in mind that in both of those settlements, in my view, there was not the level of cross-claiming or overlapping interests that we now find in the Bay of Plenty area. Of course, the Minister has recently taken over and, I think, is now moving into the Bay of Plenty, into the central North Island. I wish him all the best as he tries to come to grips with all the overlapping interests in that area, in which of course my own tribe is involved. So, yes, this is a better validation of a deed of settlement, but in my view it has to be. The level of cross-claim and overlapping interest is far greater in respect of the centre of the North Island than we have experienced before. Maybe that statement is open to other views, because we have not actually moved to the northern area in any great way at this point. The fact that, in particular, the K\u0101ingaroa Forest, which is the subject of a number of competing tribal claims, is in the middle, just highlights that we must always strive to improve the validation by tribes of their deeds of settlement. Otherwise, of course, there is the potential for any tribe to come back in the future regardless of clause 15, which states that no one can come back on those same issues. Only maximum buy-in, in my view, will guarantee that they do not come back in the future. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000607\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EOne other issue we should all be aware of that I want to refer to just briefly is clause 18, \u201CRemoval of resumptive memorials\u201D. That is, indeed, a benefit of having a claim settled and of having similar legislation pass through this House. As we all know, for at least the last 10 years there have been caveats on a whole lot of titles in this process.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022 data-id=\u00222f68b8fde8654e9387a08bba0cb0f357\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000608\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222f68b8fde8654e9387a08bba0cb0f357\u0022\u003EDr WAYNE MAPP (National\u2014North Shore):\u003C/span\u003E I want to take a brief call on clause 15 and to refer also to the statements made by my colleagues Georgina te Heuheu and Gerry Brownlee in relation to that. Clause 15 makes it quite clear, on the face of it, that this is a final settlement and that as a matter of law the settlement is of full force and effect. I guess that one of the concerns the public of New Zealand has\u2014because the reality is that people know each Parliament can pass new law that repeals old law\u2014is whether this nation will revisit these claims again. My colleagues have referred to the level of participation and the importance of buy-in, because \u201Cfull and final\u201D is not just a legal concept; it is a moral concept, as well. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000609\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EI believe that there is a strong sense today that the procedures and processes\u2014the nature of the negotiations and the democratic process of votes that occurs\u2014do not lead just to a legal obligation, about which people feel that we can just change the law, but, more important, also to a moral obligation. It is actually the reason why successive Governments\u2014National and Labour\u2014refer to the Crown. It is the Crown that is settling; the Government of the day, in a literal sense, is merely the legal representative of the Crown, which is intended to have enduring force and ties. If there is one reason why New Zealand would retain that connection to the monarchy, it is that enduring legacy, which M\u0101ori often refer to. The moral force of having the Crown as the signatory is intended to bind not just the New Zealand Government but also the M\u0101ori signatories. The democratic path and process that the Government undertakes is well understood by M\u0101ori as being a reference to the Crown. Perhaps more than any other people in the country, M\u0101ori make reference to the honour of the Crown. I have heard many M\u0101ori leaders, scholars, and lawyers refer to that phrase. It binds both ways. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000610\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EThe moral force of the law we pass today is not something that binds just this Parliament, it also binds M\u0101ori\u2014not just for one generation, not just for 10 or 20 years, but as a permanent settlement. In this instance, \u201Cpermanent\u201D means, in essence, forever. We are closing this chapter of Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa\u2019s history and the Crown\u2019s history together. People will look forward. I believe it is very important that Government representatives\u2014and those on this side of the Chamber, as well\u2014and M\u0101ori make it very clear to the wider public of New Zealand that this issue is closed. It is a trilateral relationship in that sense. This is an opportunity to move forward\u2014to use the proceeds of the settlement to advance forward. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000611\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EIn the recent words of some prominent M\u0101ori people who have electoral aspirations, this is a 20th century issue rather than a 21st or 22nd century issue. I make the point that when National states that it intends to settle all settlements by 2010, when the Government by its legislation states that the settlements are full and final, and when M\u0101ori say that they are settling with the Crown, those statements have more than just legal force\u2014they are moral impediments for the future of this country. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022 data-id=\u00221f798f69739845788a0e827d654cc461\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000612\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221f798f69739845788a0e827d654cc461\u0022\u003ESTEPHEN FRANKS (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E This is the part that records the settlement. Clause 15(1) states that the settlement is final, and that \u201Con and from the settlement date the Crown is released and discharged from all obligations and liabilities in respect of those claims.\u201D What is not immediately obvious from the words of clause 15 is that the definition that applies is set out in Part 2, which we have just considered. That definition relates only to historical claims. In fact, historical claims do not even include any claims that may have arisen since 1992; they go from 1992 back to 1840. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000613\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EThe Government should have learnt from the experience of the past 10 years or so that full and final settlement should be full and final settlement, and then the treaty should be dead. We have created a generation of talented young people who are now growing into their peak years and whose lives have been built around grievance. Although many of those whom I saw and was impressed by at the Hui Taumata want to move on, there are still too many who can hardly do that, because their living, their entire expertise, and their authority comes from that industry. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000614\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EI am concerned that the Government is making these settlements, and that it still has a residue of public support for them, when, in fact, elements of the claims are expressly not settled. I imagine, for example, that Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa will be pushing Wai 262\u2014that unbelievable claim to own the flora and fauna in New Zealand when M\u0101ori, and later P\u0101keh\u0101, came. I do not think that the settlement in Part 3, or any of these settlements, should be made while the Crown deliberately fosters the notion of a distinction between the contemporary claims under a treaty that goes on forever, and that forever draws distinctions between New Zealanders on the basis of their ethnic inheritance, and a treaty that deals with the terms on which two different peoples coexist for the shakedown period until they genuinely became one people\u2014the one people that Hobson foresaw. So I think that the rather extravagant language in this provision, which states that the Crown \u201Cis released and discharged from all obligations and liabilities\u201D in respect of the historical claims, should be withheld until we know that New Zealanders are to be rid of the treaty once the settlements are made. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000615\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EI see no place in a constitution of a contented society for a document that people call a foundation document that states that people can claim inherited privilege on the basis of their ethnic inheritance. That is exactly what the contemporary arguments say. When the Hon Margaret Wilson became the Minister in 1999, she told the House that there would be a statement of the principles as the basis on which claims that were not historical would be approached. That document has never emerged. I do not know whether any work has even been done on it in the last 3 or 4 years. We were told in the first year that there was a lot of work being done on the principles for settlement of the so-called contemporary claims, but we have never seen it. There was to be a whole-of-Government approach. I think the office that is represented by officials here today was to be in charge of it. It got too hard. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000616\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EThe contemporary claims are now scattered throughout the Government, and we have no idea whether there is any consistency in approach whatsoever. The honourable John Tamihere was in charge of dealing with some of them\u2014the Wai 262 claim, for example, which I think is one of the claims that is most likely to cause offence between P\u0101keh\u0101 and M\u0101ori. The Wai 262 claim, which should have been included here, is a matter that\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000617\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221a6d70fdd465433d80ef50ff5b56986e\u0022\u003EDarren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: Two percent support in the polls.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000618\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002226dae3ab4c6c40599d6382d64097fc47\u0022\u003ESTEPHEN FRANKS\u003C/span\u003E: Is the Government whip complaining about another call being granted?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000619\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002224d52d5d681b4ae4942111f4db608649\u0022\u003EHon David Cunliffe\u003C/span\u003E: He is just observing that ACT is 2 percent in the polls.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000620\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dc6774bc7891422b9769bf0e7f8700d7\u0022\u003ESTEPHEN FRANKS\u003C/span\u003E: Two percent. This is a very, very arrogant Government. The arguments being put forward are arguments the people of this country have wanted to hear in this Parliament for 20 years. A speech from Dr Brash caused such a crumble in Labour\u2019s support because it was what people had been dying to hear. A speech like that caused such a reaction, and the Minister\u2019s only response on a question of whether the treaty is truly a fundamental constitutional document was to throw out a jibe about party support. What a feeble and inadequate response! There must be something that he feels will be achieved. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000621\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d3ce7368d46647f0a9ebf321328ef6b9\u0022\u003EHon David Cunliffe\u003C/span\u003E: Who is your target market?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000622\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223673d15961e1485a8b15f826665ff3f7\u0022\u003ESTEPHEN FRANKS\u003C/span\u003E: The target market for this speech is, in fact, New Zealanders who are asking where this treaty industry is taking us. How do we know that anything is full and final? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000623\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d6d7c7fe82b7435a9f9c4e357c2ae431\u0022\u003EHon David Cunliffe\u003C/span\u003E: Two percent!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000624\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225d88bc38ffd3437eb4edde7ba449827a\u0022\u003ESTEPHEN FRANKS\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Minister think that only two percent of people are worried about that? The Minister needs to look at the polls that did not tell him what was creeping up when Dr Brash made his speech. When Dr Brash made his speech, Labour was just as cocky. The consequences will come again. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000625\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EBut the question that Part 3 raises is: what is a settlement? What is \u201Cfull and final\u201D? How do we know that this legislation matters at all when the contemporary claims have been left fully alive\u2014that is, anything that has happened after 1992? All of the sense of grievance can be regenerated in another generation. It can all come back. If there is not truly a partnership\u2014if we are not all living here as part of the Crown under the Sovereign\u2014and if instead we are negotiating through our representatives for a privilege based on our ethnic origins, then there can be no final settlement. This settlement will mean nothing, if that is the foundation for New Zealand\u2019s polity. If that is the basis on which we relate to each other\u2014that we share the spoils of power, which is the way that Labour approaches government\u2014then there is no end to this, and the settlements are nothing more than a temporary payment to postpone the next instalment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 367 in the name of the Hon Mark Burton to Part 3 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000627\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to, and Part 3 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000628\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002260f242d85c5a48879077c3d6ab39ea01\u0022\u003EPart 4  Cultural redress\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220ed9ad81-05c1-4171-80c6-24fa02cade42\u0022 data-id=\u00221c44343c82d9429c9a6f1ba7a679cc59\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000629\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ed9ad81-05c1-4171-80c6-24fa02cade42\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221c44343c82d9429c9a6f1ba7a679cc59\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich)\u003C/span\u003E: This includes debate on schedules 1 to 9.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022 data-id=\u0022780a166c52a14c9da04cad7ba0bb07c2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022780a166c52a14c9da04cad7ba0bb07c2\u0022\u003EHon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU (National):\u003C/span\u003E Part 4 deals with cultural redress, which this Parliament will have become familiar with. For those people who might be listening, it is part of a package of redress options that the Crown usually negotiates with claimants. There is usually some financial redress, property redress, and cultural redress. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000631\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EI want to mention an issue that the National team has raised in a number of debates, not just on this bill but in other debates on bills that are currently before Parliament, and also in the debate on the Ngati Awa Claims Settlement Act that was passed into law 2 weeks ago. Statutory acknowledgments essentially give some preference in various ways to various sites in a particular tribe\u2019s rohe and give recognition to the fact that customarily the tribe exercised certain rights\u2014they lived in certain places and gathered food in certain areas. This acknowledgment is an attempt to recognise those customary practices. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000632\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EThe issue that has been concerning the National Party over recent months is the sets of narratives that accompany recognition of these statutory acknowledgments. I think our colleague Pita Paraone has referred to this already this evening. The tribes, rightly, are required to show their connections with various rivers, mountains, hills, and land sites. That is a proper thing to do, and those recognitions are acknowledged in the deed of settlement. But I think there is an issue about that recognition becoming part of the bill. To demonstrate this, we were presented with a schedule that recounted how the geothermal resource came from Hawaiki to Tongariro in my own area. Suffice to say, that schedule did not find its way into the bill that is now before us, and for good reason in this case because Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa Bay of Plenty gave a recitation of the coming of fire, so to speak, from Hawaiki to Tongariro, which in some respects precluded Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa, my own people, from telling their story as to how that geothermal resource came to exist in Aotearoa. Thankfully, Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa Bay of Plenty were persuaded that their acknowledgment and the recognition of their relationship with the geothermal resource could just as easily be accommodated by its recitation in the deed of settlement, and therefore it did not find its way into the bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000633\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EThese acknowledgments are made up of a mixture of mythology and history, but very often it is mythology. That does not make it wrong but it does present a problem.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000634\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002210868\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225776da9d44bf4e328a23763c0dc572b0\u0022\u003EDr Wayne Mapp\u003C/span\u003E: It shouldn\u2019t be part of the law.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000635\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226a785ac7ddcc4604a0c4ced8e3e88baa\u0022\u003EHon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, it does present a problem for us as legislators as to whether we should be incorporating those sorts of stories and mythologies into the law. Increasingly, National is of the opinion that if it is not necessary to put it into the bill itself, then why should it be in the schedules? It is not so fatal as to make us vote against the settlement legislation, but Parliament should be careful as to what it puts into the law.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022 data-id=\u0022469a105be5bf4c1b973216b3f91935d7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000636\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022469a105be5bf4c1b973216b3f91935d7\u0022\u003EDr WAYNE MAPP (National\u2014North Shore):\u003C/span\u003E I would like to thank my colleague Georgina te Heuheu for drawing out the point of the role of the law and mythology. Certainly one recognises that all peoples throughout the entire world have their myths, legends, and beliefs, because this is part of the human condition. We have tried in this country, as much as is reasonably possible, to keep the spiritual world apart from our law. We do it for good reason. We do it because we want to treat all people equally, irrespective of their beliefs. Difficulty occurs when people\u2019s beliefs are elevated into the law. It is exclusionary\u2014it excludes others, in essence.