"\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=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000001\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00226a35c6f12d9a4c47a06f8fb74a1c3e3c\u0022\u003ETuesday, 16 November 2010\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000003\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022c038e19ce2eb42fd83f1b113a1e6c043\u0022\u003ETuesday, 16 November 2010\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000002\u0022\u003EMr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000004\u0022\u003EPrayers.\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000005\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022444fafdcf3e94e1f996c9b73be2c3a04\u0022\u003EVisitors\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000006\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022872bfa8b43fb4f74ae300a59908ab5c5\u0022\u003ESouth Africa\u2014Portfolio Committee on Agriculture, KwaZulu-Natal Legislature\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022 data-id=\u00222153b3af751d443aa06eab1935502a0b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000007\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222153b3af751d443aa06eab1935502a0b\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Honourable members, I have much pleasure in informing the House that the Portfolio Committee on Agriculture from the KwaZulu-Natal Legislature of South Africa, led by the Hon Richard Themba Mthembu, is present in the gallery. I am sure members would wish that the delegation be welcomed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000008\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00221f37c2679b8740e9b5c7c512e07787b8\u0022\u003EVoting\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000009\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022ca69f7f92b9a4f73b6db5d0084a27947\u0022\u003ECorrection\u2014Animal Welfare (Treatment of Animals) Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022 data-id=\u002262c8068b882c4374b4452cdef7acd264\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000010\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002262c8068b882c4374b4452cdef7acd264\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Honourable members, the results of the vote on the question for the first reading of the Animal Welfare (Treatment of Animals) Amendment Bill was incorrectly announced as Ayes 57 and Noes 62. The correct result is Ayes 56 and Noes 62. The record will be corrected. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000011\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00220fea3fefea1446d385045b8fac6d1df0\u0022\u003EPoints of Order\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000012\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002200815e5bcf194433bd179e2e89cb8103\u0022\u003EEstablishment of Body to Review Expenses and Allowances of MPs\u2014Leave to Move Motion Without Notice\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022 data-id=\u0022abe932a7af774e5da9ddef6d4ef231d6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000013\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022abe932a7af774e5da9ddef6d4ef231d6\u0022\u003EMETIRIA TUREI (Co-Leader\u2014Green):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I seek leave to move a motion without notice or debate to call on the Speaker to establish an independent body to review and determine MPs\u2019 expenses and allowances.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000014\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e33fdf9a7f1f453dad5149762a268b47\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection? There is objection.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u0022166c2aa665434bf28f52a61bbb3107d8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000015\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022166c2aa665434bf28f52a61bbb3107d8\u0022\u003EHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. This is not strictly, perhaps, a point of order. I ask your indulgence to simply explain that declining leave to move the motion simply recognises that all party leaders have so far expressed confidence in your ability to move this issue forward\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000016\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224d2724709ffc4861a10744d9088e31b0\u0022\u003EMetiria Turei\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000017\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022edd7017df55e4f0799bca7191af5c0d5\u0022\u003EHon GERRY BROWNLEE\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014and I think that is where it should most appropriately be left.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000018\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224577951762754b49b36bff84cb5ef672\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The member should have been aware that a point of order was being heard, and she cannot interrupt that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022 data-id=\u0022b75316431477498d9a38439a19a95ab0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000019\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b75316431477498d9a38439a19a95ab0\u0022\u003EMETIRIA TUREI (Co-Leader\u2014Green):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. In fact, the member of Parliament stood up and expressly said that what he was about to say was not a point of order, yet you allowed him to continue. So, indeed, I did not interrupt a point of order, because a point of order was not sought.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u002216dc9f516fc547c7946754d5d73c0345\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000020\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002216dc9f516fc547c7946754d5d73c0345\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I tend to agree with the member, and I wonder whether, in fact, seeing that it was not a point of order, the member could make it clear whether it was, in fact, a ministerial statement and whether in fact that leads to other comments.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000021\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e7d19463edd840159e38bcf14ad11094\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I have heard sufficient. The Speaker judges when he will hear points of order or not; he chose on that occasion to hear what the Leader of the House had to say.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022 data-id=\u0022bd20c56b1fee415a8678a4086c87bd08\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bd20c56b1fee415a8678a4086c87bd08\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip\u2014Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. We were prepared to hear the honourable Leader of the House on that point of order. I wonder whether you could share your ruling on his point of order with the Chamber.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000023\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022816fd0347ac8476cbf52abaf01a65c4e\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I am afraid I failed to understand what the member\u2019s point was.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000024\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00225157ef7afa8a4903a21117fe23556dd0\u0022\u003EQuestions for Oral Answer\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000025\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002243b14d2896bb471994beab4db662ba77\u0022\u003EQuestions to Ministers\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000026\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022fdf9a1eb0edc47afba6b572693d03f84\u0022\u003EEconomic Programme\u2014Main Features and Sustainable Development\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022659f6556-09a1-4ead-bc52-05cbdb4eaab8\u0022 data-id=\u00229f9741bef7294200a22df4a664a544cc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000027\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022659f6556-09a1-4ead-bc52-05cbdb4eaab8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229f9741bef7294200a22df4a664a544cc\u0022\u003ECRAIG FOSS (National\u2014Tukituki):\u003C/span\u003E My question is to the Minister of Finance and reads\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000028\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002286484470e82b4249ace94d0c93a06530\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Hekia is behind him!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000029\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022659f6556-09a1-4ead-bc52-05cbdb4eaab8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002230f4750af4fe4f8da8d5c91c061735d4\u0022\u003ECRAIG FOSS\u003C/span\u003E: The member may know I am behind\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000030\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221d578d56784c4d7b9cd6a17d4a52c078\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The member will resume his seat. I request the House to please take a deep breath and to settle down a little. There is no need for this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022659f6556-09a1-4ead-bc52-05cbdb4eaab8\u0022 data-id=\u0022f3dfef672b634a86bb4307879f3fabf1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000031\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022659f6556-09a1-4ead-bc52-05cbdb4eaab8\u0022\u003E1. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f3dfef672b634a86bb4307879f3fabf1\u0022\u003ECRAIG FOSS (National\u2014Tukituki)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Finance: What are the main features of the Government\u2019s economic programme and how are they helping to build sustainable economic growth?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022 data-id=\u00229a30ec46989f41e28915e369486ff9ee\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000032\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229a30ec46989f41e28915e369486ff9ee\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance):\u003C/span\u003E The Government\u2019s economic programme is focused on jobs and growth, and includes strengthening the tax system, investment in productive infrastructure, supporting business innovation and trade, lifting productivity and services in the public sector, removing red tape, improving education, and lifting skills. All of these things are helping to tilt the economy towards savings, investment, and exports, and away from the unsustainable borrowing, consumption, and Government spending of previous years.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000033\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022659f6556-09a1-4ead-bc52-05cbdb4eaab8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022628683e8a5f9486b9aa4b5f355073bef\u0022\u003ECraig Foss\u003C/span\u003E: Within this programme, what steps has the Government taken to strengthen the tax system?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000034\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224e5bae75ad014a778c316466ec5eecee\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: At a time when many other countries are being forced to increase both income and indirect taxes, we have delivered across-the-board personal income tax cuts that leave the average household about $25 a week better off. Even after a GST increase to 15 percent, the average wage earner is about $15 a week better off. Almost three-quarters of New Zealand earners now have a top statutory income tax rate of 17.5c in the dollar or less.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000035\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022659f6556-09a1-4ead-bc52-05cbdb4eaab8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002254c7be1cab08422e948b4fa91c5ced53\u0022\u003ECraig Foss\u003C/span\u003E: With this programme, what steps has the Government taken to increase investment in productive infrastructure?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000036\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220aad8a66dc9c4356bb307bc3037c74a6\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: There are some very significant steps, including introducing smarter planning, financing, and execution of projects. The major investments currently under way are a $4 billion programme to improve the national electricity grid, a $4.5 billion programme to restore the relevance of the rail freight network, a $1.5 billion programme for rolling out ultra-fast broadband, an $11 billion investment in roads over the next 10 years, and completing the upgrade of Wellington and Auckland metro rail, an upgrade that I acknowledge was begun by the previous Government. Collectively these multibillion-dollar programmes are supporting thousands of jobs and a brighter economic future.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000037\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022659f6556-09a1-4ead-bc52-05cbdb4eaab8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002289df45360d6244b780294b70ea0941fe\u0022\u003ECraig Foss\u003C/span\u003E: What measures are under way within the Government\u2019s economic programme to support business innovation and trade?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000038\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022aae02c428b064d5996989d398e9b3d3b\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: As most people are aware, the Government\u2019s assertive programme for free trade is progressing with some energy. We have signed agreements with Malaysia, Hong Kong, and ASEAN, and at the weekend the Prime Minister announced that talks were advancing with Russia and the Trans-Pacific Partnership countries. We are also in talks with India, the Gulf States, and Korea. Despite the fact that the Government has a very limited budget, it has announced $140 million per year for the Primary Growth Partnership, and this year we confirmed $320 million of extra investment over 4 years in science, research, and technology.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000039\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002287305c8a418f457399d3d2e5c73d4d0b\u0022\u003EHon David Cunliffe\u003C/span\u003E: What new policies is he considering to create jobs and lift incomes for New Zealanders, given the recent verdict of the 2025 Taskforce that \u201Cwe do not see any realistic possibility that the gap in real per capita income has narrowed in the past year.\u201D?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000040\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fa5a741467a64e44bcd3a90a1daa82b8\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: As I told the member last week, I do not agree with the 2025 Taskforce, and usually Labour disagrees with those people all the time. The Government has a broad and comprehensive programme. It has only just started. There are some good early signs, but the Government will continue with its programme as I have outlined it: investment in infrastructure, less red tape, more productive public services, tax reform, and so on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000041\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225232dc5881ba4675a3cf5a6238e629bb\u0022\u003EHon David Cunliffe\u003C/span\u003E: Within this so-called broad and comprehensive programme, what specific changes to monetary policy, if any, is he considering to address the high and volatile exchange rates that are crippling New Zealand\u2019s exporters and manufacturers?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000042\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f30759217b004f2db8157c1b2b3c1efa\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: The exercise of monetary policy is properly the province of the Reserve Bank. The Reserve Bank has the power to intervene, which it gained under the member\u2019s own Government, and the Governor of the Reserve Bank has set out in detail where and how he would intervene. The Government can help exporters by fixing the mess of domestic policy that that member\u2019s Government previously made, so we can help exports to become more competitive and start them growing again. Under that member\u2019s Government, the export sector went into recession in 2005. It is only now coming out of that 5-year recession.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00222760a5084e9243adad1adaf5c8dd1072\u0022\u003ECosts and Prices\u2014Effect of Government Policies\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022 data-id=\u0022c770cf3974db4fdb88aec4ac1cf4c89a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000044\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E2. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c770cf3974db4fdb88aec4ac1cf4c89a\u0022\u003EHon PHIL GOFF (Leader of the Opposition)\u003C/span\u003E to the Prime Minister: What adverse impact on costs and prices, if any, have his Government\u2019s policies had on New Zealanders?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022 data-id=\u00226d6b38415ae4485783e7d83530e8ee54\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000045\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226d6b38415ae4485783e7d83530e8ee54\u0022\u003ERt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister):\u003C/span\u003E In April the Government increased the tobacco excise. This was strongly supported by Labour, which said: \u201CThis is a huge step forward in health promotion for all New Zealanders,\u201D. From 1 July a number of sectors, including liquid fossil fuels, came into the emissions trading scheme. This is expected to have an impact on households of around $3 per week, which, I might add, is about half the cost of Labour\u2019s emissions trading scheme. On 1 October GST was increased to 15 percent, but people were more than compensated for this increase by tax cuts and increases in benefits, superannuation, and the Working for Families package. However, the most important thing to look at is the overall increase in prices across the economy. Inflation over the last year has been only 1.5 percent. The last time inflation was any lower than that was well back into 1999.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000046\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b892d17f944944239143aa6c3c431810\u0022\u003EHon Phil Goff\u003C/span\u003E: When the Prime Minister said at the start of June that \u201CPeople will be better off, they just don\u2019t know it yet.\u201D, does he think the 16.4 percent increase in the price of fruit and vegetables over the last year is making families feel better off?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000047\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222fc494cedabb4f838f5de4b37da0408e\u0022\u003ERt Hon JOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: Firstly, it is worth noting that food prices rose by 2.2 percent in the quarter. Secondly, it has been interesting to note how many people have been remarking on their tax cuts and how much money they have had, and how easily the switch and the rebalancing of the economy has gone, from a slight increase in GST to a reduction in personal taxes. But, of course, if the member wants to campaign on reversing the GST increase and increasing personal taxes, he should go ahead and do so.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000048\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228547fb19cfb849bea00a80b03ea43071\u0022\u003EHon Phil Goff\u003C/span\u003E: Is he aware of last month\u2019s report from the Ministry of Health that stated that only a third of New Zealand children are eating enough fruit and vegetables to be healthy; if so, how does he think the 16.4 percent increase in the price of those goods over the last year will help children to eat more healthy food?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000049\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002223edb649339040ef81060c5d863e0dda\u0022\u003ERt Hon JOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: I have not actually seen the report, but I certainly would encourage parents to give their children fruit and vegetables. What I would say is that although it is not my responsibility to apologise on behalf of the previous Labour Government, I was shocked to learn that the price of fruit and vegetables went up by 21 percent in the last 2 years of that Labour Government. That contrasts with an increase of 12 percent in the price since then, even including the increase in GST. That is a tragic set of circumstances.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000050\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f19f6917464349abb10e9b7e255c6a15\u0022\u003EChris Tremain\u003C/span\u003E: How does the current level of inflation compare with that in recent years?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000051\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f7036e3ca84e49269022a2f5d38ddc7a\u0022\u003ERt Hon JOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: At 1.5 percent, the current rate of inflation is very low compared with the rate between 2000 and 2008. Price growth in New Zealand is well and truly under control. This is in stark contrast, I might add, to the position in September 2008, when annual inflation was running at 5.1 percent. Members will recognise that 5.1 percent, under Labour, is much higher that 1.5 percent, under National.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000052\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228415e962-886d-47b9-9356-3fdce746891f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221a294191341a439d87420278f095a3f9\u0022\u003EHon Jim Anderton\u003C/span\u003E: Is the Prime Minister aware that the real GDP per capita in constant prices and constant purchasing power parity between Australia and New Zealand closed by about 0.5 percent in each of the first 6 years of the Labour-led Government\u2014from 1999 to 2005\u2014but has widened by over 0.5 percent in each of the 2 years that there has been a National-led Government; if he is aware of that, why does he believe that that is the situation when he has promised to close the gap?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000053\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022950511bea345412baca205faa31e4d69\u0022\u003ERt Hon JOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: I have not seen that data, but I have seen data that shows a lot fewer New Zealanders are going to Australia, and I have certainly seen data that shows that the gap in real incomes is narrowing between New Zealand and Australia.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000054\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d12d464ef6f94801b93255ce194d344d\u0022\u003EHon Phil Goff\u003C/span\u003E: Does he support the statement made by his Minister of Health that after the 6.5 percent increase in doctors\u2019 visit fees last year, which he approved, a further increase of only $1 this year would be permissible because of the GST increase?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000055\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022167e52c0ebbd4b8aa07e2eaefc24c40d\u0022\u003ERt Hon JOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: What I do support is the extra subsidies that went into general practitioner visits to help people in the most low-income and vulnerable communities. What I support is the $14 billion - plus worth of expenditure that is going into the health system. What I support is the relentless focus that the Minister has had on moving our resources from the back office to the front office. What I support is the way that the Minister is trying to get greater productivity in the health system. I certainly support the recommendation he received about sharing neurosurgery between Dunedin and Christchurch. Overall, I support the tremendous efforts he is making to improve health in New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000056\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222c940ed13e5745869a58de161d032a17\u0022\u003EChris Tremain\u003C/span\u003E: Given that increasing GST has lifted prices, how easy would it be to reverse the Government\u2019s GST - income tax switch?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000057\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222e142ebfeff4496d933bdf3106a726e0\u0022\u003ERt Hon JOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: Funnily enough, it would be very straightforward to reverse the tax switch. For instance, reversing it would be far easier than taking GST off fruit and vegetables, which would require pages of rules and armies of bureaucrats to administer it. Reversing the tax switch would be relatively simple\u2014all Labour would need to do would be to take down GST, put up personal taxes, cut benefits, cut superannuation, and get back on the bus.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000058\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002219cc2b9b34904f7da3f0fe711f73214e\u0022\u003EHon Phil Goff\u003C/span\u003E: If the Minister of Health said that it was OK for doctors\u2019 fees to go up by only $1, because of GST, how does he explain the increases of up to $7.50 a visit recorded today in the Mana electorate, since 1 April, which takes the fee for children going to the doctor up to $42.50 a visit?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000059\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221ec7495a0970494896f5b020909d6d59\u0022\u003ERt Hon JOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: As I have said, many people in Mana who attend Very Low Cost Access practices have been getting extra subsidies. I cannot talk about individual cases. But, frankly, with about 5 days to go until the by-election, I am not surprised that Phil Goff has had to wade in, because all the people of Mana know that Kris Fa\u2019afoi has done a pretty hopeless job, albeit he has had 10,000 billboards out there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000060\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f49b71e23e9342cca4d2df1e57a8af6f\u0022\u003ERahui Katene\u003C/span\u003E: Supplementary question to the Prime Minister\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000061\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221dc01480ec2a4dd3856b50f6d498daaf\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I apologise to the honourable member. I cannot accurately hear the questions being asked, at all, so I cannot assist members if they do not believe their questions have been answered, and that is not fair to the members asking the questions. It is coming from all around the House; no particular party is to blame. The whole House is far too noisy during the asking of questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000062\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022851984e69ad14af59ed7167b3fde3438\u0022\u003ERahui Katene\u003C/span\u003E: What has been the impact on the Government\u2019s policies in addressing the poverty of many New Zealanders of the assessment from the United Nations that New Zealand was rated as having the sixth-greatest gap between rich and poor among developed nations last year?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000063\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002224cb129562b54a72907574879fc1886a\u0022\u003ERt Hon JOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: The Government is working very hard to close the gap. If we look across the range of different policies that the Government has been implementing\u2014whether it is Wh\u0101nau Ora; national standards to try to lift literacy and numeracy skills; the 90-day trial periods, which give people an opportunity to work; or the 17.5 percent tax rate that three-quarters of New Zealanders face\u2014we see that all of these things will help. But we need to recognise that we are in difficult times and we do need to do our best, and the Government is working on those issues.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000064\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d5b0a05a18b243338eeec681544ca94b\u0022\u003EHon Phil Goff\u003C/span\u003E: If New Zealanders are overwhelmingly better off after his tax switch, as he has promised, how does he explain the statements from Baycorp and Veda Advantage that recently there has been a massive increase in the number of New Zealanders unable to pay their bills?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000065\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a82e51d2d67f4ddf803a829b561d68fe\u0022\u003ERt Hon JOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: The same way I did last week or the week before when I answered that question: there is always a lag effect. But, interestingly enough, if one was to look hypothetically at the number of defaults that are taking place at the moment, and contrast that with the number of defaults in 1991-92, the advice I have had is that the current number is about a quarter of the number in 1991-92. Yes, there have been difficult times for a lot of New Zealanders, but they are very fortunate, I would suggest, to have the policies we have, which are helping them through it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000066\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228415e962-886d-47b9-9356-3fdce746891f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002203f6cc43b57045729825619489d5521e\u0022\u003EHon Jim Anderton\u003C/span\u003E: As the table prepared by the OECD on national accounts, which I will seek leave to table, shows the gap widening between the income per capita in New Zealand compared with that of Australia, will the Prime Minister\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000067\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267431f57-e958-4c83-b438-7da8061d479e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221f75c11781d34023ac3b0382501787ad\u0022\u003EPaul Quinn\u003C/span\u003E: What year?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000068\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228415e962-886d-47b9-9356-3fdce746891f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220d040396e1324259a2f989492e018d4a\u0022\u003EHon Jim Anderton\u003C/span\u003E: This year, and that member\u2019s Government is responsible\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000069\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002228bbbc81096e41bdb27777ca9e0c1745\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Order!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000070\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228415e962-886d-47b9-9356-3fdce746891f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022450b74aebbc749118589d5e0783c1260\u0022\u003EHon Jim Anderton\u003C/span\u003E: Will the Prime Minister say to the House today that when the full panoply of the National Party\u2019s policies that he promised before the election come to bear at the end of the 3-year term of Government, the income per capita gap between New Zealand and Australia will be closing?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000071\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e55db3bdd6b44394b26e73ea9a4be7c6\u0022\u003ERt Hon JOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: The Government is working hard to achieve that objective.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000072\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022865307b6ffb74a85a938342f11e18e99\u0022\u003ESearch and Surveillance Bill\u2014International Federation of Journalists\u2019 Statement\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022 data-id=\u0022dda6acfaa1a14adbbf0b9fe6e30e6c5c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000073\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003E3. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022dda6acfaa1a14adbbf0b9fe6e30e6c5c\u0022\u003EKEITH LOCKE (Green)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Justice: Does he agree with the International Federation of Journalists that if the Search and Surveillance Bill proceeds in its present form it will \u201Cundermine the long-held right of journalists to protect the confidentiality of sources\u201D; if not, why not?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022 data-id=\u00229340eaebf15144c58a8252df6df55205\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000074\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229340eaebf15144c58a8252df6df55205\u0022\u003EHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Acting Minister of Justice):\u003C/span\u003E No, I do not. The media\u2019s right to protect confidential sources under the Evidence Act 2006 has been expressly carried over to this bill for examination orders, production orders, and all searches. Under the bill, a journalist presented with an examination order or a production order may refuse to answer questions or produce documents that would reveal the identity of the journalist\u2019s source.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000075\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002243011bad382d47fb9b71ad312c1b5e75\u0022\u003EKeith Locke\u003C/span\u003E: Is it not true that before the claim of privilege is heard the journalist may be forced to produce those documents and disclose confidential sources, leading the New Zealand Herald editors to say that these powers to reveal confidential sources threaten \u201Cthe public airing of some of the country\u2019s most important, and uncomfortable, news stories\u201D?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000076\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f8f8ea6cbb5243948c9b4baf1010e7ab\u0022\u003EHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON\u003C/span\u003E: No. I think what the member is actually referring to is a situation where the claim to the privilege may be disputed. In those circumstances it may be necessary to refer the material to a judge, who can determine the validity or otherwise of the claim. That is the procedure that is set out under the Evidence Act, which the Green Party did not oppose when it was debated 3 years ago.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000077\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b4e02ef66541477abbd5af574e3ebea2\u0022\u003EKeith Locke\u003C/span\u003E: What concerns does he have that the power to require documents to be produced on request under the threat of a jail term is now available to a host of Government departments\u2014for example, the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, the Ministry of Fisheries, etc.?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000078\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002239dc9ba6fb764b179f7266b55df4fcbe\u0022\u003EHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON\u003C/span\u003E: None.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000079\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b3e0684cb17e43bcb7682d1e278a1a04\u0022\u003EKeith Locke\u003C/span\u003E: Will he consider deleting the examination orders in the Search and Surveillance Bill, because, in the opinion of the International Federation of Journalists, New Zealand Herald editors, etc., they contravene the right of New Zealanders to silence and may force journalists to disclose their sources?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000080\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d939b8a0a78045b3bf85a92ca8bd4d73\u0022\u003EHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON\u003C/span\u003E: No.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000081\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c1e95ecf72aa483b857f261a62483127\u0022\u003EKeith Locke\u003C/span\u003E: Does he agree with the International Federation of Journalists that the Search and Surveillance Bill will \u201Cerode the democratic role of working journalists in New Zealand\u201D, the federation not being satisfied with a subsequent judicial hearing of a right to privilege if the Government agencies have already run off with documents containing the journalists\u2019 confidential sources?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000082\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022460bf7aaecb543328d61e7a7d3c1abe7\u0022\u003EHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON\u003C/span\u003E: No. That is hyperbolic nonsense.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000083\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224c2befbb226841ce9964fbe5a828d830\u0022\u003EKeith Locke\u003C/span\u003E: If it is hyperbolic nonsense, why did the chair of the select committee, Chester Borrows, tell Radio New Zealand National that the bill may warrant further consideration and that he took seriously the criticisms of the journalists, and will the Minister not take another look at the concern expressed by a range of journalists, including their international federation?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222a19a11095f1445e90a8706886ab4134\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I believe that the Minister has no responsibility whatsoever for what the chair of a select committee may have said. In fact, he probably should not even be commenting on it. So I do not believe that it is appropriate for to me to allow that question. I apologise to the member.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000085\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b1bd78e6e0334527be9bfb5be5d7386b\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I think the Minister can\u2014[Interruption] \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000086\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002230b4f39f99d3489892ba333f939de8c1\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: A point of order is being heard.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002230c8ae4f24484627a7f313334f31d848\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I think the Minister can take into account comments a chair of a select committee made publicly. I think that is certainly within the rules. If the comments are done in a public way Ministers can, if they wish, either take them into account or\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000088\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ef751d7a9d874b3fa9c2efaf41eaf7e0\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I think we get into dangerous territory if we have Ministers commenting on what chairs of select committees do. They are matters for Parliament, not for the executive. Once a matter is reported back to the House, I am more comfortable about it being commented on, but while a matter is before a select committee, I am not comfortable about it, at all. I do not want to deny the member his supplementary question, so I invite him to reword it to see whether he can bring it within order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000089\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022df7740f8ba53473192e4141fd3c85190\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I ask you to review the ruling you just made. I think it is one worth another look, after a bit of time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000090\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227f235188cb564abd89427bbf132a4755\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I am always prepared to, on request, look at what I have done. Ministers have no responsibility for the chairs of select committees. But I invite Keith Locke to bring his question within the Standing Orders.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000091\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002267b5514540e1485bbb225350dea94820\u0022\u003EKeith Locke\u003C/span\u003E: Will the Minister take another look at the bill and the possibility of revising it, given the concern expressed by a wide range of journalists, including the International Federation of Journalists, and by some political figures who have commented publicly, expressing an interest in further considering the bill?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000092\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022892bfa84cff44a7894d09b2699ae9a4f\u0022\u003EHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON\u003C/span\u003E: No.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000093\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a82fb0b9c83644b8801785102bafe51b\u0022\u003EKeith Locke\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Speaker, I take your standard that you do not like press statements being tabled, but in this case the statement from the International Federation of Journalists is on an international website and might not be available. I seek leave to table the statement made by the International Federation of Journalists on 12 November headed \u201CNZ bill Undermines Journalists\u2019 Rights\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000094\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ebc093554f974dc788b75ea621074d88\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is no objection.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000095\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EDocument, by leave, laid on the Table of the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000096\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f2ff9b952652468c8cfec1703da9dfcc\u0022\u003ECharles Chauvel\u003C/span\u003E: Will the Government secure Labour\u2019s support for the now substantially redrafted legislation by taking up its offer to provide that support if the Government includes in the bill specific provisions to better affirm press freedom, provides for better controls on Serious Fraud Office powers, and makes production and examination orders available only for the most serious offences and under the supervision of judges?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000097\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e2fb3201081d4bb48d5d75cb5348862a\u0022\u003EHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON\u003C/span\u003E: The Minister has no responsibility for the Serious Fraud Office or any aspect of its administration.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000098\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022987a63bb90ef42f1b08b0c2870d516b0\u0022\u003ECharles Chauvel\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. My question was about whether the Government would be willing to amend the legislation in the three ways indicated. The Minister has carriage of the bill, so he has responsibility for all the matters that are in it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000099\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bdc06ac837cc427eabb7c42637984ef1\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I believe that in answering the Minister pointed out that the Minister of Justice does not have responsibility, as I understand it, for the Serious Fraud Office, which was one of the components of the member\u2019s question. I cannot, I believe, constrain the Minister beyond that; I think he did answer that part of the question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000100\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d6d919995980422289d941a4507b8d08\u0022\u003ECharles Chauvel\u003C/span\u003E: I seek leave to table a letter from the Labour Party to the Minister offering support for the legislation if it is redrafted in the ways indicated in my question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000101\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227f5f4db6bc294c068094919e6c6890be\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is no objection.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EDocument, by leave, laid on the Table of the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000103\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00225d921c959d2f4751aece50647b7bb572\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 2 to Minister\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228415e962-886d-47b9-9356-3fdce746891f\u0022 data-id=\u0022909e472ac2264abe9cca9d326417312d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000104\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228415e962-886d-47b9-9356-3fdce746891f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022909e472ac2264abe9cca9d326417312d\u0022\u003EHon JIM ANDERTON (Leader\u2014Progressive):\u003C/span\u003E I seek leave to table a document compiled by the Parliamentary Library from OECD, Statistics New Zealand, and Australian Bureau of Statistics figures showing that the income gap between Australia and New Zealand has widened in Australia\u2019s favour in the last 2 years.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000105\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e208a3c04760472881f29ee6ff194352\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought to table that document, is there any objection? There is no objection.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000106\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EDocument, by leave, laid on the Table of the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000107\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022dc4303a0632c48a6a0b1f83c4284987f\u0022\u003EMinisters\u2019 Private Interests\u2014Compliance with Rules\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022 data-id=\u0022cd5770b024df461083365e0cf2d8c14a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000108\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E4. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022cd5770b024df461083365e0cf2d8c14a\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON (Labour\u2014Dunedin North)\u003C/span\u003E to the Prime Minister: Does he believe clear and unambiguous leadership is now needed to ensure that rules regarding the private interests of Ministers are upheld?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022 data-id=\u002201a0bfb562da445593690d4b1af18a4d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000109\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002201a0bfb562da445593690d4b1af18a4d\u0022\u003ERt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister):\u003C/span\u003E As Prime Minister I have responsibility for protecting the integrity of the decision-making process of executive Government and maintaining public trust in the executive. I have always expected and demanded that my Ministers act lawfully and behave in a way that upholds, and is seen to uphold, the highest ethical standards.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000110\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d6831d1b19cd43b29ffb801a8c65111b\u0022\u003EHon Pete Hodgson\u003C/span\u003E: Was he showing clear and unambiguous leadership when, even before he became Prime Minister, he happened to forget how many Tranz Rail shares he owned?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000111\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222c0d4e1ff7e54d1b8a86c6b67cf8b0be\u0022\u003ERt Hon JOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: Yes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000112\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002283c2e9c8760740f2bd534db569d274b3\u0022\u003EHon Pete Hodgson\u003C/span\u003E: Was he showing clear and unambiguous leadership when he set up a blind trust to manage his real estate, dairying, and wine interests, which was blind in legal theory but which had 20/20 vision in practice?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000113\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226c6547b07a7543b0b3101861f9c030d8\u0022\u003ERt Hon JOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: The member is wrong in his accusation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000114\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fd02302fda5342fba47c51d84f64089f\u0022\u003EHon Pete Hodgson\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I did not hear the Prime Minister\u2019s reply, and I wonder whether I could have the chance to hear it afresh.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000115\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f8d439de141849d48b71869d92c3d7a5\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I ask members to be quiet. I realise that issues can be tense. Would the right honourable Prime Minister mind repeating the answer?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000116\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e97764bddf8147dc81c62ab919df1778\u0022\u003ERt Hon JOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: I refute the member\u2019s accusation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000117\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228ed73b1b88e442939017209e5a9c92d6\u0022\u003EHon Pete Hodgson\u003C/span\u003E: Was he showing clear and unambiguous leadership when he reinvented a new ministerial housing system, supposedly to save the taxpayer money after the Bill English debacle, only to find that his system costs more because Ministers can, and do, pocket more money without having to show that their expenses are real?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000118\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225453d11b305a4656a8f1064cf7c7618f\u0022\u003ERt Hon JOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: I am satisfied that the new system works effectively, is fair, and balances the needs of both taxpayers and Ministers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000119\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022790e1342433e48eaa3d918ba9927d620\u0022\u003EHon Pete Hodgson\u003C/span\u003E: Did he show clear and ambiguous leadership when he initially denied wrongdoing by Dr Richard Worth, the Deputy Prime Minister, Bill English, or Pansy Wong, only to have to backtrack when the facts emerged?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000120\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f5d34a7360474cbc822e7b93fafbd3ff\u0022\u003ERt Hon JOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: The member is incorrect in his statement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000121\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fe5e88efb48f406f85c1ad087ff83405\u0022\u003EHon Pete Hodgson\u003C/span\u003E: Why is it always the Prime Minister\u2019s instinct to deny, forget, minimise, dampen, distract, ward off, and worse, or to run a new agenda, rather than to live by clear personal rules himself and require his Cabinet to do the same?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000122\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222b8ba72317474022a468b9342ec53ac9\u0022\u003ERt Hon JOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: In the 2 years that I have been Prime Minister I am proud to have led a Government that has had greater transparency and greater openness than previously. I am very grateful that I was not a member of the previous Labour Government, which spent its time with Taito Phillip Field, Winston Peters, and a range of other people whom it sought to protect and hide from. [Interruption] \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000123\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022257208b2581046f8ad8c60e57bad4ccb\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: If the National backbench has quite finished, I will call the Hon Rodney Hide.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000124\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f1374967f20a468883751327a44ef75d\u0022\u003EHon Rodney Hide\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I ask you to go back over the supplementary questions that the Hon Pete Hodgson raised, and the way of doing it, in the context of the Standing Orders. I let him finish, obviously, but I raise this for next time. It seems to me that the danger that we might be heading into is the ability of members to put down questions without notice, in effect, by asking a Minister or Prime Minister whether he or she believes that clear and unambiguous leadership was shown in a particular case, and then allowing a whole range of issues to be trawled. It seems to me that the House might want to enable that to happen, but in the past Speakers have been quite tough about members putting down questions like that without notice.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000125\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002282fcae41d680416684249925ce47f6d4\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I appreciate that the member has raised this point in good faith. These are difficult issues. I think there was nothing unusual about the primary question that was put down. Over the years members of the House have lodged primary questions that give no particular indication of where the supplementary questions will go. I listen to the supplementary questions, and if there have been outrageous allegations against a member\u2014or in this case the Prime Minister\u2014I have ruled them out. Where possible I tend to let the Minister deal with the question. I think the Prime Minister dealt with the questions on this occasion. But as Speaker I accept that I have to be careful, because outrageous allegations are totally out of order and outside the Standing Orders. I will be mindful of that issue. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000126\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002278b00e3be43e4cbfaeff4f6d867ccdf5\u0022\u003EKiwifruit, Pseudomonas Syringae pv. Actinidiae\u2014Government Response\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c0f78f60-c2fd-46f4-8138-72f39692fc20\u0022 data-id=\u00225409d1411e624490b5c1c4e046d6618d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000127\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c0f78f60-c2fd-46f4-8138-72f39692fc20\u0022\u003E5. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225409d1411e624490b5c1c4e046d6618d\u0022\u003ETODD McCLAY (National\u2014Rotorua)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister for Biosecurity: How is the Government responding to the identification of the Psa disease in New Zealand?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e4b09a29-dfd3-42c0-8585-11463bd6077b\u0022 data-id=\u002247269dedceeb4a0d93268945584b2e80\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000128\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4b09a29-dfd3-42c0-8585-11463bd6077b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002247269dedceeb4a0d93268945584b2e80\u0022\u003EHon DAVID CARTER (Minister for Biosecurity):\u003C/span\u003E Since Pseudomonas syringae pv. Actinidiae (Psa) was identified in New Zealand 11 days ago, a major biosecurity operation has swung into action. The response team of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry was on the ground within hours of notification. Since then a major round-the-clock programme of movement controls, laboratory testing, spraying, vine control, and grower education has been in place. The ministry has also been communicating extensively with our offshore trading partners to ensure that market access remains open. The Government and industry have been working together extremely closely on this serious disease outbreak, and to date we have seen a well-managed response implemented at speed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000129\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c0f78f60-c2fd-46f4-8138-72f39692fc20\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022212e480a7144447892aa869f3afc7721\u0022\u003ETodd McClay\u003C/span\u003E: What are the next steps in the Psa response?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000130\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4b09a29-dfd3-42c0-8585-11463bd6077b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022624eeab831614672b9512995681b098f\u0022\u003EHon DAVID CARTER\u003C/span\u003E: Although urgent testing continues, with some 500 hectares now confirmed as infected, eradication\u2014at least in the short term\u2014is unlikely. The Government and industry are now focused on developing a programme of aggressive containment of Psa, which involves restricting it to currently infected sites. I am meeting with industry tomorrow in an attempt to finalise that response. Aggressive containment will require investment from the Government. The kiwifruit industry will also have to make a similar commitment but we are both 100 percent focused on ensuring a prosperous and vibrant sector into the future.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000131\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ae90decd92524d339562a0351f68ab95\u0022\u003EHon Damien O\u2019Connor\u003C/span\u003E: Will the Government response include reinstatement of the 54 front-line biosecurity jobs he cut in 2009\u2014cuts that may have contributed to the disease breaching New Zealand\u2019s borders?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000132\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4b09a29-dfd3-42c0-8585-11463bd6077b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f93e50396a964695b71085bcb3b9b4c6\u0022\u003EHon DAVID CARTER\u003C/span\u003E: No, it will not. This Government has appropriated more money for biosecurity than the previous Government did and I am certain that the readjustments at the border associated with imported containers and used cars have nothing whatsoever to do with the possible incursion of Psa, which is a disease that could have been here for many years.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000133\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c0f78f60-c2fd-46f4-8138-72f39692fc20\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002218ffa87ac9114540b9ff5e2ffb1054ee\u0022\u003ETodd McClay\u003C/span\u003E: What has been the feedback from the kiwifruit industry on the support provided by the Government to date?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000134\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4b09a29-dfd3-42c0-8585-11463bd6077b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222dc1780f2b7d4aadb649eb8ce8af341e\u0022\u003EHon DAVID CARTER\u003C/span\u003E: Perhaps the most pleasing aspect of the last 11 days has been how the Government and industry have worked together in a collaborative way to address this very serious issue. Industry leaders from Zespri, the New Zealand kiwifruit growers, and various post-harvest operators have specifically thanked me for the timely, expert, and high-quality support provided by the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. It is still early days in the response to this challenging disease, but I am confident that the high-quality and professional leadership provided by both industry and the ministry leaves us well placed to tackle this disease.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000135\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00226daa42f8a9064f0486857d62c92ff4c2\u0022\u003EPansy Wong\u2014Ministerial Resignation\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u00223889517678d64ae2bd17893a337a447b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000136\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E6. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223889517678d64ae2bd17893a337a447b\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South)\u003C/span\u003E to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all statements made by him and on his behalf on the matters which led to Pansy Wong\u2019s resignation?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022 data-id=\u0022469640cd097842c6bb076e279df54889\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000137\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022469640cd097842c6bb076e279df54889\u0022\u003ERt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister):\u003C/span\u003E Yes. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000138\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222b0c5407094a41e1a7c98bf0d7883c37\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Before I call the honourable member, I say that excessive interjection from the back of the House is unnecessary. I think the member knows whom I am looking at.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000139\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002276fd24728b35439ba002357e899bc147\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Does he stand by the statement made on his behalf in the House last Wednesday by Bill English, who said: \u201Cthe member\u2019s allegations are disgraceful, they have impugned a member of Parliament in a way that is absolutely unnecessary and unjustified.