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000637\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EI have heard the Prime Minister talk about one of the values of New Zealand being that it is a secular society, and I happen to agree with her. We are a secular society. That does not mean to say that we are an irreligious society, or that we are a society without beliefs. It is saying, however, that we do not put those beliefs into the law, because the intent is that we treat all our citizens equally, irrespective of the beliefs they might happen to have. That enables each person, and each group, to have their beliefs\u2014to celebrate them, to commemorate them, and to pay observance to them. We treat that as standing outside the law of the land. So our secular society is another way of saying that we are all equal before the law. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000638\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003ENational has taken the view that the myths and legends referred to in the various schedules\u2014for instance, schedule 9 refers to the fire gods Pupu and Hoata, and schedule 6 refers to islands disappearing as a result of karakia\u2014do not have a place in the law of the land because they infringe the idea that we are all treated equally. As my colleague said, we will not be using that as a reason to vote against the legislation, but we are saying that settlements of this nature should not have those references in them. Moreover, they are not even required. Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa Bay of Plenty do not require those references to establish their connections. They can do that by temporal references rather than spiritual references. That is the role of the law, as opposed to the role of belief, in our society.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000639\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003ESo I am taking the opportunity, along with my colleague, to say that we need to think afresh about this, because it is about the values of our country. I have heard the Prime Minister speak of the importance of secular society. I presume she understands what she means when she says that, which is that we are all able to be treated equally in our own country.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002272e48ab0-e7ae-427f-bedc-793b7a91adba\u0022 data-id=\u0022fcd57598d1594ff3b45ba39c30ace7d3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000640\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002272e48ab0-e7ae-427f-bedc-793b7a91adba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022fcd57598d1594ff3b45ba39c30ace7d3\u0022\u003EHon MARK BURTON (Minister in charge of Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations):\u003C/span\u003E I say, in brief response, that I think the points made are certainly worthy of consideration for future reference. I acknowledged that myself to the M\u0101ori Affairs Committee when we met concerning this matter. In looking to future settlements and to the legislation, and at the link between them and the deeds, I think, indeed, that this is a matter that can be properly discussed. I think the potential difficulty in this case was that in good faith the negotiators had reached a point where the legislation was to reflect, by repetition of those records, what is contained within the deed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000641\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002272e48ab0-e7ae-427f-bedc-793b7a91adba\u0022\u003EI want to put on record my appreciation of the willingness of Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa Bay of Plenty negotiators to be responsive to the concerns that were raised, and their willingness to have that amendment agreed to. I think that allowed us all to move forward constructively, and to bring the legislation back to the House with a general agreement. Rather than discord, we are having a sensible discussion about how we will deal with these matters in the future. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022 data-id=\u00220f76166bd06e4cefb32b3b547d7bba1c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000642\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220f76166bd06e4cefb32b3b547d7bba1c\u0022\u003ESTEPHEN FRANKS (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E I was going to say that Part 4 is the guts of the bill, but it is not. Part 3 is the recognition of settlement. Part 4 is full of the provisions that should really worry people about the future of the settlement. It is simply stuffed with provisions that no one can tell the meaning of. Part 4 hands out a new generation\u2019s bangles and beads to Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa. The protocols look as if they are offering something from the perspective of a believer in a good-faith approach, but when we get down to the legal language we see they are deliberately stated to mean nothing in terms of impact or enforceability. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000643\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EThe ideas of cultural redress properties and of statutory acknowledgments are expressly said in one part to be an acknowledgment by the Crown of the particular cultural, spiritual, historical, and traditional associations of Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa with the statutory areas listed. Then a statement of purpose requires the Environment Court and the Historic Places Trust to have regard to them, to ensure that Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa gets notice of resource management applications in order to allow it to cite statutory acknowledgments as evidence of association. It says that the statutory consent authorities, including the Environment Court, must have regard to those acknowledgments and that they must be recorded on statutory plans, but states further on that the contents are not binding as deemed fact on any of those authorities. So the authorities have to have regard to the acknowledgments, but they need not treat them as statements of fact. The part then states that they are not exclusive, so the association would appear not to give a privilege\u2014although I think it is intended to look as if it is giving a privilege. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000644\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EThe provisions go further, for example into the geothermal statutory acknowledgments, and say that they do not really mean anything to anyone else. So what is it that one has when one does a negotiation, sets out the instruments\u2014in the most authoritative form of instrument that this country knows, an Act of Parliament\u2014and states on one page that people have to have regard to them, and then on all the succeeding pages says that they do not mean anything? The Minister might care to explain, in just a few words, exactly what the acknowledgments intend to confer. Are these valuable, or not? Future generations will say that they cannot accept that the Crown and Parliament set out, once again, to mislead and cannot believe that a Parliament would spend time going into these things, to create instruments that do not mean anything\u2014instruments that a body is directed to have regard to but is then told are not binding. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000645\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003ESo what does it mean? Why is there no definition of \u201Chaving regard to\u201D? Why will the courts be left to try to decide, under the normal statutory rules of interpretation, that Parliament must have intended it to mean something when the words say that it does not? We are setting this up for the same kind of confusion that New Zealand has been bedevilled by ever since Parliament put those ridiculous words into the State-Owned Enterprises Act\u2014that nothing shall be inconsistent with the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi\u2014when it knew that no one knew what those principles were. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000646\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4030eb1-1b72-4bc3-b00d-7126013abc01\u0022\u003EThese bills will be made to mean something by courts. It might not be that the courts are setting out to cause strife\u2014the sort of strife this Government got itself into when the courts decided that the seabed and foreshore were not owned by the Crown, as everyone had assumed for 100 years. They may not set out to cause strife, but they are bound to try to give some meaning\u2014other than sleight of hand\u2014to a statutory document. The Minister surely can tell us exactly what is meant by, for example, clause 56 that states: \u201CThe entry into a deed of recognition does not, in relation to a statutory area to which a deed of recognition applies,\u2014(a) require the Crown \u2026\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cba965bb-864f-4e06-99dc-6fcdfd007ad5\u0022 data-id=\u00229e4763d8734e4181b4f829bf5828bf75\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000647\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cba965bb-864f-4e06-99dc-6fcdfd007ad5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229e4763d8734e4181b4f829bf5828bf75\u0022\u003EPITA PARAONE (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E I want to make some comment on this part of the bill\u2014particularly in terms of some of the comments made by those who have already spoken\u2014given that it is all about cultural redress. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000648\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cba965bb-864f-4e06-99dc-6fcdfd007ad5\u0022\u003EReference has been made to the narratives regarding cultural connection that have been excluded from and included in the bill. I say right from the outset that Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa have a right to their beliefs and their tikanga. We in New Zealand First do not have any gripe with that. For that matter, any group\u2014M\u0101ori or non-M\u0101ori\u2014in this country is entitled to its view. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000649\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cba965bb-864f-4e06-99dc-6fcdfd007ad5\u0022\u003EHowever, New Zealand First is concerned that those beliefs should not be legislated for in order to give credibility to them. Our concern is that the fact that this reference has been included in this legislation will give credibility to those beliefs. It is very important to note that there was an earlier intention to include a reference in the bill as to where fire came from, and that the Government agreed to exclude that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000650\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cba965bb-864f-4e06-99dc-6fcdfd007ad5\u0022\u003EThe important issue for me is that the exclusion of those references would not affect this settlement or the effect intended by this bill. Of course, one could rightly ask whether their inclusion was something the Crown was happy about in order to give the sense, or feeling, to the claimants that they were getting something they wanted, with the Crown knowing that it would not be too much of a concern to the Crown. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000651\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cba965bb-864f-4e06-99dc-6fcdfd007ad5\u0022\u003EBut the question that needs to be asked is what the effect of including those beliefs in legislation is. In considering that question, we must look to the future. Are those beliefs what future generations of New Zealanders will have to believe in, even though they may not be of Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa descent? That is the major crux of the concern I am expressing. I just want to make it quite clear that we certainly do not wish to contradict the beliefs of Ng\u0101ti T\u016Bwharetoa or of any other such group. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000652\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cba965bb-864f-4e06-99dc-6fcdfd007ad5\u0022\u003EProgress reported.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000653\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cba965bb-864f-4e06-99dc-6fcdfd007ad5\u0022\u003EReport adopted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000654\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cba965bb-864f-4e06-99dc-6fcdfd007ad5\u0022\u003EThe House adjourned at 9.55 p.m.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20050503967c4601fc784bb7b7b058669c6a23f6000655\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cba965bb-864f-4e06-99dc-6fcdfd007ad5\u0022\u003E\u003Cbr\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n  \u003C/body\u003E\n\u003C/html\u003E"