\u201D; if so, does he still maintain that revealing Pansy Wong\u2019s misuse of taxpayer funding has been unnecessary?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000140\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225d74aa0da1254b3b9ee93b8932c8cc08\u0022\u003ERt Hon JOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: Given the facts known at the time the Acting Prime Minister made those statements, yes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b6fded1e46934089b9f6ce045eae9dab\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Does he stand by his statement on Breakfast this morning in relation to the Hon Pete Hodgson: \u201CIf he\u2019d asked a question that was the right one, I\u2019d at least, um, even\u2014even reluctantly give him some credit.\u201D; if so, is he suggesting that if the public want transparency around his Ministers\u2019 misuse of taxpayers\u2019 funds, that depends on the right questions being asked rather than his Ministers\u2019 honesty?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000142\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002291c16914abcb4428bef38f47b1e8799a\u0022\u003ERt Hon JOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, but I regret saying \u201Cum\u201D. I know that my mother brought me up better than that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000143\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222698d1623e934e0096596fde7d296efe\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Does he stand by his statements on Radio New Zealand this morning when he said that he advised Pansy Wong not to talk until a Parliamentary Service investigation into her use of subsidised international travel has been completed, because \u201CMPs need to be able to answer questions honestly, truthfully and, hopefully, directly.\u201D; if so, why, when Pansy Wong is the only person in possession of the all the facts, is she not allowed to share those facts with the media and the public?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000144\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002219c2dae1d827484cb24e87d26e8e0490\u0022\u003ERt Hon JOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: To the best of my knowledge, she is not, but the Parliamentary Service report will actually prove what the facts are.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000145\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eb1623b3212f4ad5a74bb0eaa6696ee9\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Does he stand by the statement of his spokesperson Kevin Taylor, calling Pete Hodgson\u2014I abbreviate\u2014an \u201Cf-wit\u201D for questioning the legitimacy of Pansy Wong\u2019s travel and business affairs?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000146\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b0286b37c1c647cb9b592c2b0c54fcb1\u0022\u003ERt Hon JOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Hodgson did not question the travel.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000147\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b35bf106b4bb42e9ae5bae5b9686e058\u0022\u003EHon Rodney Hide\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Perhaps we could have a vote on that question in Parliament.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000148\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002251889389c0414953bf17c933df3aa4c3\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I just ask the House\u2014[Interruption] I am on my feet, and there will be no further interjection. The House will settle down. These are not easy issues and I respect that fact. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000149\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223c33701e9df948c5a8619a8bc84980f8\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Does he stand by the statement of his spokesperson Kevin Taylor, calling Pete Hodgson\u2014I abbreviate\u2014an \u201Cf-wit\u201D for questioning the legitimacy of Pansy Wong\u2019s business affairs? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000150\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220a2a2ebd060e434aafddb9c9de92ac0b\u0022\u003ERt Hon JOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: I think Mr Taylor could, in hindsight, have chosen his words more wisely, but I am relieved that he did not use his fists. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000151\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022136b3b9ca3fb49debfa87e54baca1291\u0022\u003EClimate Change Initiatives\u2014Reports and Effect on Role in International Negotiations\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226e1ead03-bf7f-496a-a02f-ce52859c58c1\u0022 data-id=\u00221f33e89b1a6049b6877bef85129e8ea9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000152\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ead03-bf7f-496a-a02f-ce52859c58c1\u0022\u003E7. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221f33e89b1a6049b6877bef85129e8ea9\u0022\u003EHEKIA PARATA (National)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister for Climate Change Issues: What reports has he received on New Zealand\u2019s climate change initiatives, particularly the ETS and the global alliance for research into cutting agriculture emissions, and how have those influenced New Zealand\u2019s role in the international negotiations of a new climate change deal, post-Kyoto?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022 data-id=\u0022b004ca47072441ed93bd04d6b2436aa9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000153\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b004ca47072441ed93bd04d6b2436aa9\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for Climate Change Issues):\u003C/span\u003E The reports indicate a high level of respect for the progress New Zealand has been able to make on climate change, in sensibly implementing a moderate emissions trading scheme and launching the Global Research Alliance on Agricultural Greenhouse Gases. The Minister responsible for International Climate Change Negotiations, Tim Groser, chaired discussions in Mexico City on how countries\u2019 pledges to reduce emissions can work best, and consequently he has been invited to the Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate this week in Washington. That reflects the international respect for Tim\u2019s work as a negotiator, as well as his work in climate change, and New Zealand\u2019s proactive role on the issue of climate change. I also note that this year New Zealand\u2019s former Climate Change Ambassador, Adrian Macey, was elected to a key role in the post-Kyoto negotiations, again reinforcing the constructive role New Zealand is playing in these difficult negotiations. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000154\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ead03-bf7f-496a-a02f-ce52859c58c1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222b000e8be63641bcb01f9111fb121e1f\u0022\u003EHekia Parata\u003C/span\u003E: Has the Minister seen the UMR Research report, published yesterday, on public attitudes to climate change and the emissions trading scheme, and what conclusions does he draw from that report? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000155\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b7efc33edf524fb1ad680be0cf62a122\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, I have seen the report, and it is very encouraging, because it reinforces the approach the Government is taking. A very clear majority of people in New Zealand want to reduce our emissions, but they are also cognisant of the costs, as consumers, and of the impacts on jobs. On the question of the emissions trading scheme, a minority of 23 percent want the scheme scrapped altogether, whereas a similar number of 25 percent want us to go harder and be more demanding in reducing emissions. It is also interesting to note that over the last year there has been an increase in the proportion, now up to 52 percent, of the public who back the need to provide support for businesses that are trade exposed. The poll indicated a very polarised position on the inclusion of agriculture in the emissions trading scheme, with 48 percent being opposed and 45 percent in support. That reinforces the cautious position the Government has taken on the inclusion of agriculture in the emissions trading scheme. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000156\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ead03-bf7f-496a-a02f-ce52859c58c1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f03adeb9d02e427b866d8dfe70036493\u0022\u003EHekia Parata\u003C/span\u003E: What reports has the Minister seen on how the emissions trading scheme is helping New Zealand reduce emissions? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000157\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228f58395fb8f144de9518654ca36afde1\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: There are two areas where the scheme is having a very positive impact. The first is in respect of forestry. In the years 2005 to 2008 we had the highest level of deforestation since records began in the 1930s; that has been reversed, with plantings now exceeding felling in both 2008 and the projected figures for 2009. I am also encouraged by reports from nurseries that the forward orders for 2011 are the most positive for more than a decade. The second positive result is the switch of investment in electricity generation. Over the last decade more than 60 percent of new generation has been thermal, and that has resulted in a decline in the proportion of our power that is renewable. I am further encouraged by the fact that over 80 percent of new resource consents for electricity generation are now for renewable power, and that is exactly where New Zealand needs to head. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000158\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c9f62d3357c4431388762a9f0a29ebcb\u0022\u003EHon John Boscawen\u003C/span\u003E: Can he confirm that his emissions trading scheme will cost the good people of Mana $20 million over the next 3 years, and if he does not think it will cost $20 million, how much does he think it will cost?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000159\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002200061fb9f97c41298d680a241c97e8e2\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: The costs for the people of Mana would be substantially more if we put our heads in the sand and pretended there was not an issue in relation to climate change. I would also note that there are a number of significant forestry areas in the area of Mana, and our very capable candidate, Hekia Parata, has discussed with me the encouragement that is going on in forestry. Seeing new trees being planted in that electorate is something I think most members of this Parliament would welcome.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000160\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00222a9d2b7c8db84820ab478aa33668dd67\u0022\u003ERoading, State Highway 1\u2014Minister\u2019s Contact with Transport Agency\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022 data-id=\u0022afdda54e3cc14f85bf6957681747d595\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000161\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E8. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022afdda54e3cc14f85bf6957681747d595\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES (Labour)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Transport: On how many weekends has he contacted both the chair and the chief executive of the New Zealand Transport Agency during the 104 weekends since his warrant was issued, and did a call to either person take place last weekend ahead of the agency\u2019s committee meeting set down for Thursday, 18 November where the route of the new State Highway 1 motorway through Kapiti will be considered?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224a244152-977c-48d2-bf53-4f3a369a27a9\u0022 data-id=\u0022b5aa73959be94128b4818f344bff0889\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000162\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a244152-977c-48d2-bf53-4f3a369a27a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b5aa73959be94128b4818f344bff0889\u0022\u003EHon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister of Transport):\u003C/span\u003E It has not been possible to go through the countless phone logs to provide a definitive answer to that question. I will be helpful to the member by pointing out that it is not the first time I have spoken to officials over a weekend, and I give my apologies to them that it probably will not be the last time, either. In fact, by way of illustration, during my time as a Minister I have used my weekends and other out-of-work hours to contact any number of agencies across all of my portfolios, including the New Zealand Transport Agency, Maritime New Zealand, the Civil Aviation Authority , the Ministry of Transport, KiwiRail, the Transport Accident Investigation Commission, Treasury, the Ministry of Economic Development, Crown Fibre Holdings, the Ministry of Education, the Tertiary Education Commission, and a number of local body representatives. In reply to the second part of the member\u2019s question regarding the weekend just passed, no.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000163\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b95643a7c41f4f3d809767b236519540\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: Would he at least be able to say\u2014given that last week he said it was not unusual for him to contact officials at the weekends, and he did it all the time\u2014he would have contacted them on over or under half of the weekends since he became the Minister?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000164\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a244152-977c-48d2-bf53-4f3a369a27a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ce64a18a2e0541f5bea4c7bfdb6fa824\u0022\u003EHon STEVEN JOYCE\u003C/span\u003E: We can play this game as often as we like. I suspect it is less than half. As I pointed out to the member, this is unlike himself, obviously, in his former role as Minister of Statistics in the previous Government. Probably the statistics job ran from Monday through to Friday; I do not know\u2014Maurice, is statistics a weekend job?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000165\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002298da4929959a4c878c9a4bdb925de7b1\u0022\u003EHon Maurice Williamson\u003C/span\u003E: Monday to Friday.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000166\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a244152-977c-48d2-bf53-4f3a369a27a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a05355b568624894a72efbaafc582885\u0022\u003EHon STEVEN JOYCE\u003C/span\u003E: It is a Monday to Friday job in statistics. But I think the other portfolios run pretty much 24/7.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000167\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022492f7e609f8a4da5aebc668c790544af\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: Smarminess is fine\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000168\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002215d73ac196174bc78d07e3bfd78dd585\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Could the Hon Darren Hughes please just ask the question?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002212411bf6a7904736bc952f7620b7c24d\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: I can take it, no trouble. Does he have any\u2014[Interruption] \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000170\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d8514e0adb544cee9fd8f32b5c46210d\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I apologise to the honourable member. I say this to the National benches: that level of noise is totally unreasonable. I cannot possibly hear the member\u2019s question. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000171\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cad0f980067d4283a0b225132750b544\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: Does he have any concerns about the consultation period under the time line for the release of the route for the new motorway\u2014to be built for maximum speeds of up to 110 kilometres an hour through the communities of Kapiti\u2014now that such a release has cleared his goal of being after the Mana by-election?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000172\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a244152-977c-48d2-bf53-4f3a369a27a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022aae982ad24474e3c9fbe9ddd32846073\u0022\u003EHon STEVEN JOYCE\u003C/span\u003E: I just cannot accept the member\u2019s assertion contained in that question. He is also incorrect on another matter, in that we actually do not have a speed limit of 110 kilometres an hour on any open road in New Zealand. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000173\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c7c88cec12914032926ead6eb173cce3\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: The road is to be built to that specification. If the New Zealand Transport Agency committee finalises the motorway route on Thursday, will he suggest to the agency that it take a full-page advertisement in Friday\u2019s Dominion Post so that at least some Mana voters will know what is going on before Saturday\u2019s by-election, given that the deadline for the last community newspaper before the by-election just happens to be tomorrow?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000174\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a244152-977c-48d2-bf53-4f3a369a27a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bf85e54bdbd6435b8b27ddd3f15288f5\u0022\u003EHon STEVEN JOYCE\u003C/span\u003E: The point is that on the one hand that member is trying to suggest the New Zealand Transport Agency should take a political approach to the consultation, in reference to the by-election, and then he is accusing me of taking a political approach in respect of the Mana by-election. So I am sorry, but I just cannot buy that. The bigger concern is that this member is opposed to having a strategic plan for State Highway 1 through the Kapiti area. He is opposed to having a strategic plan\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000175\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a80fb7a3bf2a471f9b4593d62b2baa16\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. On one level I have no objection at all to the Minister talking about me endlessly, but I did not ask about that. I asked him whether\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000176\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dbe4d58b68f6450391b1bed57478ea83\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I ask the member to resume his seat. Now this has got a bit messy. I am not surprised the member has raised a point of order, but the issue of order was more to do with the Minister alleging what the member might believe or might stand for, etc. That is out of order. I think in terms of the question that the member asked, the Minister did answer that in the first part of his answer, but he was just going on too long and making allegations against the member that were totally uncalled for.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000177\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b7f8626488fd40ae9c0db4b3a67c4323\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. My question asked him whether he would suggest something to the agency, and his response to me was that I was accusing him or the agency of being political. My question was about a suggestion of what he could do.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000178\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220b223bea42724c1dadb4a67741622191\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I think the Minister gave a clear answer that he would not do that, and he explained why he would not. He did not give the words that he \u201Cwould not be\u201D doing that, but he made it very clear that he saw doing such a thing as being improper. So I think the answer the Minister gave was pretty clear.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000179\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224c053fe783b34273a096e8c0e7f19cf4\u0022\u003EGareth Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: Why will the Minister not admit that delaying the route announcement till after the Mana by-election is because the Minister has learnt the lesson from the Mt Albert by-election that it is not a good look to be bowling people\u2019s homes before asking them to vote for you?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000180\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a244152-977c-48d2-bf53-4f3a369a27a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f654be8689224eabaa29a0f0113681ad\u0022\u003EHon STEVEN JOYCE\u003C/span\u003E: When the consultation proceeds, certain members in the House with the surname Hughes will have to swallow their words. The focus of the change is due to there being insufficient detail on the section of the road towards the northern end of the alignment, which is not in the Mana electorate, and if consulted on as it stands it would leave too much uncertainty for local residents.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000181\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002229e334cc1f3f44aca18a9a784789397e\u0022\u003EEarthquake, Canterbury\u2014Enhanced Taskforce Green Funding\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022fbe3f87c-849c-4eee-84cc-119edeb1a681\u0022 data-id=\u002258f8ee1e626142899c5f3cfc4aba50a0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000182\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fbe3f87c-849c-4eee-84cc-119edeb1a681\u0022\u003E9. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002258f8ee1e626142899c5f3cfc4aba50a0\u0022\u003EAARON GILMORE (National)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: What announcements has she made about Canterbury Enhanced Taskforce Green funding?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022 data-id=\u0022c8f53f820aec44f2b4292855bc8f066c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000183\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c8f53f820aec44f2b4292855bc8f066c\u0022\u003EHon KATE WILKINSON (Minister of Conservation) \u003C/span\u003Eon behalf of the Minister for Social Development and Employment: Last week we announced funding of $96,000 to support the first Canterbury Enhanced Taskforce Green project in Waimakariri. The project will support clean-up and restoration work on the Waikuku Beach Reserve needed as a result of the damage caused from the Canterbury earthquake.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000184\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fbe3f87c-849c-4eee-84cc-119edeb1a681\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b05d341a804c4ee094e73b85b195235a\u0022\u003EAaron Gilmore\u003C/span\u003E: How will this funding support the Waimakariri project?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000185\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022afa0b623afd14bd18fb5171613e07d7a\u0022\u003EHon KATE WILKINSON\u003C/span\u003E: The Canterbury Enhanced Taskforce Green funding will subsidise the wages of a supervisor and five staff working on the project. We are working with all local councils to identify other potential Enhanced Taskforce Green projects around the region.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000186\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00228508c55ef44a43d7b8a3e6db1483ad39\u0022\u003EEarly Childhood Education Services\u2014Effect of Funding Reductions\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022 data-id=\u002233744aea55bc4d2a9a08c78bac563f4f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000187\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E10. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002233744aea55bc4d2a9a08c78bac563f4f\u0022\u003ESUE MORONEY (Labour)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Education: What reports has she received on the impact of the Government\u2019s funding cuts to early childhood education services with more than 80 percent qualified staff?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022 data-id=\u00223f572437170947bd85bfc8423ea26c36\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000188\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223f572437170947bd85bfc8423ea26c36\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL (Minister of Health) \u003C/span\u003Eon behalf of the Minister of Education: The Government is actually spending more than ever on early childhood education. The Government will invest $1.3 billion in early childhood education in 2010-11, which is an increase of $107 million from the previous year. The Minister of Education has received no formal reports on the impacts of the funding changes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000189\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a00177dc64094474a17a36d78fa83a3e\u0022\u003ESue Moroney\u003C/span\u003E: Has she seen a report about First Five Community Childhood Centre in the electorate of Mana, where the treasurer, David Codwell, said that the impact of the Minister\u2019s funding cuts will result in an increase in fees to families of up to $50 per child per week?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000190\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cc4fb4aa90354acab4954e2eea50023f\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL\u003C/span\u003E: Of course, the Minister of Education would be disappointed to hear that news, because those organisations have had 8 months to get themselves organised to allow for this. The fact is the Government is putting more money into early childhood education subsidies. We simply cannot carry on with a situation where the budget for early childhood education trebled and participation went up by less than 1 percent.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000191\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229a1265ae80e14b1ea7bde1833ed92cc1\u0022\u003ESue Moroney\u003C/span\u003E: What does she say to Mrs Niki Alefosio, who has two children attending the First Five Community Childhood Centre in Porirua, and who, because of Government funding cuts, now faces\u2014[Interruption] I will start again.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000192\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d4e83d0b0d2c4b0ca0dbf62a5dddf892\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I say to Government front-benchers on this occasion that I am on my feet. The member should just ask her question. She will note that when the Minister was answering the last question, there was a significant level of interjection from her own colleagues. She should not be totally surprised if some Government members interject a little on her question, although I would prefer that both sides of the House be more reasonable.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221a93a5972c08478fa59926d5c9d93a48\u0022\u003ESue Moroney\u003C/span\u003E: What does she say to Mrs Niki Alefosio, who has two children attending the First Five Community Childhood Centre in Porirua, and who, because of Government funding cuts, now faces an additional cost of $100 a week just so her children can have a good start to their education?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000194\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002267aa4f35cefa45fc8f8a10ae06c715c0\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL\u003C/span\u003E: The Minister would say to that lady that this Government\u2019s top priority is to make sure that those children who are currently missing out on early childhood education, and who we know will benefit, get the opportunity to experience good quality early childhood education. That is why we are putting an extra $107 million into early childhood education subsidies this year and have also set aside $91 million to improve the participation rate. We simply cannot have a system where the spending has trebled but the participation rate went up by less than 1 percent.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000195\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002232b2cb5f95424202b67fd731b2b5bbd5\u0022\u003ESue Moroney\u003C/span\u003E: Has she received advice from National\u2019s Mana candidate that her Government\u2019s funding cuts for early childhood education affect more than 2,100 children in the electorate of Mana alone, and that the funding cuts will stop Mana children from accessing quality early childhood education, like the advice I have received from Labour\u2019s candidate, Kris Fa\u2019afoi?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000196\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227e28265e77274f7c8f984b66417f29a1\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL\u003C/span\u003E: I am sure the Minister of Education would say that in the time that she has spent with National\u2019s candidate in the Mana electorate, Hekia Parata, she has found strong support from parents for the leadership that Mrs Parata would be able to provide in that electorate, and also for the respect that she would give all cultures in that electorate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000197\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002212cb42cf4e154a1dbd3e9fb6e917c81a\u0022\u003ETreaty of Waitangi Settlements\u2014Progress\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002267431f57-e958-4c83-b438-7da8061d479e\u0022 data-id=\u0022a4c9cd2ff93044a0986cf00dd90879e1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000198\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267431f57-e958-4c83-b438-7da8061d479e\u0022\u003E11. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a4c9cd2ff93044a0986cf00dd90879e1\u0022\u003EPAUL QUINN (National)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations: What recent progress has the Government made towards its goal of settling historical Treaty of Waitangi claims by 2014?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022 data-id=\u0022f69a64de457e48119e0b36a0f2552385\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000199\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f69a64de457e48119e0b36a0f2552385\u0022\u003EHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations):\u003C/span\u003E The Government recently signed deeds of settlement with two Kurahaup\u014D iwi at the top of the South Island, Ng\u0101ti Kuia and Ng\u0101ti Apa, and will be signing a deed of settlement with Rangit\u0101ne o Wairau on 4 December.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000200\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f29f86281fde4b5db17e97a556e16ee1\u0022\u003EHon Shane Jones\u003C/span\u003E: What about Taip\u0101?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000201\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227592e7344d544f4db47621ce124503f8\u0022\u003EHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON\u003C/span\u003E: Taip\u0101 is not at the top of the South Island. Since the start of last year the Crown has reached over 60 significant settlement milestones, including 21 agreements in principle and 10 deeds of settlement. That represents great progress, especially compared with the previous administration\u2019s average of 1.6 deeds of settlement a year. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000202\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267431f57-e958-4c83-b438-7da8061d479e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d0480108cc3b4db6b4699b00aed71bdf\u0022\u003EPaul Quinn\u003C/span\u003E: What other progress has the Government recently made towards its goal of settling all historical Treaty claims? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000203\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220bc94e3f5d054c9b88a90d8696af5769\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I apologise to the member, but I say to members on both sides of the House that the background noise today is unacceptable. A member was yelling endlessly across the House while the member was asking his question. I fully accept that tensions are quite high today. I have tried to let the House live a little more because of it, because I think there are times when one cannot keep the reins too tight. But I just ask for a little bit more reasonableness, please. I ask Paul Quinn to repeat his question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000204\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022494501252466426cb6867ad970b163b5\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. We accept your ruling. If you are to extend that protection to the particular member who is asking the question, then he might return the courtesy when other members on this side of the House are asking questions. This member in particular yells a diatribe whenever our people are asking questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000205\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f089b6fe99884067af60f735dba3aacf\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Members should not abuse another member when raising a point of order\u2014for example, referring to something as a diatribe. Members should not do that. I admit that the member has interjected a little too often during question time today and he needs to be mindful of that, although I have not heard him yelling constantly, which is what was going on here. [Interruption] Order! His voice is very loud and very distinctive, and one certainly hears it, but what we have just been experiencing is someone yelling continuously. I have not blamed one side of the House more than the other; I am just asking all members to be a little more reasonable. I am not blaming one side of the House any more than the other; both sides have been particularly noisy today in respect of background noise. I take on board the member\u2019s point, and I ask Paul Quinn to be mindful of that when he is interjecting.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000206\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267431f57-e958-4c83-b438-7da8061d479e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002274ddff9156384ef5a8520cdfb129fc7b\u0022\u003EPaul Quinn\u003C/span\u003E: What other progress has the Government recently made towards its goal of settling all historical Treaty claims?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000207\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d69d06a90b9a48478ab8e2bd3a504a3f\u0022\u003EHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON\u003C/span\u003E: The Government recently initialled a deed of settlement with Ng\u0101ti Porou. Ng\u0101ti Porou is now engaged in a ratification process and I\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000208\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002254dfa5952cf447ae914a3c869deff199\u0022\u003EHon Shane Jones\u003C/span\u003E: Labour policy!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000209\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c6e123ba5f8d4ca09e82f6133277d8f5\u0022\u003EHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON\u003C/span\u003E: What is Labour policy? It certainly is not to settle Treaty of Waitangi grievances. I encourage all those who are eligible to participate. I acknowledge the leadership of Ng\u0101ti Porou in reaching this milestone and the support of the M\u0101ori Party throughout the negotiations. I also acknowledge the very eloquent speech by the Hon Parekura Horomia at the ceremony when the deed was initialled.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000210\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e4f47628477f4f7bae2ba9b902bc2cd4\u0022\u003ERahui Katene\u003C/span\u003E: What impact has the legal action being taken against the Crown by Wakat\u016B Incorporation had on settling the claims of Te Tau Ihu iwi, and what can those iwi do to progress their negotiations?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000211\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002221099cc4b04743aa8799d0987de96ca5\u0022\u003EHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON\u003C/span\u003E: It certainly delays the signing of the deeds of settlement because, in accordance with the terms of negotiation, the Crown has had to suspend negotiations with Tainui Taranaki pending resolution of the Wakat\u016B proceeding. They too were parties to the terms of negotiation, but in the interim I hope that the iwi of Tainui Taranaki will be able to work together to resolve the intra-iwi issues that remain outstanding. My understanding is that good progress is being made in that regard.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000212\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c53e4642-d448-4d84-abfe-0443fe24aae9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d976e91aff6f46958d7a71fe3e589ca2\u0022\u003EHilary Calvert\u003C/span\u003E: In the light of it taking 40 years to settle Treaty claims, does he expect it to take more or less time for customary marine title claims to be settled?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000213\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ca025ecfe8774db483d629f870efb6b3\u0022\u003EHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON\u003C/span\u003E: It has not taken 40 years to resolve Treaty of Waitangi claims. This process really got under way in the early 1990s, and good progress is being made. In answer to the question about customary marine title matters, I say that I believe good progress can be made to resolve those matters once legislation is passed\u2014legislation that, properly explained to the electorate, will secure their agreement. I think we should adopt that approach rather than scaremongering and unpleasantness.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000214\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022857e7188e79b4c1f932a453728480b81\u0022\u003EBroadband, Ultra-fast\u2014Tendering Process\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222aa0b524-c38d-45aa-bd5b-99c5927085f4\u0022 data-id=\u00224d5ca9e170e449cd9449e0ab44500004\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000215\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222aa0b524-c38d-45aa-bd5b-99c5927085f4\u0022\u003E12. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224d5ca9e170e449cd9449e0ab44500004\u0022\u003ECLARE CURRAN (Labour\u2014Dunedin South)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister for Communications and Information Technology: Is he satisfied that the process for awarding the ultra-fast broadband tender is appropriate; if so, why?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224a244152-977c-48d2-bf53-4f3a369a27a9\u0022 data-id=\u0022a5d5441e9df14733b91acda1cfe13511\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000216\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a244152-977c-48d2-bf53-4f3a369a27a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a5d5441e9df14733b91acda1cfe13511\u0022\u003EHon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister for Communications and Information Technology):\u003C/span\u003E As I replied to the member\u2019s exact same question last Thursday, yes; and for the same reasons.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000217\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222aa0b524-c38d-45aa-bd5b-99c5927085f4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002202ab5217fc954a61b307e524a4e3acf3\u0022\u003EClare Curran\u003C/span\u003E: Has he received any advice or expressions of concern from industry stakeholders relating to a potential or actual conflict of interest in Murray Milner\u2019s role as director of Crown Fibre Holdings at the same time that he was a consultant to Huawei Technologies, a likely bidder for equipment and services on ultra-fast broadband; if so, what is the detail of that advice or concern?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000218\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a244152-977c-48d2-bf53-4f3a369a27a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022beec6e94cc8d42dcb8bfa715619ac101\u0022\u003EHon STEVEN JOYCE\u003C/span\u003E: No, I have not received any concern in that respect. I have sought advice in response to the member\u2019s questions from the chair of Crown Fibre Holdings, and I am satisfied that Crown Fibre Holdings has robust and comprehensive procedures in place regarding conflicts of interest, which all board members and staff are required to comply with. I note again that Huawei Technologies is not a respondent in the ultra-fast broadband initiative but a technology provider. Crown Fibre Holdings will not be entering into agreements with technology providers; that is an issue for the Crown\u2019s partners to manage.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000219\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222aa0b524-c38d-45aa-bd5b-99c5927085f4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022575f3ee292c54bfd8aae8b845ed750de\u0022\u003EClare Curran\u003C/span\u003E: Did he meet with Chinese technology company Huawei Technologies during his recent trip to China, leading an information and communications technology delegation; if so, whom did he meet with, on what occasions, and what was discussed?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000220\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a244152-977c-48d2-bf53-4f3a369a27a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cc5e1266afde423a86e655bb35f4cfda\u0022\u003EHon STEVEN JOYCE\u003C/span\u003E: Absolutely. I led the trade delegation and we met with a number of very large Chinese telecommunications companies, including China Unicom, China Mobile, China Telecom, and Huawei Technologies. I met with Huawei Technologies\u2019 chief executive officer and founder, Mr Ren, as part of a visit to its Shenzhen headquarters. The purpose of the visit was to showcase the New Zealand companies that were travelling with the trade mission I was leading, and give the opportunity to build contacts and relationships with Huawei Technologies, which is one of the world\u2019s largest telecommunications technology providers. Although Huawei took the opportunity to show me some of its product range, neither the New Zealand urban nor rural broadband initiatives were specifically discussed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000221\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00227f193ea565ca43f6b19a277b37ec1ab3\u0022\u003EUrgent Debates Declined\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000222\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022ea393ff960274396b5b5bf375a530d3d\u0022\u003EPansy Wong\u2014Ministerial Resignation\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022 data-id=\u00227f22d3ec91064a209ad47aaa7d559e49\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000223\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227f22d3ec91064a209ad47aaa7d559e49\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I have received a letter from the Hon Pete Hodgson seeking to debate under Standing Order 380 the resignation of the Minister for Ethnic Affairs and the Minister of Women\u2019s Affairs, the Hon Pansy Wong. This is a particular case of recent occurrence involving ministerial responsibility. Not all ministerial resignations will lead to an urgent debate. In this case I am not persuaded to accept the application. Although there is ministerial responsibility for the acceptance of a resignation of a Minister, the administrative responsibility in this case lies with the Speaker. The issues that led to Mrs Wong\u2019s resignation are not ones to which ministerial responsibility attaches. Parliamentary travel entitlements are funded through Vote Parliamentary Service and administered by the Parliamentary Service. It is the Speaker who must answer for them. Furthermore, there is a Parliamentary Service investigation under way. This needs to run its course. To justify an urgent debate, there must be an element of urgency to require a matter to be debated immediately; otherwise, the scope for urgent debates would be enormous. The urgent debate is a way of holding the Government accountable for an action for which it is responsible. It is not a vehicle for addressing matters that are the responsibility of the Speaker. 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=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000224\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022e00ddebf129e48459d091d0aa21a2f61\u0022\u003EGovernor-General Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000225\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a86d5649e871438ba4a484a43aa820c0\u0022\u003EThird Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000226\u0022\u003EDebate resumed from 9 November.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022ed2d10c1-43b7-41d9-9f5c-0c313f70e625\u0022 data-id=\u0022add191b2f8c542e9953b58ecdd944ec8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000227\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ed2d10c1-43b7-41d9-9f5c-0c313f70e625\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022add191b2f8c542e9953b58ecdd944ec8\u0022\u003ENIKKI KAYE (National\u2014Auckland Central):\u003C/span\u003E I am pleased to speak on the Governor-General Bill. The purpose of this legislation is to provide simpler financial arrangements for the support of the Governor-General and his or her programme. The other major purpose of this legislation is to provide greater transparency and to ensure that we have a simpler regime than the present regime.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000228\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ed2d10c1-43b7-41d9-9f5c-0c313f70e625\u0022\u003EAs we know, the main provisions within this legislation are about creating a new funding structure for the Governor-General. This is really about ensuring that we have greater transparency in the funding structure of the office of the Governor-General, and this stems from the Law Commission report that was previously tabled in the House. The present exemption for the Governor-General\u2019s salary from income tax will be removed. Members on this side of the House believe that there is no longer a justification for this exemption. Successive Governors-General have also requested that it be discontinued. The bill also removes certain outdated restrictions on the availability of the annuity paid to former Governors-General and their surviving spouses or partners. The annuity recognises the significant role played by a Governor-General\u2019s spouse or partner in supporting the office holder.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000229\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ed2d10c1-43b7-41d9-9f5c-0c313f70e625\u0022\u003EDuring the progress of other speeches on this legislation, what has become very clear is the recognition of the current Governor-General and the huge contribution that he has made to New Zealand. We have been very fortunate in this country to have had a number of very good Governors-General, from a range of backgrounds, but this bill is about bringing the office of the Governor-General into a much more modern arrangement. We know that the office of the Governor-General is a symbolic connection between the community and the State. We know that the Law Commission made a number of other recommendations within the report on the modernisation of the office, as well. In terms of this legislation, it is important that we recognise it is vital to have this transparency, given the importance of the office of Governor-General in New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000230\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ed2d10c1-43b7-41d9-9f5c-0c313f70e625\u0022\u003EI am very pleased to support this legislation and the modernisation of the arrangements for the office of the Governor-General. I reiterate my support for the huge contribution that the current Governor-General has made during his time in office. I think it is really important that this bill is supported by members across the House, as it will separate the arrangements relating to the Governor-General from those providing for Ministers and MPs, and it will better reflect the constitutional boundaries that are so important for the independence of this office. I am pleased to commend this legislation to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022 data-id=\u002294806d57e01f4b07b591784c95699805\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000231\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002294806d57e01f4b07b591784c95699805\u0022\u003EDr RAJEN PRASAD (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I am also pleased to take what must be Labour\u2019s final call on the third reading of the Governor-General Bill. First and foremost, the bill gives proper recognition to this important office. I agree with Sir Geoffrey Palmer, who said that the Governor-General is an important symbol of our nation, and that the position symbolises our sense of national unity and national identity. There is something in this role that is about us, about \u201CNew Zealand Inc.\u201D, and about New Zealand society in the modern world. From that perspective, it is right and proper that the provisions that relate to the person who occupies this position are contained in clear and unambiguously stated stand-alone legislation. This is precisely what the Governor-General Bill has done. From that perspective, it is an excellent bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000232\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003EAs many other speakers in this debate have said, the bill streamlines and makes transparent the provisions we make for future Governors-General. The bill will be simpler to administer. That is very clear, because it is stated in unambiguous language. It modernises the old-fashioned old language of the Civil List Act, brings it into modern form, and places it before anybody who wants to understand what the provisions are. The bill does a number of additional things. There is something in the nature of New Zealanders that prefers a flat society, in the sense that there are no tall poppies. One provision, the exemption from income tax in the present legislation, will be changed by this bill. The Governor-General\u2019s remuneration will be determined by an independent authority, and then the Governor-General is required to pay tax like the rest of us. That indeed has been a very popular provision, and it reflects the nature of New Zealand society without reducing the symbolism of this important role one iota.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000233\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003EI am also particularly pleased to recognise that the bill defines the family in modern-day terms and makes provisions for that family\u2014our first family, if you like. That also recognises the role played by the spouse of the Governor-General. When the time comes for the spouse to be supported, when he or she is without the kind of support that is provided by the Governor-General, then we know that the provisions will be there. This bill makes that very, very clear. In those senses this is a very transparent bill. It makes all of those provisions very transparent, and provides for greater openness and accountability. It is very easy to hold those holding the post, and others around that person, accountable for this office and for the expenditure of the office as well. Those are very, very good, useful, and modern provisions for this important office\u2014symbolically, our first family.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000234\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003EI turn my attention briefly to talk a little more about the office of Governor-General and indeed the current Governor-General, the Rt Hon Sir Anand Satyanand, and Her Excellency Lady Susan Satyanand. I want to talk through their performance and the importance of this office. It has already been stated elsewhere that this is the highest office in the land, and it carries huge symbolism. One of my observations is that the last 4 or 5 weeks have been a period of tremendous celebration in the Indian community, as my colleague Mr Kanwaljit Bakshi will recognise as well. He has been present, along with myself and many other members of Parliament, at these celebrations. The Governor-General himself has been present, along with Lady Susan Satyanand, at these celebrations. There was something different, something additional, something special, and something new about the speeches made during the last 4 weeks of the Diwali celebrations, especially in the speeches made by the Governor-General, and indeed in the reaction from, and behaviour of, those who came to celebrate Diwali with the Governor-General. It seemed as though New Zealanders wanted to acknowledge this first couple in a very special way, as it was most likely to be their last Diwali celebrations. They wanted to demonstrate their respect to the Indian community, to a Governor-General of Indian background, but also to other New Zealanders as well. The audiences were much more diverse this year, and they seemed to be making a point of recognising the tremendous contribution of Sir Anand and Lady Susan Satyanand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000235\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003ESince their inauguration, over 4 years ago, they have set very high expectations of themselves and they have indeed set a very high standard and a very exacting standard of their own performance, the performance of their own staff, and indeed their own outputs everywhere they have been. They have also pursued a particular agenda for the last 4\u00BD years. They decided, it seems a long time ago, that Sir Anand Satyanand\u2019s time as Governor-General would focus on inclusiveness\u2014the inclusive nature of our society. Their intention was to respond to as many cultures in New Zealand as possible, and to as many of the ethnic groups of New Zealand as possible. That is the importance of this office, for whom this bill makes these modern provisions, so much so that much of the customary greeting of the present Governor-General has become almost legendary. The Governor-General does not leave anybody out; he recognises everybody. Indeed, he also acknowledges everybody in the language of their land, as well as recognising sign language.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000236\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003EThose kinds of things have been particularly appreciated by New Zealanders up and down this country. I have had, like many other members of this House, many, many opportunities to observe our first family performing and going about their work. They have focused on the importance of the family\u2014Lady Susan Satyanand has, in particular\u2014and they have taken every opportunity with audiences to ensure that the importance of the family is underscored. They have stopped to speak to many, many New Zealanders from every walk of life. People are surprised at how much time they make for New Zealanders who want to get close to them, understand who they might be, and spend a few minutes with them. They have hosted many functions. They have travelled widely overseas and represented us well. Sir Anand is probably one of the most widely travelled Governors-General, and Lady Susan Satyanand is well travelled, as well. Everywhere they go their message is the same: they are proud New Zealanders, putting the country\u2019s best foot forward. Indeed, they have not given anybody cause to say anything other than \u201CWhat great New Zealanders.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000237\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003ESo it has been surprising that in recent times, somebody began to question them as New Zealanders. But that gave New Zealanders the opportunity to recognise Sir Anand and Lady Susan Satyanand, and I record my thanks to them for the way they have conducted themselves. So this bill makes modern provisions for the office of the Governor-General, for people like the present Governor-General and Lady Susan Satyanand, and for people in the future and their families. Labour supports this bill very, very strongly. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226dc89bbf-c2ef-45c9-89e4-d2b5952d8d16\u0022 data-id=\u00224ef4379428f24db1a5f725934d064880\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000238\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226dc89bbf-c2ef-45c9-89e4-d2b5952d8d16\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224ef4379428f24db1a5f725934d064880\u0022\u003EKANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI (National):\u003C/span\u003E I would like to add my contribution, which is in agreement with what my parliamentary colleague Dr Rajen Prasad just said about the Rt Hon Anand Satyanand. The day he was appointed as Governor-General we were really quite proud that someone from our own community had been appointed to the country\u2019s highest office. Not only that, but in the last 4 years I have met him on a number of occasions, and I have visited the Governor-General\u2019s house in Auckland. Both the Governor-General and his wife have been great hosts. They have welcomed everyone with open arms. The Governor-General represented us very well at the Commonwealth Games, and he received a lot of appreciation from the press in India. I met him for the first time at a function where an Indian judge, Dr Ajit Singh, was appointed to the Manukau District Court. The Governor-General spoke there. I have a lot of respect for him as someone from our own society, our own ethnic community, representing us in different areas. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000239\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226dc89bbf-c2ef-45c9-89e4-d2b5952d8d16\u0022\u003EWe are debating the Governor-General Bill because the Law Commission made a number of recommendations in the area of transparency that the Government Administration Committee endorsed. One of the recommendations of the Law Commission was that the provisions in the Civil List Act were very old-fashioned, unnecessarily complicated, and no longer supported what we need, which is a more modern office of Governor-General. The legislation is timely and important. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000240\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226dc89bbf-c2ef-45c9-89e4-d2b5952d8d16\u0022\u003EThe Governor-General plays an important role in our constitution. As the Queen\u2019s representative in New Zealand, the Governor-General maintains the legitimacy and stability of government. The office of Governor-General is symbolic; it is a link between the community and the State, and the Governor-General also represents the New Zealand public in a non-partisan way on important public occasions, as was just mentioned by Dr Rajen Prasad. We have both met him on a number of occasions at Diwali celebrations. New Zealand\u2019s Governor-General has always supported many community organisations. It is vital that the office of Governor-General is properly supported in carrying out its roles. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000241\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226dc89bbf-c2ef-45c9-89e4-d2b5952d8d16\u0022\u003EAs a modern, stand-alone statute, the bill will separate the arrangements relating to Governors-General from those providing for Ministers and MPs, and will therefore better reflect existing constitutional boundaries as well as the mana and independence of the office. The bill will further improve transparency by requiring the Government to present to the House, on an annual basis, the details of the expenses incurred to provide such benefits. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000242\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226dc89bbf-c2ef-45c9-89e4-d2b5952d8d16\u0022\u003EApart from one or two exceptions, the new legislation will not apply to the current Governor-General, but will apply when the next Governor-General is appointed. I thank the officials for their help during the select committee process, and I thank the members of the select committee for their work on the bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000243\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022651ebe61ea2345ebbefd16cf3ceee61e\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I think we have a problem similar to one we had the other day. I think the member is now reading out the Minister\u2019s speech on this bill, rather than his own. He was thanking himself for his work on the bill. I do not think it is appropriate for the member to re-read the Minister\u2019s speech or to be thanking himself for the work he did on the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000244\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226e2effdad26e47c69d475879603930cb\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: I have been listening reasonably carefully, and I have not picked up the inferences the member has.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000245\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226dc89bbf-c2ef-45c9-89e4-d2b5952d8d16\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b7fda2b921114cd8a142c790a5383c4b\u0022\u003EKANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI\u003C/span\u003E: Overall, the bill represents a big step forward in the way the Government supports the Governor-General. I commend the bill to the House on its third reading.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000246\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226dc89bbf-c2ef-45c9-89e4-d2b5952d8d16\u0022\u003EBill read a third time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000247\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002222869552a09b4cc9ba20877e7c764241\u0022\u003EAquaculture Legislation Amendment Bill (No 3)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000248\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002241c25f4e67fe4cc9b1a6fb4e56bbbed7\u0022\u003EFirst Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022 data-id=\u0022130e96aafa19443781ec9aa9fd514b22\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000249\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022130e96aafa19443781ec9aa9fd514b22\u0022\u003EHon PHIL HEATLEY (Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the Aquaculture Legislation Amendment Bill (No 3) be now read a first time. At the appropriate time I intend to move that the bill be referred to the Primary Production Committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000250\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003EBefore I go any further, I wish to acknowledge the work of the Ministry of Fisheries chief executive Wayne McNee, his staff members Emma Taylor and Scott Gallacher, and their teams. Their commitment to the development of this bill has been outstanding. Given that our chief executive Wayne McNee is now moving to the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, it is fitting to recognise him today, as this is one of the significant pieces of work that he has led, when in office over the last 3 years. I cannot go on, though, without thanking the rest of the team: Kristin, Christine, Mary Beth, Jessie, Sam, John, Tania, Katrinka, Andrew, Phil, Daniel, Frances, Ada, Emma, Mark, Cathy, Tim, Don, and Demelza, for all the work that they have done. The process has been onerous to work through and to make sure that we have satisfied all those who have a stake in our coastal environment\u2014in particular, those who want to make some economic benefit from it while maintaining the wonderful coastline that we have, and the environmental surrounds.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000251\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003EThis bill will reform aquaculture legislation. It will provide an efficient legislative regulatory framework that enables marine-based aquaculture to fulfil its economic potential. We want to do that while ensuring that development is environmentally sustainable and balanced with other uses of our coastal space. There is considerable opportunity for New Zealand\u2019s aquaculture industry to grow, and its potential is yet to be reached. The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization reports that aquaculture is the fastest-growing food sector in the world. There is a demand for high-quality produce that is farmed in an environmentally sustainable manner, which is something that New Zealand is well-placed to meet and has a track record of meeting. The Government is committed, as part of its economic growth agenda, to enable the aquaculture industry to grow.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000252\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003EGrowth in aquaculture and an increase in export earnings will create jobs in farming, processing, and related activity, particularly in the regions. It is worth pointing out that the investment when a marine farmer starts marine farming in this country is on the water, on the shoreline with processing, and also in overseas markets. It is a big bullet to chew off. Growth will come from increases in the average value of production, through making better use of existing space, and from research and innovation into different species and new technologies in that existing space. Growth will also come from expanding the volume of production through the development of new space, and that is critical.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000253\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003EThe Government is committed to ensuring that aquaculture development is environmentally sustainable and takes place within the integrated coastal management framework. That is part of the reason why we have decided to keep development within the Resource Management Act. Stringent tests are already in place to ensure that all aquaculture development takes place within acceptable environmental limits. Those tests will remain under the new law. The undue adverse effects test, which protects the interests of commercial, customary, and recreational fishers, is an essential part of the framework for aquaculture, and will also remain.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000254\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003EHowever, there is a need to simplify and streamline processes, and to provide a kick-start to industry growth after years of frustrated opportunity and potential. For instance, the current law requires that aquaculture management areas must be established in regional coastal plans before applicants can apply for resource consents, but that approach has not worked in practice. Poor incentives for council and industry to plan and invest have resulted in no new aquaculture space being created under this regime since its commencement in 2005. This bill will normalise aquaculture within the Resource Management Act framework by removing the requirement for aquaculture management areas. That will allow applicants to apply directly for resource consents, subject to the provisions in the regional coastal plan. That is already the case with most other activities, so we are normalising the aquaculture regime. Planning and consenting processes will be streamlined, and there will be better integration between Fisheries Act and Resource Management Act processes. That will reduce costs for industry and provide stronger incentives for development. Regional councils will be better able to respond to demand for space in the coastal marine area. The bill will provide more efficient access to an alternative to the \u201Cfirst in, first served\u201D basis that we have seen in the past.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000255\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003EThe bill will also enable the Government to take a more active role in aquaculture planning. The bill creates a new ministerial power to recommend the making of regulations that amend aquaculture-related provisions in regional coastal plans. We do not foresee that power being used without talking to the public and, in particular, to the regional councils involved. Clear parameters are established for the use of that power. Those parameters include, among other things, a requirement for consultation and the requirement that the use of the power must be relative to achieving the purpose of the Resource Management Act. Use of the power will not in itself enable new aquaculture activities to go ahead. Applicants will still need to apply for consents in accordance with normal processes, and those consents will be judged on their environmental production and merits as listed under the Resource Management Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000256\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003ESome planned changes will be made directly through the enactment of this bill. We have decided to step in and make some legislative changes to plans. These changes are in regions where current plan provisions present the greatest barriers to aquaculture growth, and where the opportunities for sustainable development within acceptable environmental limits are the greatest. The amended plans will enable applicants to be active for the farming of a wider range of species, including finfish, and some expansion of existing farms. Those changes will provide a much needed stimulus to investment and growth.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000257\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003EThe bill includes measures to bring existing marine farmers into the new regime with minimal disturbance. It will enable the processing of a backlog of applications, including those frozen\u2014effectively, in limbo\u2014under the current law. In most cases, processing will be able to proceed on commencement of the new law, subject to the provisions of the relevant regional coastal plan. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000258\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003EThe Government is also committed to ensuring that the Crown continues to uphold the M\u0101ori commercial aquaculture settlement. The bill retains the core components of the settlement, including all rights associated with the 20 percent of new space created from 1 January 2005. A new mechanism for delivering those obligations is needed as a consequence of changes to remove the requirement that aquaculture activities must be located within aquaculture management areas. We have begun a process of engagement with iwi to discuss how best to deliver on the settlement in light of the reforms introduced in this bill. I hope to be in a position to introduce the necessary provisions later in the legislative process. Pending development of an intended mechanism, the bill provides for the Crown\u2019s obligations in respect of the new space to be delivered by providing either space or an agreed equivalent.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000259\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003EI acknowledge the work of the Aquaculture Technical Advisory Group, which reported in October last year. It is very important for me to do so. I acknowledge the contribution of the many interested parties who made submissions on that report or provided input into the policy development process.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000260\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003EThis bill lays the foundation for the next stage in the growth of an exciting industry, with real potential for sustainable economic development within acceptable environmental limits and a balanced use of our coastal space. I thank all those who were involved in its development, particularly those in the team within the Ministry of Fisheries that engaged so well with marine farmers, those in the environmental protection sector throughout New Zealand, and those in regional councils. I appreciate their work.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022 data-id=\u0022071fa5fa02e946739a11c050e766ef9a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000261\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022071fa5fa02e946739a11c050e766ef9a\u0022\u003EHon PAREKURA HOROMIA (Labour\u2014Ikaroa-R\u0101whiti):\u003C/span\u003E We support the Aquaculture Legislation Amendment Bill (No 3) going to a select committee, but there are a whole lot of questions on the journey through and after the select committee that we would like answered. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000262\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022\u003EThe bill makes some significant change to the current regime. We have serious reservations regarding the regulatory power being given to the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture to change regional and coastal plans without appropriate public consultation. As he said, the group that went out to consult and travel around the country has come back with a report that still needs to be worked over. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000263\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022\u003EThe bill supposedly aims to provide a legislative and regulatory framework that enables the sustainable development of aquaculture. We are certainly supportive of that. This bill is an omnibus bill, which amends the Resource Management Act 1991, the Fisheries Act 1998, the Maori Commercial Aquaculture Claims Settlement Act 2004, and the Aquaculture Reform (Repeals and Transitional Provisions) Act 2004. It will be divided into four separate bills during the Committee stage. The majority of the bill is due to come into effect on 1 July 2011, and, if we are able to support that objective, we certainly would be interested in the Minister\u2019s answers. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000264\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022\u003EThis certainly spells out the complexity of this bill and the activity as we have seen in past years. The bill incorporates some of Labour\u2019s Aquaculture Legislation Amendment Bill (No 2), which was reported back from the select committee in September 2009. However, as this bill removes the requirement for aquaculture management areas, the crossover between the bills is limited. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000265\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022\u003EThe major change in this bill is the removal of aquaculture management areas. The bill gives the Minister significant new powers. Specifically, it gives him or her the power to override regional coastal plans that have been developed and agreed to by councils and locals. Essentially, it undermines the process of developing a regional coastal plan. Treasury itself expressed some significant reservations about the creation of this power: \u201CThe power is not consistent with the RMA, and wider resource management reform is currently under development. This power is a fundamental departure from devoted regional decision-making and integrated resource decision-making.\u201D We have heard heaps of talk, especially in the health area, about taking it to the front to where the local regions develop things. This bill seems to be more of a centralising and pulling back of those powers that had been developed, when local communities and regions were trusted to ensure that what is imbued in any progress for this great industry is something that they helped to design and develop. Treasury also notes that this power only adds to uncertainty for investors, who will be unsure\u2014and this is a critical and crucial part\u2014about whether or not the Minister will exercise the power. That is one of the big questions. It also ties the hands of councils in the consent process by requiring them to grant consents for a minimum term of 20 years. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000266\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022\u003EThe changes in this bill are part of a wider programme that includes the establishment of an aquaculture business unit, which is to be supported within the Ministry of Fisheries. But Cabinet papers released by the Minister are not clear on just how much the total cost of establishing and running the unit will be, given that we have seen the Public Service purposely run down. It is certainly a concern that the risks, at minimum, include issues such as the fact that it could have unintended impacts on other Government objectives\u2014for example, the ability of councils to consistently manage the coastal marine area\u2014it could encourage councils to act more conservatively, leading to a greater propensity to decline consent applications, and it could use other means to manage uncertainty, such as placing special limits on development of farms. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000267\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022\u003EWe need to ask some interesting questions about the supposed well-repealed foreshore and seabed legislation and the relevance to the takutai moana legislation. One has to ask how this impact on that legislation. Where does it line up with that, if surety is to be given to iwi? It was certainly interesting to hear that the Minister was engaged with iwi, so we look forward to seeing how that will line up with the foreshore and seabed legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000268\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d366a93f3d5545f5ad55a61e64b8ac75\u0022\u003EHon Christopher Finlayson\u003C/span\u003E: Very well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000269\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fc7ef94093144a5c99b1b51c654d2ed9\u0022\u003EHon PAREKURA HOROMIA\u003C/span\u003E: I am pleased to hear the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations say it will line up pretty well. I am very encouraged by that, but I am not too sure whether he has read this bill and understood the difficulties and complexities in it. We need to ask how this will get M\u0101ori into the industry. There are no guarantees. What the Labour-led Government did do was lead and sign off the allocation to iwi. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000270\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022\u003EThe other question is how the industry will be established if there is no time line for the establishment of actual aquaculture areas. That is the guessing within this legislation. How will they be set up if there is no time line? It just seems that there is quite an unbelievable allowance available to the Minister to just do what he or she wants to do. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000271\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022\u003EThe other issue is in relation to fishing quota holders. The holders may be weakened if there is inadequate compensation for the aquaculture areas that are designated. That could be dangerous for iwi, given their big economic stake in the industry. It is critical to watch that and understand whether this bill will lighten and speed the process up. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000272\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022\u003EThe bill gives the Minister broad powers to change, introduce, or remove provisions relevant to the management of aquaculture in a regional coastal plan. He or she can do that without a requirement to consult the community affected, although he or she is required to consult the relevant regional council. I think we are seeing the start of one of these hand-ons to Ministers where, irrespective of the consensus view, the Minister has this autonomous, stand-alone power. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000273\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022\u003EInteresting statements came out in the writings in the supporting papers about the fact that there is some risk that amendments made through the exercise of this power will have unintended consequences. It is critical to have that understood at the outset before we go to the select committee, because there are a whole host of things that need to be redefined. I am afraid that some of them have not been redefined and it just seems to be a kludge of some people\u2019s thoughts, but the complexity is added to in relation to giving the Minister that autonomous power. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000274\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022\u003ETreasury does not support the creation of that power, which is very interesting. It is Treasury\u2019s view that the power does not offer anything substantial beyond what already exists. That is the big question. Within the Resource Management Act central government already has a full suite of options for intervening. Those options can be used to achieve the same outcome as the proposed power, but there is the important difference that they fit within the Resource Management Act framework. That is a huge question that needs to be answered. The tools and the means in the legislation are already there, so what is this bill about? Is it just about allocating unbridled power to an individual Minister to ensure that he or she can choose to do what he or she wants to do, whenever? The power is not integral to achieving the aims of the reforms. The package of reform options already significantly removes barriers that exist for aquaculture and provides measures for promoting the industry. This option provides a signal but it does not achieve anything substantial. I repeat that the tools and passageways via the present legislation are already there. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000275\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022\u003EWe certainly will support the bill going to the select committee, but on the way we want those questions answered. What are the unintended consequences, and how will the Minister ensure that there is a commitment and recognition of what local communities and councils need? We certainly will be watching this bill with interest and we look forward to the debate and discussion.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022 data-id=\u00225d6e048d0f2e4b3e85764c5abfc397fa\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000276\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225d6e048d0f2e4b3e85764c5abfc397fa\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for the Environment):\u003C/span\u003E I am delighted to be part of a Government that sees the potential of the aquaculture industry and what it can do for job and wealth creation in this country. I congratulate the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture on the hard work that has gone into creating the Aquaculture Legislation Amendment Bill (No 3). I challenge the previous speaker, the Hon Parekura Horomia, about Labour\u2019s record and what it did in aquaculture. That speaks volumes about the difference in values and in skills between this National-led Government and what occurred in the time of the previous administration. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000277\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EFirstly, I will talk about the opportunities that there are for us to create jobs and wealth from aquaculture. Few countries in the world are as blessed as New Zealand is with ocean space and fertile waters in which to grow aquaculture. A bit over a decade ago I was privileged to be invited on an ANZAC Fellowship to visit Australia, and I said then that New Zealand was a long way ahead of Australia. In the 1990s we saw the size of New Zealand\u2019s aquaculture industry grow threefold, and no region benefited from that growth as much as Nelson and Marlborough. But over the last decade Australia has gone way ahead of us. Let us see what occurred and put the record straight. Labour passed new aquaculture legislation in 2005. Members opposite said the legislation was the gateway to growing a billion-dollar industry. I simply put this question to members opposite: how many new aquaculture management areas have been created since Labour\u2019s legislation was passed in 2005? Were there 10, or 5? [Interruption] I say to Steve Chadwick that not one was created. We had the World Food Programme identifying aquaculture as one of the most promising areas for growth in the production of protein and food, yet in New Zealand, which exports a greater proportion of food than any other country, frankly, the members opposite blew it when they were in Government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000278\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EThe 2005 legislation was a disaster. Let me tell the Labour members why it did not work. It was a very fundamental\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000279\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d5f7d66c8ef94344a4a7c2633b4feff9\u0022\u003EHon Steve Chadwick\u003C/span\u003E: We did nothing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000280\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225037a69802af4f9d88f44cd626bbe77e\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: Steve Chadwick chips in. I tell her that she needs to listen. The truth is, I say to Steve Chadwick, that not one new marine farm was established under Labour\u2019s aquaculture legislation. I will explain to her why that was the case, because it explains some of Labour\u2019s naivety and why members opposite do not have the acumen and ability to grow the New Zealand economy. You see, what Labour did was this. The rules of the 2005 legislation stated that someone who went to the expense of applying to a regional council for consent for a new aquaculture management area, at an expense of hundreds of thousands of dollars, spent all that money, yet under Labour\u2019s law had absolutely no right to any of that space. Should we be surprised that with those sorts of perverse incentives, nobody has ever bothered to apply? You see, if this country is to grow its aquaculture industry up to the billion-dollar industry that it has the potential to be, we need to get the incentives right. The incentives in the law that was passed by Labour do not work, and that is why this law change is required. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000281\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EWhat does this bill do? First, Labour put a blanket ban from Kait\u0101ia to Bluff on any new marine farm, unless it was in one of the narrowly prescribed aquaculture management areas. Should we then be surprised that nobody has been able to lodge a consent and progress a new marine farm? Nor did Labour address the very real issue that in many of our areas that are owned and good for developing marine farming, the species are very narrowly defined. That is why this bill quite sensibly provides measures by which an area that is suitable for marine farming is able to be farmed for different species. I know that you, Mr Assistant Speaker Roy, are interested in oysters. There is a lot of potential for growth in that industry and you would not believe the bureaucracy that a marine farmer has to go through to be able to develop a new area of oyster farming. I welcome that change. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000282\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EI also commend my colleague Kate Wilkinson, the Minister of Conservation, because part of her work has been to ensure that our policies are aligned with the growth of the aquaculture industry. In the revised coastal policies statement that my colleague Kate Wilkinson has signed off, we provide a very clear signal in the framework of resource management that this Government wants to see the growth of the aquaculture industry. By aligning that new coastal policy statement with the provisions in this bill, we will provide opportunities for growth. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000283\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EThere are provisions in this bill that say use it or lose it. We do not want speculators to simply apply for large amounts of marine space, then not produce a single dollar of wealth for New Zealand. It is absolutely proper that Phil Heatley has included in this bill tighter provisions to make sure that those who acquire marine space actually develop that space, thereby creating wealth and jobs for New Zealanders. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000284\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EI also support the provisions in this bill that provide 20 years of certainty for marine farmers. That is the bit that members opposite do not understand, and I was concerned that Mr Horomia opposed those provisions. If we are to get investors to take a punt, and if we are to get private people to invest in the aquaculture industry, we need to provide them with the certainty that is provided for in this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000285\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EI will also outline how this bill fits into the Government\u2019s broader programme of resource management reforms. This is just one of a stream of 10 areas of work where we are working hard to make sure that the Resource Management Act works well with a blue-green approach, making sure that we properly manage the environment but also making sure that we get the job opportunities and economic growth that this country can responsibly create from its rich natural resources. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000286\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EThere is an important job for the select committee to do on this bill. The bill is very detailed. It is complex law, and the Minister has done a great job in getting it to the House. I simply say to this House that if we are serious about growing the economy, if we are serious about closing the gap with Australia, and if we are serious about growing the aquaculture industry into a billion-dollar industry, we need to back this bill. We need to have sensible rules that will enable the growth of that industry. I commend the work of the Minister and this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022 data-id=\u0022a190cb740dc1463191f43726e4aa3a7d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000287\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a190cb740dc1463191f43726e4aa3a7d\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u2019CONNOR (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E Labour will support the Aquaculture Legislation Amendment Bill (No 3) going to a select committee, because we too understand the need to clarify a number of things that have bogged down the aquaculture industry. None the less, the reality for many in the industry is that the international markets have not been great over the last few years, and, in some bizarre way, the lack of any further space development has probably helped protect those who are currently producing to get a slightly better return in the market place. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000288\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003EI would like to follow on from the Hon Nick Smith, who needs to have a few points clarified, because it is not often that he comes to the House to clarify things, and he certainly confused things. The dilemma we face in aquaculture is a direct result of the National Government\u2019s Resource Management Act, which left regional councils, regardless of their capability or knowledge, to develop plans to manage all of the things in the coastal areas that, strictly speaking, they did not have responsibility for but had been asked to manage. In Tasman, where there was a unitary council, Nick Smith campaigned to get rid of the unitary council, and a whole lot of people there think that that was a major blue, I have to say. The unitary council in Tasman had not foreseen the growth potential in aquaculture and had not put in place a coastal management plan and a resource plan that adequately addressed the huge number of applications for coastal space. Under the Resource Management Act passed by the National Government, there was a clear obligation to manage the applications on a \u201Cfirst come, first served\u201D basis. Some regional councils that did not have huge pressure from aquaculture put in place some basic requirements. Marlborough, on the other hand, moved forward and developed a reasonably robust scheme for managing applications. In fact, it moved on and\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000289\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b6782a90417049aa892dc7e4322297ec\u0022\u003EHon Member\u003C/span\u003E: It was under a unitary authority.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000290\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223da19f4e58f94615a09bffc5f2e5dd82\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u2019CONNOR\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, some work well; some do not. It addressed the issue. But in Tasman there was a flood of applications by a bunch of speculators who thought they would rush out to get the space and that someone would come along later on who might want to grow some mussels, or do something else. Mr King knows the truth of this. So when Labour was in Government, there was a huge amount of litigation\u2014expensive litigation. The personal cost was quite high for a number of people involved in that, and I offer them my sympathy. They were caught up in a legislative vacuum, perhaps in the absence of any clarification by Tasman District Council, in the attempt to sort out who got first rights and where these applications should be approved. The spaces were huge in area, so something had to be done. We got in and attempted to do that, keeping in mind, and we put in place, the obligation for 20 percent of new space to go to M\u0101ori, as has happened with quota. We got to that point, put in place a few principal positions, and said there had to be a process for developing aquaculture management areas and then a process for applying for space within those. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000291\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003EYes, hindsight would say that we did not get that quite right. We would admit that, but it was with the best of intentions. This legislation addresses a number of those problems; I accept that. But it also hands over a huge amount of responsibility to a Minister, and that will not offer investors or industry much certainty. We were reluctant in Government to have ministerial discretion, and preferred to have in place a robust and independent process. We attempted to provide that through aquaculture legislation. We know that if we hand over ultimate responsibility and decision-making to a Minister, it will be all right if we are in Government and can trust our Minister, but if, as happens in a democracy, another bunch of loonies gets into power, we do not know whether the new Minister will have the knowledge or the right ethical and moral judgment to make the right decisions. If we look at what has happened within the National Party in the last few weeks, we would have to say there are some Ministers who do not have the best guidance on ethical and moral judgments, so how will any investor ensure that they get a fair assessment of their application, and a fair go at getting a positive decision on their application? In the end, it is up to the Minister. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000292\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003EThat is one area we will scrutinise closely in the select committee, because we still believe that an independent, transparent process is the fairest way for all business in this country to operate, so that businesses are not battered around by the winds of ignorance, different ethical judgments, or politicking, so that they get a fair go to develop a business, get access to a bit of space, and get on to develop some exports for the country. Although this bill makes some progress in some key areas, ultimately it leaves ministerial discretion as the last port of call for decision making, and in our view that is a big worry. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000293\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003EThere are some existing problems within the aquaculture industry that really need to be addressed, and I take the opportunity during the debate on this bill to ask the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, who has come into the House, what he is doing about scallop management in Golden Bay. In both Tasman and Golden Bay there has been a programme of management and enhancement, with 20 percent of the industry\u2019s income coming back into enhancement, and it has worked OK for quite some time, but for the last few years it has been disastrous. Something needs to happen to improve the commercial potential\u2014not the commercial business, because there is none in Golden Bay, and the industry cannot take any out\u2014of scallops, an industry that has been established and has huge potential, but is now failing. The Minister needs to give us some steer as to how he will improve that situation before we embark upon a new wave of aquaculture that, without the right safeguards and proper management, might result in a whole lot of businesses falling over or failing. We do not want to see that. We want people who are prepared to invest to go out, create exports, and get some good returns and profits on their investments. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000294\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003EI will go through a few key provisions in the bill. There have been changes. The fact is that there is now no requirement for aquaculture management areas. There are some interim areas under the Tasman District Council that are almost through to completion point; they will still be in place, and I think that is a good call, provided for in this legislation. The 20-year minimum requirement for aquaculture consents is OK. It gives some certainty for investment, but it is a long time, and it effectively gives up to 35 years, which is the maximum allowed, of private property rights over what is, I guess, the seabed and the foreshore, and particularly the seabed. We still have major legislation to pass through the House to establish some rights in that area, so it is an area of uncertainty for the industry, I would say. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000295\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003EThe re-consenting process for marine farmers has been simplified. That is smart, and we welcome it. The undue adverse effects test asks whether an activity affects anyone else, and that is really at the heart of the problem here. Those people who have wet-fish quota, and those who might be scallop farmers, for example, do not like green-lipped mussel farms coming in over the top of them. The real battle in this area is within the industry. It has not been between the Government, be it Labour or National, and industry; it has been within the industry over who has preferential rights to sea space. The test of undue adverse effects, and the removal of the right to take a case right through to the High Court, are good things. Litigation and big money have bogged progress in aquaculture as much as inadequate legislation has done. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000296\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003EI have spoken about the power of the Minister. I think it is alarming, and, indeed, Treasury itself has spoken of that danger. Treasury has stated that the power is not consistent with the Resource Management Act and the wider resource management reforms that are currently under development. Referring to the Government\u2019s own adviser through Treasury, we see there are some dangers in this legislation. We will support the bill going to the select committee, but we will be scrutinising it very carefully. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022 data-id=\u0022abd6a04e30854e588c8827527c96d3f6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000297\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022abd6a04e30854e588c8827527c96d3f6\u0022\u003EGARETH HUGHES (Green):\u003C/span\u003E Kia ora, Mr Deputy Speaker. Ng\u0101 mihi nui ki a koutou. Kiwis love our oceans. Oceans cover 70 percent of our planet and represent 95 percent of the biosphere, and in New Zealand our waters are particularly special. Members may not have noticed, but a few weeks back the big biodiversity conference wrapped up in Nagoya, Japan. The 10th meeting of the Conference on Biological Diversity received both brickbats and bouquets. Delegates heard that we are in the midst of a great extinction event, with species disappearing at a rate between 100 and possibly 10,000 times greater than the historical level. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000298\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003EThe biodiversity crisis is particularly important, and it is global. It requires international solutions. We used to think, when we looked at our oceans, that they were unlimited, and that it would be impossible for humans to fundamentally impact and change our oceans. However, climate change, ocean acidification, oil and mineral exploitation, whaling, overfishing, and pollution are all taking their toll on our marine environment. A major recommendation from scientists at the conference was that some areas just need to be off limits to humans. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000299\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003EIn Nagoya, under the agreed protocol, Governments committed to protecting 17 percent of the land and 10 percent of the world\u2019s oceans by 2020. The 10 percent by 2020 protected area target sounds impressive, but it is similar to something we have heard before in this Parliament, which was: \u201CNew Zealand? Ten percent by 2020? Pah!\u2019, said the New Zealand Government, because we already had a 10 percent by 2010 target. If members had heard our delegates in Nagoya, they would have heard them say that we are doing great, and we are almost there, and that 7 percent of our territorial sea is in marine reserve. What they forgot to mention, of course, is that it is not just the territorial sea that is counted, but our marine area, our exclusive economic zone. It is a total area of 4.15 million hectares, which is less than close, when we take into account the fact that only 0.3 percent is in marine reserves. Add in marine mammal sanctuaries, and our marine protected area is a paltry 0.77 percent, which is a long way off the 10 percent by 2010 target. With 3 months to go until the deadline, how are we going? Do we have much chance of meeting that target? Not likely, considering this Government has introduced a moratorium on marine reserves in the exclusive economic zone until 2013, last year it stopped the Department of Conservation from applying for marine reserves, and in Akaroa it declined a marine reserve application because of recreational fishing impacts. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003EI mention this in order to highlight the role of the Greens in this House, which is to be a voice for the environment, and to talk about the sustainability issues that are often ignored in the pursuit of profit. The Aquaculture Legislation Amendment Bill (No 3), on the whole, ignores sustainability issues. This omnibus\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a25943b-cb3b-49c3-bd10-74316fae17f1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022801e3639ed0c446b8794a6b37becd9dc\u0022\u003EJacqui Dean\u003C/span\u003E: Silly man.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000302\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e1a24143d3484a6a9208b24b1226359e\u0022\u003EGARETH HUGHES\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I take offence to being called a silly man by the member opposite. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000303\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226304a7e7245448d4931975cabc4ac647\u0022\u003EMr DEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: We are called many things in this House. This is a debating chamber. I am sure the member will, over time, hear other things. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000304\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002253d668b8f5344d31872f7bf9c9a14f53\u0022\u003EGARETH HUGHES\u003C/span\u003E: I may be a silly man, but I am not talking about silly issues. This omnibus bill deals with removing barriers to commercial aquaculture, which is just one aspect of how Kiwis interact with the ocean for pleasure, profit, and conservation. The message we are bringing into this House is that we cannot look at aquaculture in isolation. We need some joined-up thinking. New Zealand has some 5,800 hectares occupied, including freshwater farms, in some 1,200 marine farms. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000305\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003EAquaculture can be good, with the right species in the right place; however, it must be sustainable. We cannot be establishing an aquaculture system that will just crash and burn. We heard from the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture that by 2020 it is estimated that aquaculture will make up 58 percent of worldwide seafood production. What the Minister did not answer was why we would be doing that. What has happened to all the fish that are wild? What has happened to them? We have simply eaten them. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000306\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003ELooking to the future of the aquaculture industry, we are hearing talk of around $1 billion in earnings by 2025. Aquaculture New Zealand estimates that that will require some 17,000 hectares of inshore mussel farms, or approximately 10 times that amount for offshore farms. We support ecologically sustainable aquaculture and we support economic development. But the Greens will be voting against this bill, because we believe it is the marine equivalent of the 1991 Building Act. It is establishing, through lack of planning and lack of regulations, huge problems downstream. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000307\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003EThe Minister quoted the Food and Agriculture Organization, but forgot to point out also what that organisation says about the environmental impacts. The Food and Agriculture Organization points to pollution, nitrification, transmission of diseases, and displacing other activities like marine protected areas, that would come on account of this bill. Between 1985 and 1995\u2014and I know we are not talking about shrimp fisheries; we are talking about finfish fisheries in this bill\u201436 million tonnes of wild-caught fish was used as feed to produce only 7.2 million tonnes of shrimp. This bill will make it easier to farm finfish in New Zealand, which will have massive impacts. Around the world 31 million tonnes of wild-caught fish was fed to other fish. This will hugely impact on our \u201Cclean, green\u201D brand. Around the world, our fisheries have been called into doubt by the Guardian, by The Economist, and by the New York Times; even the Queen will not eat orange roughy from New Zealand any more. We need to take account of the impact of sustainability issues. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000308\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003EI will now quickly go through some of our concerns with this bill, including the lost opportunities for spatial planning in relation to the aquaculture agency, and the lack of local decision-making in the coastal plans. Firstly, when looking at spatial planning, we can see that there are many activities that occur in New Zealand\u2019s marine area, such as fishing, boating, water sports, and enjoying conservation, and aquaculture should not be seen in isolation. We need to take an integrated approach in this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000309\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003EGreen Party policy supports integrated marine ecosystem planning. According to the Environmental Defence Society and other experts, best practice involves heading towards integrated marine spatial planning. This bill does not create a comprehensive integrated mechanism to replace the regional aquaculture management areas. The Environmental Defence Society submitted to the initial technical advisory group report that integrated spatial planning\u2014or a similar framework\u2014should be in place before we remove the red tape for accelerated commercial development. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000310\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003EWhen looking to the aquaculture agency, we agree with the Environmental Defence Society\u2019s concern that the representation of industry interests, as well as responsibility for setting environmental standards, the drafting of national policy, and the management of the environmental impacts of aquaculture, are too many functions to be vested in one agency. The greater role of central government in aquaculture development creates potential conflicts of interest, whereby the regulator of the activity is also the advocate for the activity. This can lead to under-regulation and poor environmental outcomes. In a nutshell, it is not good policy or practice for the industry\u2019s promoter also to be the regulator. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000311\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003ELastly, the bill follows poor legislative and democratic processes by directly amending the two regional coastal plans. That is a bit of a trend of this Government, whereby it will sack entire regional councils in Canterbury, change waterway plans, such as the ones developed by the Greater Wellington Regional Council for Transmission Gully, and call in giant motorway projects, such as Waterview Connection in Auckland, and allow the community very little time to consult on it. Or, as in the case of Mana, the community will have no ability to know where the motorway is, as the route will not be announced before members of the community have their most powerful democratic function\u2014their power to deliver a message with their vote in the ballot box. This Government will not even tell the voters of Mana where the motorway is going or whose houses will be bowled for this development. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000312\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003EWhen it comes to questions of local democratic involvement, this Government errs on the side of the corporate. It errs massively in its own interests, in order to ram through\u2014much like we will be doing under urgency again tonight\u2014issues such as this. This bill also follows poor legislative and democratic process in that it changes the coastal plans to allow for the application for consents to develop finfish farming, which has significantly different and more extensive environmental impacts than shellfish farming. It is not clear whether large-scale finfish farming could be ecologically or economically sustainable in the medium to long term. This should be studied, and there should be local, democratic input into these plan changes. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000313\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003EIn conclusion, the select committee process will allow greater investigation and, despite voting against this bill, we look forward to engaging with it in the select committee. We hope this bill can be improved to better achieve its aims, but we think the fundamental approach will make it difficult for the bill to be amended to the point where the Greens will support it. This bill is about making it easier and faster for corporate aquaculture to grow. We are not opposed to economic development and aquaculture in general, but it must be planned, it must be regulated, and there must be sustainability. What we are doing here is like that other great folly in this House: we are replicating the 1991 Building Act. We will see huge problems in our marine environment down the line. Kia ora.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022 data-id=\u0022087170cc353646759285ca462a0c2bf4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000314\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022087170cc353646759285ca462a0c2bf4\u0022\u003ERAHUI KATENE (M\u0101ori Party\u2014Te Tai Tonga):\u003C/span\u003E The House is now immersed in a debate on yet another omnibus bill. The Aquaculture Legislation Amendment Bill (No 3) makes amendments to the Aquaculture Reform (Repeals and Transitional Provisions) Act 2004, the Fisheries Act 1996, the Maori Commercial Aquaculture Claims Settlement Act 2004, and the Resource Management Act 1991. On its own, this legislation may seem like just a technical clean-up, or another piece of legislation driven by administrative purposes. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000315\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003EAs the MP for Te Tai Tonga, I will bring two important points of distinction in speaking to this bill. The first is that it has been 6 years since the Maori Commercial Aquaculture Claims Settlement Act was passed. Urgent progress must proceed to ensure iwi get the full value from that settlement. The Maori Commercial Aquaculture Claims Settlement Act 2004 provided a full and final settlement of M\u0101ori commercial aquaculture interests since 21 September 1992. I remember the advent of that legislation very clearly. It was something that iwi from Te Tau Ihu, or the top of the South Island, for those not in the know, were especially interested in. The purpose of the 2004 legislation was to enable the marine farming industry to continue growing without risk of litigation relating to contemporary Treaty grievances, and to ensure iwi access to coastal marine space to develop their marine farming interests. The proposed legislation is arguably, then, a work in progress, especially in consideration of the changes aimed at simplifying the process in relation to the allocation of new space for aquaculture activities. It is also a means of achieving incremental progress, taking into account the interim measure put in place to allow for the continuation of the 20 percent allocation mechanism for M\u0101ori interests in aquaculture.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000316\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003EOur sources tell us that aquaculture management areas have not at all been successfully designated by regional authorities, due to a lack of resourcing and planning capacity. The main problem with that is that in order to allocate the 20 percent of new space for M\u0101ori aquaculture activities under the Maori Commercial Aquaculture Claims Settlement Act, those areas need to be established. So the purpose of this new bill is to streamline planning and consenting processes by removing the requirement for aquaculture management areas, to provide stronger incentives for industry development while maintaining existing processes to ensure environmental limits are respected, to enable central government to take a more active role in aquaculture planning and consenting, and to honour the settlement under the Maori Commercial Aquaculture Claims Settlement Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000317\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003EI will speak to that last point in more detail, because it is the second point of distinction that the M\u0101ori Party brings to this debate. This legislation is not just about tidying up the statutes for the purpose of housekeeping. It has a long whakapapa with wh\u0101nau, hap\u016B, and iwi who seek genuine progress in respect of their connections with their maunga, awa, moana, marae, t\u016Bpuna, and atua.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000318\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003EI want to share a little story with members about my own wh\u0101nau experience. Many years ago, the people of Waitohi were moved by the Government at the time from Waitohi to Waikawa so that the Picton township could be built where they were living. At that time, Waikawa was a swamp, and my uncle, Mike Reeves, was born and raised in Waikawa. He has talked to me about life in the mid-1940s in Waikawa, when both sea and freshwater food were plentiful. The wh\u0101nau regularly benefited from the ample supplies of lamprey eel and ordinary silver-bellied eel found in the swamp from the beach. This was also a breeding area for whitebait and thousands of baby flounder, right across Waikawa P\u0101 foreshore. In those times of plenty, the people enjoyed fresh flounder, scallops, cockles, and pipi, and tons of herrings and mackerel. There was also a huge snapper area on the west side of the bay. In the bay itself there was plentiful blue cod, p\u0101ua, and kina. The wh\u0101nau went to their beach to pick mussels, kopakopa, and other kai moana. For those people who are listening, I will stop right now to give them a chance to stop salivating. But this is not a good news story. Eventually, the Waikawa Marina was dug out and the land was reclaimed by uplifting the seabed and filling in the beautiful swamp. In that one act of human intervention, the people were robbed of their source of natural, healthy sea and freshwater food because of the marina pollution. Their scallops have shifted out of the bay into deeper water because of pollution, and the only shellfish left, kopakopa, is way out in the bay.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000319\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003EIf we fast forward to 2010, we see that Port Marlborough wants to shift the shellfish from where it has been for hundreds of years by extending the marina so that more wealthy outsiders can moor their expensive toys there. So the bill comes at a very good time for our people, who are outraged at the decisions that local authorities continue to make, which are seemingly more focused on profits than people, and more focused on financial return rather than the long-term environmental health and well-being of the people.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000320\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003EThere are certainly issues within this legislation on which I would seek the expert advice and knowledge of our wh\u0101nau leaders, like my uncle Mike Reeves. I am thinking particularly about the nature of the new space allocation mechanism. The proposed reforms seem to normalise aquaculture by removing the need to create aquaculture management areas and rebranding across the board all aquaculture activities as coastal permits. There is concern that this is an interim measure with no clear indication as to what will replace it and when it will be replaced. In our opinion, this issue should be finalised first, before the legislation is progressed. In fact, if we were to talk with any of our people involved in aquaculture, I suggest we would hear that their main focus would be that the 20 percent allocation of new space for aquaculture activities should be increased, not removed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000321\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003EWe all accept that the current legislation has not worked as it should have, because not enough progress has been made in the allocation of new space for aquaculture activities by regional councils. The proposed reforms on the allocation of new space, although not ideal, are at least a step forward in simplifying the complex process of allocating new space for aquaculture activities. But, and this is the crucial thing, we must see ongoing and formalised consultation with iwi as a vital step in making progress. The commitment shown in regard to future consultation with iwi leaders on this issue is encouraging. The M\u0101ori Party promotes ongoing and continuing engagement with Ministers and iwi leaders in the hope of reaching a speedy resolution that can promote the development of the aquaculture industry and secure a central position in that industry for iwi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000322\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003EJust for the record, I will outline some of the key understandings we have in respect of iwi leaders operating in this and other fora with Ministers. The role of the Iwi Leadership Group is strictly focused on advising Ministers on the development of options that best advance iwi interests. It is to be noted, however, that members of the Iwi Leadership Group do not purport to speak for or represent any iwi other than their own; no one-size-fits-all template provides the generic iwi answer. Accordingly, the Iwi Leadership Group does not have a mandate to negotiate or reach agreements on behalf of any iwi. Its focus is on reporting back to iwi both directly through e-p\u0101nui and hui as required, and through regular meetings of the Iwi Chairs Forum.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003EFinally, it should be noted that engagement between Ministers and the Iwi Leadership Group does not derogate from the Treaty relationship between iwi and the Crown, and it is no substitute for direct engagement between the Treaty partners.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000324\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003EWith all these principles in mind, I acknowledge the leadership of iwi and record our respect for the views that they bring, including the views of experts from regions with interests in aquaculture, as well as outside expertise where that is required.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000325\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003EI remember what my Uncle Mike keeps fighting for: a quality of life; a clean, pristine environment; the ability to go to the beach and pick one\u2019s own food; and leaving behind a legacy of beauty for our mokopuna. The M\u0101ori Party welcomes the open-door approach and will support this bill at the first reading to enable the k\u014Drero to be had.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022 data-id=\u0022f9a1d8312f39446fa3eb2f10ea7e7568\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000326\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f9a1d8312f39446fa3eb2f10ea7e7568\u0022\u003EHon PHIL HEATLEY (Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture):\u003C/span\u003E In my introductory speech, I should have pointed out that I wanted the Primary Production Committee to consider the Aquaculture Legislation Amendment Bill (No 3) and that the committee will report its findings to the House on or before 27 April 2011. I would like to inform the House of that and I seek leave to do so.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000327\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022da5e7781886f44be947a83f6a20cb2e3\u0022\u003EMr DEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is no objection.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022 data-id=\u002209f0c25272ae4dab8c75cc2558112f0e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000328\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002209f0c25272ae4dab8c75cc2558112f0e\u0022\u003ESHANE ARDERN (National\u2014Taranaki - King Country):\u003C/span\u003E I rise in support of the Aquaculture Legislation Amendment Bill (No 3). It has been interesting to listen to the speeches from both sides of the House, and particularly to the reasons of the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture for coming forward with the bill. As the chair of the Primary Production Committee, I tell members that the committee undertook a study tour of South Australia last year, and one of the things that overwhelmed me\u2014I do not know that it overwhelmed anybody else but it overwhelmed me\u2014was the massive growth we saw in aquaculture in South Australia. It has got to the point now that it represents about one-third of the South Australian economy. So the obvious questions to ask in that process were: at what environmental cost was that growth, and at what other costs? I have to report back to the House that from the amount of research we were able to do with the people we spoke to, who were from both scientific backgrounds and environmental backgrounds, and of course at the meetings we had with parliamentarians there, we learnt that the amount of environmental impact has been, at the best, very minimal.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000329\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003ESo from that I can answer some of the concerns raised by the Green Party in its contribution earlier on, and by the Hon Damien O\u2019Connor, who said that he feared the powers that the Minister might have under the proposals of this omnibus bill, which at a later stage in the parliamentary process will be divided up into more than one bill. I guess that to some extent I can sympathise with those concerns. But if New Zealand were to have a Labour Government with a Green Minister, then the aquaculture industry would not progress, at all. There would be no progress, at all, in this industry. In fact, if we look at what has happened in recent history, we can see that there has been no progress in this industry\u2014an industry that potentially has up to $1 billion worth of export earnings.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000330\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003EIf we look at what New Zealand\u2019s low-hanging fruit will be in terms of potential for growth going forward, we see that it will be\u2014without a doubt in my mind\u2014the export of high-quality protein products, with integrity and traceability; we can tick all of those boxes. The concept of the triple bottom line, which is touted much by those on the Green side of the political divide, is not a new concept to those of us who have been involved in the farming industry for years. The idea of having a balance between economic, social, and environmental concerns is something that is absolutely fundamental to the New Zealand economy, to our way of life, and to the farming systems we employ.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000331\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003EUnder the current legislation there are aquacultural management areas, which in the last 5 years have had no new developments, at all, under that regime\u2014none, zero, nothing. Surely that meets the concerns that the Green member raised about the potential environmental impacts\u2014there are none because there has been no development. But we cannot have a growing dynamic economy at the bottom of the South Pacific that is dependent on exports for its way in the world and for the standard of living that we have all come to appreciate and demand from successive Governments\u2014health care, education, high-quality communications, and a high standard of living\u2014without economic development. Those things do not exist when we do not have economic development. So the purpose of the bill is to try to clear some of these regulatory roadblocks that exist in the development of aquaculture in New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000332\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003EAquaculture can be done in a sustainable way, and I am reminded of one of those who spoke to us in South Australia, a person of German descent from about five generations ago. I will not use names because that would personalise it too much, but this person said to us: \u201CWe left central Europe five generations ago because of bureaucratic persecution, but last year, after having invested millions of dollars in development in New Zealand\u2014millions of dollars worth of economic development in that country\u2014we left New Zealand for South Australia to escape bureaucratic persecution.\u201D So we need to reflect on that a little bit.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000333\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003EAs we grow and develop as a First World country we need to learn the lessons of our forbears, and of our origins. I include tangata whenua in that. Some examples were given by our colleague from the M\u0101ori Party of early development in New Zealand that was not, and never would be, environmentally sustainable. Those lessons need to be learnt, along with what we know now through modern science about the potential for us in terms of developing a sustainable, dynamic, and economically viable aquaculture industry.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000334\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003EDifferent members have touched on the different types of aquaculture farming. One of the things that was very, very obvious to us when we looked not only at the Australian example but also at our own example here in New Zealand was that technology has moved on, and we can now farm finfish in areas where it has been identified that these fish will grow and thrive without having a major environmental impact. They can actually be fed on land-produced feeds, and not on captured wild fish, which, of course, would not be sustainable. So a range of options is now available that were not available even 10 years ago.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000335\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003EI think that members should wait until the bill gets to the select committee. Members should bring their concerns to the committee, as I am sure submitters will. I look forward to the process going forward.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022 data-id=\u0022a7afca137df842569bf9a640cb5c37af\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000336\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a7afca137df842569bf9a640cb5c37af\u0022\u003EHon SHANE JONES (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E Kia ora n\u014D t\u0101tou. T\u0113n\u0101 koe, Mr Deputy Speaker. Along with my other colleagues I rise to support this bill going to the Primary Production Committee. In 1992 the Hon Doug Kidd was the Minister of Fisheries. During his tenure he identified that aquaculture, by 2010, would produce $1 billion worth of foreign exchange earnings. He then moved on and surfaced many years later as an expert guiding the current Ministers in terms of how those dashed expectations of his might be achieved. I have to say that the range of ideas contained in this bill most certainly should be supported to the select committee and we should listen very carefully to what ideas might come out of the select committee to ensure that the balance does not tip too far one way or the other. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000337\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022\u003EThe current value of the aquaculture industry is approximately $370 million, the vast majority of which goes overseas. Indeed, the major mussel stakeholders are about to leave to go to China in the forlorn pursuit, I rather fear, of acting in a cohesive fashion to ensure that we do not continue the curse of so many New Zealand exporters of undercutting their neighbours. This is an opportunity for us to redress what has been a spectacular episode of non-activity and indeed, in the minds of M\u0101ori marine farming enterprise owners, a spectacular failure that goes back to key decisions taken by Ministers over the last 3 or 4 years. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000338\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022\u003EIn an attempt to respond to the Klondike effect, where people were screaming around the country and actually camping on coastal real estate without having either the capital or the connections to ever develop that space, we unwittingly created in those days a speculative rush. When we had communities that probably had the ability to leverage their other assets and put capital into aquaculture, they found they were being charged extortionate fees to take a secondary stake in this coastal space that had already been locked up by a range of entrepreneurial characters who, as I said, knew not a thing about exporting and who lacked the ability to amass the necessary elements to create any enterprise out of it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000339\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022\u003EThen we came forward with our response and froze that part of the industry\u2014that is, new space. But I have to say that new space is only part of what is needed in this industry. As with all industries, if we cannot settle upon a sustainable or maintainable export price, then it is very hard to grow or even stay solvent in this industry, as many mussel farmers, oyster farmers, and others will tell us, which is why this industry is seeing critical mass dynamics at work. That is more a statement on the industry, as opposed to this legislation, but it is important that we have a very good understanding as to what really are the problems we are trying to solve here. Obviously, in a simplistic way, too much red tape or too many complex and costly planning provisions are key issues that both major parties have deep concerns about. If this bill can simplify that, then we may see some fresh investment. But we will not see fresh investment unless we can see sunlight in the market place\u2014that is, the export markets. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000340\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022\u003EThat raises questions as to how well organised aquaculture exporters are, what level of collaboration there is amongst them, and to what extent they can work together without falling foul of the law in relation to using practices that might raise the ire or cause the attention of regulators to be directed towards their activities. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000341\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022\u003EIn addition, for the past 5 or 6 years there has always been a funding problem\u2014once the aquaculture management area model was brought into law. Areas would be created as aquaculture management areas, and within those areas punters who wanted to create a business there could make an application. Those aquaculture management areas were never going to be created without central government funding. To date, none of the big parties has shown much zest for spending the millions of dollars necessary for aquaculture management areas to be created. In addition, when an aquaculture management area is created, the costs facing an investor are inordinately larger than the costs facing an opponent. The opponents are able to use the fruits of social democracy being married with resource management and bring their concerns to the table and actually require an exhaustive consideration of things that are both relevant and irrelevant. If one is an investor wanting to enlarge one\u2019s enterprise, one faces those considerable hurdles, but that in itself can be traced back to the inability of regional government to fund it, and also, I am told, the inability of the ratepayers who stand behind regional government to put serious dough on the table to allow it to determine which areas under the planned environmental management strategies will be dedicated; and, if we were to go for a private plan change, then that in itself is a very expensive exercise. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000342\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022\u003EThis is relevant to M\u0101ori, and I suppose the jury is still out as to how the M\u0101ori entitlement will be settled, flowing from the deal done in the time of, I think it was, David Benson-Pope. How will it happen? Will it be cash? If there are no aquaculture management areas, how will they be allocated their space? The obligation upon the Crown is clearly reflected\u2014I think it is section 53\u2014and there is the ability to take different routes forward, so we look forward to hearing what both the industry and M\u0101ori players have to say about that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000343\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022\u003EIt is useful to think about how aquaculture can move into other species. At the moment it comprises primarily mussels and oysters, but there is a large market for finfish. I come from Te Aup\u014Duri iwi and we unwisely invested many millions of dollars in a land-based fish farm. The fish farm has since been discontinued. Fortunately, the asset base was such that the assets have been able to absorb the losses that come as a consequence of dabbling in capitalism, and of getting Scandinavian technology and learning that the ability to enforce the contract against Scandinavians is actually proportionate to the distance that they are away\u2014that is, one has to go a long way to get them to observe their obligations under the contract. But that is another matter. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000344\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022\u003EThere is a great deal of scope for the farming of finfish. I only hope that when the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture comes back to us later in the Committee stage, he ensures that there is scope in this bill for investors to move from one type of aquaculture species to another, depending on where the market trends are taking us in terms of our export potential over the medium to long term. Although this is an important resource management issue, at the end of the day aquaculture is about exploiting natural space and natural resources, and transforming that into jobs, enabling firms to take a risk, and generating a flow of goods and services that hopefully will lead to the generation of foreign exchange earnings. At a deep level that is what we are really on about here. I have my doubts about whether the rhetoric spouted by the Hon Gerry Brownlee will ever come to pass\u2014he has pinned a great deal of hope upon the aquaculture industry to be a new, inordinately large growth industry\u2014but we will support this bill\u2019s referral to a select committee. Kia ora.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022 data-id=\u0022ec6ae474342047cf8a22d8cadeaa43e4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000345\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ec6ae474342047cf8a22d8cadeaa43e4\u0022\u003ECOLIN KING (National\u2014Kaik\u014Dura):\u003C/span\u003E It is a pleasure to stand and speak in the first reading of the Aquaculture Legislation Amendment Bill (No 3). I must concede that earlier speakers have canvassed this subject very well. I shall take only a short call. I certainly look forward to this bill coming to the Primary Production Committee so that we can glean the value out of the select committee submissions. While I am on my feet I will talk about how enthusiastic this Government is about aquaculture, how focused it is on environmental sustainability, and how aware it is, when looking back, of the impracticability of some of the other attempts to sort out the aquaculture industry. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000346\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022\u003EIt is probably quite appropriate to see where all this started. In the 1970s a lot of the land-based farms in the Marlborough Sounds were finding the going very tough. With innovation, they saw an opportunity to farm green-lipped mussels in the sounds, and the rest is history. A wonderful book called Lines in the water was published, which celebrates the achievement of aquaculture in the Marlborough Sounds. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000347\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022\u003EOne point I will make is that we are not necessarily talking about great, endless hectares of water space being used to realise the $1 billion. It is quite clear that if the science is done and the water space is identified as being appropriate, then salmon farming could double the financial returns in the Marlborough Sounds by actually reducing the overall areas. But the point we learnt as a select committee from what happened in South Australia is that one must do the science. One must identify the areas, and then one has to look for a very simple but responsible framework in order for sustainable aquaculture to occur. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000348\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022\u003EThere are very exciting opportunities. The National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research is doing very successful research into h\u0101puka, and their growth rates are very similar to those of salmon. With regard to this bill, I see that the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture wants us to report it back on 27 April 2011, which should give adequate time for us to test much of the thinking that is in the bill. I know that a lot of candle hours have been spent in anguishing over the details and complexity of such things as how to apportion the 20 percent that is due\u2014the contemporary arrangements relating to M\u0101ori. That issue has to be looked at, and I am sure that there are far better solutions in the second generation of stepping forward in aquaculture. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000349\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022\u003EI will leave it there. I am fully in support of this legislation. As the MP for Kaik\u014Dura, which encompasses the Marlborough Sounds and probably some 1,700 kilometres of coastline, I realise not only the sensitivities relating to this legislation but also the enormous opportunities to harvest economic gain. I commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022 data-id=\u00229f62dd3f20ed4edd96ec90cc736aac5d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000350\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229f62dd3f20ed4edd96ec90cc736aac5d\u0022\u003EBRENDON BURNS (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central):\u003C/span\u003E I am very pleased to support the Aquaculture Legislation Amendment Bill (No 3). I will set the framework for my comments around cautious support for this bill. I say \u201Ccautious\u201D, because\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000351\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002225f8c78b-f301-4aca-a936-366f00a26bc9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022be54223aaf904aa1b5b745bae0bffb15\u0022\u003ESandra Goudie\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, come on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000352\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223a0b667ca2aa4d778ecda5650dcd200f\u0022\u003EBRENDON BURNS\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014and I will express the caution first\u2014we have been there at least twice before in my lifetime in terms of trying to grow this industry successfully. But I also say \u201Csupport\u201D, because aquaculture can, and should, become a billion-dollar export industry, if we get it right this time round. I am a great believer in aquaculture. I say that as somebody who, just at lunchtime today, when hosting a South African delegation with colleagues from the Primary Production Committee, ate some delicious salmon for my lunch\u2014farmed salmon.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000353\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267431f57-e958-4c83-b438-7da8061d479e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c847ab4cc8974384b818f3899c6e3b25\u0022\u003EPaul Quinn\u003C/span\u003E: Did you pay for it?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000354\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c99c8441f8fe43ad97dd3b5a4423fdd5\u0022\u003EBRENDON BURNS\u003C/span\u003E: I did indeed pay for my lunch, through the tax system that we all contribute to, I say to Mr Quinn. Last Saturday, in a rare moment off from work, at Pomeroy\u2019s pub in my electorate, I enjoyed with my wife a lunch of a dozen freshly cooked Marlborough Sounds mussels. I am also a regular consumer, as some other MPs may be, of fish oil pills, which come from farmed salmon and which are good for keeping our joints supple and for feeding our capacity to retain information.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000355\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022659f6556-09a1-4ead-bc52-05cbdb4eaab8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c6aada72127146049987dc0e5e7f9685\u0022\u003ECraig Foss\u003C/span\u003E: You should share them with your colleagues.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000356\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002227f33202ed114667a03b156a850ba451\u0022\u003EBRENDON BURNS\u003C/span\u003E: I should share them with members opposite\u2014indeed, I should. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000357\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003EI lived for 14 years in Marlborough and spent a lot of time in the Marlborough Sounds in holiday and weekend periods. The Marlborough Sounds is home, I think, to about three-quarters of the current existing aquaculture industry. I love to fish. One can never catch more fish than when one is somewhere near a mussel harvester. Yes, there are parts of the sounds where the mussel industry and aquaculture in general may currently be being farmed to capacity, but that certainly does not apply in any more than a handful of bays across the vast expanse of the Marlborough Sounds. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000358\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003EThe current aquaculture industry in New Zealand takes a fraction of 1 percent of our coastal water space. We have considerable capacity for growth\u2014considerable capacity for growth\u2014and I hope this bill will provide for that, because this is a clean, green industry. It is a sustainable industry. It is an industry that is needed by this nation to grow and an industry that is needed by this world to grow, because our fresh catch resources are declining\u2014as members will know if they saw the weekend piece in the Sunday Star-Times about the pressure on the tuna industry, for one example\u2014and we need to be able to grow fish and shellfish to feed the world. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000359\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003EThe Marlborough greenshell mussel industry is the dominant player in the current aquaculture industry. It was established by mum and dad pioneers, and they grew that industry out of nothing. They invented such things as the use of net stockings in a continuous loop to host mussel spat and attach it to the lines between the mussel floats, which were also designed and developed in Marlborough for that industry. It was a No. 8 fencing wire industry that has come together and created a fantastic, sustainable industry for us. But it needs to grow. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000360\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003EThree months ago I suggested to the Primary Production Committee that we might go and look at the industry in the Marlborough Sounds. I think the proposal was that we would go to look at a National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research facility, but I believed that we should go and look at this industry in situ. It was a splendid day and we, as members, were shown\u2014shown again, for some of us\u2014how that industry is performing and how it could perform better. We were treated to some of the innovations that are emerging. Bruce Hearn from Marlborough, a pioneer of the industry, has now developed what I believe are the best oysters in the world and is farming them commercially in the Tory Channel. They are absolutely delicious. That is the sort of technical innovation that is happening in the industry, and we should see more of it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000361\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003EBut I still come back to the note of caution that I expressed at the beginning of my comments. That is because, living in Marlborough in the 1990s, I well remember Doug Kidd as the Minister of Fisheries and as the then local MP introducing a moratorium that started for 1 year, I think, and was extended to 2 years, if not beyond, as he attempted to control the gold rush that was going on for water space at that time. Legislation emerged, but it did not solve the issues of the industry and encourage growth that is sustainable and possible. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000362\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003EAt the beginning of 2005\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000363\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002225f8c78b-f301-4aca-a936-366f00a26bc9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022606dfb8e89404800a2ca6cab7d998119\u0022\u003ESandra Goudie\u003C/span\u003E: Tell us about the 5-year Labour moratorium.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000364\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022642999e0e13a41f5abbcfb14dbf4da81\u0022\u003EBRENDON BURNS\u003C/span\u003E: This is across parties and Governments. I remind the member that it was her Government that introduced the Resource Management Act, not the Labour Government, which she was so critical of before. She should check her facts before she opens her trap. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000365\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003EIn the year 2005, while working in a private capacity, I organised a visit to the Marlborough Sounds by Jim Anderton when he took on the fisheries portfolio, to expose him to the industry. I thought that if anybody was going to get that industry moving, it would be Jim Anderton. He had been the architect of the Labour Government\u2019s policies in terms of regional development, and all of aquaculture is regional development. But I have to say that the growth did not happen. We are now looking at the Australian model. Last year the Primary Production Committee visited South Australia where a very good model is in place. It is a partnership between industry and government. Yes, extraordinary growth is going on in South Australia. They are now farming tuna, kingfish, and black mussels, and some of the Marlborough industry pioneers are involved in the industry in Australia because they have had such frustration here with the restrictions in place, in terms of the growth that could occur if we get it right. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000366\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003ETen years ago, in my past life as a journalist, when on a press fellowship I visited Ireland to look at regional development.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000367\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267431f57-e958-4c83-b438-7da8061d479e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ffd5d344e390401ba33b67db8a5a211f\u0022\u003EPaul Quinn\u003C/span\u003E: You\u2019ve travelled the world.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000368\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227ea9c40144e14adcb3677c6848f4ab10\u0022\u003EBRENDON BURNS\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, at times I have benefited from that and it certainly helps, along with the fish pills, to open one\u2019s mind\u2014and some members would benefit from that, I say to Mr Quinn. I visited Ireland, and one of the enduring strengths of the Irish economy\u2014and it has had its difficulties of late\u2014has been the aquaculture growth in that nation. The models are there; they are absolutely there. But we do need to be cautious. The reason we have to be cautious is that Doug Kidd, who is well-respected by this House as a technocrat and operator, did not get it right in the 1990s; Jim Anderton did not get it right in 2005-08; and now we are putting our faith and trust in the new Minister, Mr Heatley, and I say good luck to him. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000369\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003EBut I have to say that I think the Ministry of Fisheries may be as much a part of the problem to date as part of the solution, and I think the industry needs to make sure it takes every opportunity for input into this bill, as it is guided through the Primary Production Committee, to make sure that we get it right this time. It is hugely important to our nation that we get it right this time round. We have the opportunity. The Minister has indicated that the bill will be before the select committee through until April next year, so there is a good time frame for submission in order to get it right. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000370\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003EThere are multiple reasons why we must get it right this time. The fact is that this could be, by 2025, a billion-dollar export industry, which would more than double the current growth of the aquaculture sector. We want to see those sustainable export dollars. We want to see the jobs that emerge from the aquaculture industry\u2019s growth, and we want to see the food for a food-hungry world, which could be supported out of this low-impact, low-imprint sustainable industry. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000371\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003EBut there is another reason that I want to commend to this House, in terms of support for this bill. It is because of what the greenshell mussel can do to us as people. I believe it can make us smarter. The reason I cite for that is that two eminent scientists, both of whom won the Nobel Prize, Sir Ernest Rutherford and Sir William Pickering, have one thing in common. They both grew up in Havelock, which is the home, the world capital, of the greenshell mussel\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000372\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f62b1543ec824f6f9a19f5dfde2c2bab\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Parekura is a Rutherford; seriously.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000373\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226f10090620174bb789a2b904912cec90\u0022\u003EBRENDON BURNS\u003C/span\u003E: There we go! I will not quite put Parekura in the same league as Ernest Rutherford and William Pickering because there was a science bent, rather than Parekura\u2019s political bent. But in all seriousness, this is a sustainable industry and it deserves the chance to grow. It can be done in a way where communities can have input. We do not want to see the industry expanded to every corner of every bay in every part of New Zealand. That will not happen. It is not envisaged I am sure.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002225f8c78b-f301-4aca-a936-366f00a26bc9\u0022 data-id=\u0022531ed0f86ce948d1959c8bb221c074c2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000374\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002225f8c78b-f301-4aca-a936-366f00a26bc9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022531ed0f86ce948d1959c8bb221c074c2\u0022\u003ESANDRA GOUDIE (National\u2014Coromandel):\u003C/span\u003E I applaud the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, Phil Heatley, and his officials for the magnificent bill that they have brought to the House, because at last somebody is doing something to clean up the dog\u2019s breakfast in regard to aquaculture. Labour had 9 long years in Government and did not do it. This can and should be a billion-dollar industry. We need the export dollars, we need the tax revenue, and we need the jobs. Why? Because there is an ever-clamouring demand for more dollars for health, education, and policing, and we will get that only by having the tax revenue and having the export dollars. As Conor English said, it is an excellent opportunity. There is no free lunch. We need these jobs, and we need that sort of revenue. But we will always get those people who try to oppose that type of thing. We will get people who march against things like the Hobbit movies and the like. They march against the food industry, yet it is the food industry, the agriculture and aquaculture sectors in New Zealand, that will have the opportunity, with a bit of support and vision from the population of New Zealand and, of course, from the Opposition, to make a real difference to the economy of this country, which we so desperately need. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000375\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002225f8c78b-f301-4aca-a936-366f00a26bc9\u0022\u003EI applaud the Minister and his officials for the work they have done, because it has been difficult. It is quite a vexed issue. But the trip that the Primary Production Committee took to Australia showed quite clearly where the roadblocks were. If we look at Australia, we see that it is the state that sets the areas, and all a person who wants to get into the industry has to do is get a lease to fish and a licence to occupy. It is nice and simple. Here in New Zealand, what is the process? They have to go through a plan change, which means consultation; they have to lodge a plan change document, with, again, consultation and hearings, including the Environment Court; and they have to repeat that process for a resource consent and then repeat it for an undue adverse effects test with the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. If that was not bogged down, I do not know what was. It is absolutely no surprise that nothing has been happening in the sector for many, many years. It is just wonderful to see that we have a bill here that will redress some of the concerns that have been raised and make some substantial progress in moving this industry forward. I certainly applaud it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00227492e857bda64136a5154fab5a7ca43a\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 Aquaculture Legislation Amendment Bill (No 3) be now read a first 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 National 58; New Zealand Labour 41; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1; United Future 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\u003EGreen Party 9.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill read a first time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022 data-id=\u0022974eae56645045b7b4e72cfe1d1fe2d2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000376\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022974eae56645045b7b4e72cfe1d1fe2d2\u0022\u003EHon PHIL HEATLEY (Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the Primary Production Committee consider the Aquaculture Legislation Amendment Bill (No 3) and that the committee report finally to the House on or before 27 April 2011.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000377\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\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=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000378\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022054eabc481584c39a30b2a1153045715\u0022\u003ERugby World Cup 2011 (Empowering) Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000379\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00226737635f90444f24b81daa6d3acfc43f\u0022\u003EThird Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002223de6bd3-0482-495d-88f4-7cc3f75d8442\u0022 data-id=\u0022ab4ba4566c6545dcbcb487202c3e7b85\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000380\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002223de6bd3-0482-495d-88f4-7cc3f75d8442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ab4ba4566c6545dcbcb487202c3e7b85\u0022\u003EHon NATHAN GUY (Minister of Internal Affairs)\u003C/span\u003E on behalf of the Minister for the Rugby World Cup: I move, That the Rugby World Cup 2011 (Empowering) Bill be now read a third time. When New Zealand hosts the Rugby World Cup next year, it will be the largest event we have ever experienced in this country. Matches and teams will be spread from one end of the country to the other, with an influx of 85,000 visitors and 2,000 international media expected. For 45 days the global spotlight will shine on New Zealand. It is vital for our reputation, our economy, our pride, and ourselves that our country delivers a truly excellent tournament. As a result, the Rugby World Cup 2011 (Empowering) Bill is needed to guarantee the country\u2019s preparedness for this enormous responsibility. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000381\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002223de6bd3-0482-495d-88f4-7cc3f75d8442\u0022\u003EThe Government has invested in various stadium developments, infrastructure, business leveraging, and sector showcasing programmes. We are wholeheartedly committed to making sure we are ready. This bill is a vital tool to aid the country in hosting our biggest event ever. There will be no room for any second chances. We simply have to get this right. This bill will speed up the consenting process for Rugby World Cup - related facilities and activities, and also allow for special Rugby World Cup liquor licences. It provides an expedited regime that will help ensure that the events forming part of, and supporting, the tournament meet the appropriate environmental and public safety standards. This will help ensure that New Zealand can meet the hospitality and hosting requirements of the tournament, and that we are well placed to leverage maximum advantage from the opportunities that hosting this event will provide overall. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000382\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002223de6bd3-0482-495d-88f4-7cc3f75d8442\u0022\u003EThe bill establishes a Rugby World Cup Authority to consider and determine applications for temporary approvals for Rugby World Cup - related activities and facilities, as well as temporary declarations of permitted activities. The authority is appointed by the Minister for the Rugby World Cup and must include members with experience and expertise in the matters likely to come before it. It will receive administrative support and advice from local councils and does not require the establishment of any significant new bureaucracy. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000383\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002223de6bd3-0482-495d-88f4-7cc3f75d8442\u0022\u003EThere is also provision in the bill to enable the Minister for the Rugby World Cup, after receiving advice from the authority and consulting relevant Ministers, to grant approvals in circumstances of unforeseen urgency. The bill also enables declarations of permitted activities to be made urgently by Order in Council. These provisions are a vital safeguard for the successful operation of the tournament, and it is entirely appropriate, given the importance of the Rugby World Cup, that the final decisions are made by Ministers rather than by an unelected body, no matter how eminent. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000384\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002223de6bd3-0482-495d-88f4-7cc3f75d8442\u0022\u003EFinally, the bill establishes a Rugby World Cup liquor licensing regime, which will help the hospitality industry meet the extraordinary requirements of the Rugby World Cup, while ensuring that licensed premises operate in a sensible and safe manner. Premises licensed under the bill will need to adhere to stricter standards than the ones in the Sale of Liquor Act, and both the police and the authority have the power to take swift and effective action against premises that do not meet those high standards. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000385\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002223de6bd3-0482-495d-88f4-7cc3f75d8442\u0022\u003EDuring the parliamentary stages of this bill a number of matters were clarified, including the duties and powers of the authority itself, the supporting role of local councils, and changes to the definition to clarify the sorts of activities and facilities that can be approved under the bill. One of the effects of those changes ensures that Rugby World Cup liquor licences can be granted for live public screenings of games. Holders of current on-licences will be able to have their licensing hours extended to coincide with live screenings of Rugby World Cup matches, and will allow cruise ships, the holders of club licences under the Sale of Liquor Act, and charter clubs to apply for Rugby World Cup liquor licences. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000386\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002223de6bd3-0482-495d-88f4-7cc3f75d8442\u0022\u003EThe bill provides the police with greater enforcement powers to control the consumption of liquor during the tournament and ensures that the granting of Rugby World Cup liquor licences will not extend the hours during which existing gambling machines can be operated. In addition, the select committee recommended providing an exemption from the change-of-use provisions in the Building Act to enable modern apartment buildings to be used for temporary Rugby World Cup accommodation, without seeking building consent. This was a sensible solution that balanced the accommodation requirements of the tournament with the need to ensure public safety. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000387\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002223de6bd3-0482-495d-88f4-7cc3f75d8442\u0022\u003EDuring the Committee stage a number of MPs commented on the powers the bill gives to the Minister for the Rugby World Cup. Some of the speakers suggested that the Minister could override any decision of the Rugby World Cup Authority. This is not correct. The Minister, following consultation with at least two other Ministers, can make a final decision on only the most urgent applications and then only in the period between 1 July 2011 and the end of the tournament. Hopefully, the Minister will not be called upon to exercise that power, but given its nature it is entirely appropriate for it to be exercised by a democratically accountable Minister. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000388\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002223de6bd3-0482-495d-88f4-7cc3f75d8442\u0022\u003EI thank the select committee, officials, Parliamentary Counsel Office, submitters, and all those people who have had a part in bringing the Rugby World Cup 2011 (Empowering) Bill to this stage. The bill will give us the mechanism to ensure that all necessary approvals for Rugby World Cup activities and facilities are considered and determined very quickly. It will also deal with any unforeseen emergencies that may affect New Zealand\u2019s ability to host an excellent tournament next year. It is further evidence that the Government continues to deliver on its commitment to maximise the benefits and opportunities that we know will be presented to our country by staging the Rugby World Cup. I am pleased to commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u00221bc56b22d7ce49af949ca7e96ad95bec\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000389\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221bc56b22d7ce49af949ca7e96ad95bec\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I think it is fair to say that it is more in sorrow than in anger that the Opposition is opposing this legislation. It is fair to say that, notwithstanding some temptation over the last year or so, the Labour Party has attempted right through the process, both in Government and in Opposition, to work with National to have as close to a bipartisan approach to this Rugby World Cup as is possible, even to the extent, as we worked our way through the bid process, of including the then Leader of the Opposition, Dr Brash, as part of the team that was involved in the final determination of the shape of the bid, and including him in the bid document itself as an endorsing party. We have worked hard, right back to the time when I was involved in the bid for the bid\u2014if people understand that; the money that was being put together in order to finance the bid\u2014to make sure that right through there was quality consultation, because we knew that it was important that this was not seen as something that was politically divisive as far as New Zealanders were concerned. We knew there was a big investment and an enormous opportunity, and that is why we reached across the House in the time we were in Government in order to attempt to build a consensus. So it is with some sadness that we have come to the point that we have. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000390\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EThere is acceptance on my part and on the part of the Labour Party that the legislation is necessary. The vast majority of this bill as it was introduced showed, I think it is fair to say, the degree of roughness and readiness that the Minister in charge of the bill is a bit renowned for, but the Government Administration Committee did a good job, and with one major exception the legislation is acceptable to the Labour Party. I would go further and say it is necessary. There is no doubt that especially but not only in Auckland, the current systems for liquor licensing and resource consents could end up with a hodgepodge of uneven decisions made in the run-up to the Rugby World Cup if legislation of this type was not in place. So it is necessary. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000391\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003ETherefore\u2014and I focus for a second on the select committee\u2014I want to say that the committee worked very well. I commend my colleague David Parker for his chairing, and also members of the Government. I think it is fair to say that a lot of work was done within the committee very much on a bipartisan basis. There were ideas from both sides that were worked into the bill, and disagreements on the majority of issues were just as likely to be between people on the same side as across the table, but we worked through those processes. I think we have better legislation as a result of that. We knew that was important, because the world will be looking at New Zealand at that time. It is very much a case of not knowing what one does not know, so it is important to have legislation that works between now and 1 July through what might be described as not the normal process but the new normal process for consent-type arrangements, and then there does need to be something in place for things that are late-breaking. Having that sort of process is vital in getting things right. It is very important. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000392\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EI do say, though, that the issue that causes us to oppose the bill is the taking by the Government for the Minister of powers that we think are judicial powers and powers that should be reserved to the process and the authority that has been set up\u2014as I will get to soon, even the possibility of having some sort of compromise arrangements. I am slightly critical of the Law Society. The Law Society is an organisation that I think should have been across this legislation much, much earlier than it was. Its late comments on the legislation, although absolutely appropriate and accurate, should have been made much earlier in the process. I think that at some stage the Law Society\u2014and we have to work our way through how that happens\u2014needs to focus earlier when inappropriate powers are being taken. Sometimes there is a lot of publicity or a discussion. I think that as parliamentarians we mainly came to a point of view on the Canterbury legislation that, in retrospect, leaves us with some questions. But in this case, the taking of the power by the Minister was clear, on the face of the bill, right from the beginning. I think it would have been appropriate for the Law Society to look at the bill and work its way through it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000393\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EI will give an example\u2014one of many and one that I have given to the House before\u2014of something that is late-breaking. The example is of an application that is made after 1 July to dismantle or demolish a home that may or may not be historic but that could not be handled and would not be acceptable under normal resource consent conditions. So there is a property right maybe for the owner, certainly for the neighbours, and maybe for the community around it. Under this legislation, the authority set up to consider it can recommend that it not proceed, but the Minister can make a decision that it should proceed. I think that\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000394\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a25943b-cb3b-49c3-bd10-74316fae17f1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022290baaf607f6486ebcc758611a64d74e\u0022\u003EJacqui Dean\u003C/span\u003E: I don\u2019t think you\u2019re right, there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000395\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d6e5d7045acd465188fe6178948939dc\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: The member, whose name I have forgotten\u2014which one is she? [Interruption]\u2014Jacqui Dean. The member Jacqui Dean is shaking her head and says that that is not possible. Well, it actually is possible. It is absolutely possible that the authority can say no, the Minister can say yes, and the house can be demolished. That could be an enormous financial advantage to one of the parties. In my opinion that is not the sort of decision that should be taken by a Minister. It is something that is properly taken by a judge or, in this case\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000396\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ae94eea7-ba5f-4303-bf71-49e708bc9888\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002262ff8098c75b40fd8b49c2964fd683d6\u0022\u003EJohn Hayes\u003C/span\u003E: A Minister is politically accountable.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000397\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002220466685169040d984ce80dc4b4dd742\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, a Minister might be politically accountable, but my view is that that is the sort of political decision-making around individual, advantaged people that has led to corruption internationally. New Zealand has a very proud history of keeping Ministers out of those sorts of decisions. That goes back, I think, probably to 1912. We have developed a system whereby we keep Ministers out of that sort of decision making, and I think that is the right thing to do. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000398\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EI place on the record of the House that I went to the Minister and offered him a compromise. I said that we would support this legislation leaving in his power of veto over the decision of the authority to approve something. So he could block something that would otherwise have happened under this legislation in the late phase and say \u201CNo, that is wrong. That is unacceptable.\u201D, but he could not overturn a negative decision. He could not turn a negative decision into a positive decision, and, in the example I gave, allow for the demolition of a property that could not be demolished under the Resource Management Act. He chose not to do that. I think that was wrong. I think it is very sad that he chose to sacrifice a bipartisan approach to the legislation\u2014something that we wanted to do\u2014in order to retain that power for himself. I think that showed very poor judgment. It showed a poor understanding of the constitutional separations that have grown in New Zealand, which are important to the fabric of our society and to the avoidance of both corruption and the perception of corruption. I think that is breaking down, and it is very, very sad that this sort of event is one where it breaks down further. I say to the National Government that it might come to regret that in the future, because what it does is add to the perception of the Government not caring about matters that lead to perceived corruption in New Zealand. We should not have that as part of this legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224a25943b-cb3b-49c3-bd10-74316fae17f1\u0022 data-id=\u002227e201ec24c048ad87667ca480fb1d73\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000399\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a25943b-cb3b-49c3-bd10-74316fae17f1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002227e201ec24c048ad87667ca480fb1d73\u0022\u003EJACQUI DEAN (National\u2014Waitaki):\u003C/span\u003E I rise to speak in the third reading of the Rugby World Cup 2011 (Empowering) Bill. The member opposite, whose name I cannot recall, made a contribution. He talked about the possible power of the Minister for the Rugby World Cup to have a historic home demolished days before the Rugby World Cup. As fanciful a notion as that is, and as far away from reality as one could possibly get in the context of this argument, when I raised the question, very much an eleventh-hour objection, typically, I was just wondering. It is never good to think on one\u2019s feet. That is why we have select committees; to talk about issues like this. But I wonder whether the fact that the Historic Places Act has an effect on historic homes might limit the particular fantasy scenario that that member has promoted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000400\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002260f78d8e82c4405c8e3f79567b990499\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s not one of the Acts; it\u2019s excluded.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000401\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a25943b-cb3b-49c3-bd10-74316fae17f1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f1d5fd54b7bf427d8ca0b3f450e30dce\u0022\u003EJACQUI DEAN\u003C/span\u003E: It is, indeed, what the Act has said.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000402\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ae94eea7-ba5f-4303-bf71-49e708bc9888\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c17461008ac44575ba07d4c9b5982ebe\u0022\u003EJohn Hayes\u003C/span\u003E: No, you\u2019ve ducked that one.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000403\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a25943b-cb3b-49c3-bd10-74316fae17f1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022efa101efc29747a4adc813c74ab911cb\u0022\u003EJACQUI DEAN\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, ducked, and it is too late. I am afraid that the fantasy has been disproven, just like that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000404\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a25943b-cb3b-49c3-bd10-74316fae17f1\u0022\u003EIt is probably just as well that that fantasy scenario has now been disproven by that member across the House, because this bill has as its intention the smooth and proper running of the Rugby World Cup tournament in 2011. I have to say that with Sonny Bill Williams on the team now, I think we are going to do pretty well. Those passes the other night were something to behold. The whole of New Zealand is now excited by the prospect of the All Blacks turning out for a marvellous tournament, which will be supported by the provisions in this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000405\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a25943b-cb3b-49c3-bd10-74316fae17f1\u0022\u003EThere are just a couple of issues that have been raised. One of them is the Rugby World Cup liquor licensing provisions. If we have a look at what the bill does for liquor licensing, we see that it does not change the criteria for liquor licences. It does not make it easier to get a liquor licence. All it does is simply speed up the process, give the police some extra powers, and give extra considerations like having to have food available for purchase and having to supply free water. For the life of me I cannot understand why Labour had to have a conscience vote on this bill in the Committee of the whole House. Can anybody tell me why Labour had to have a conscience vote on liquor licensing?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000406\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229cd53a2f425040b796700487e2db1c39\u0022\u003EHon Members\u003C/span\u003E: They were having a coup.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000407\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a25943b-cb3b-49c3-bd10-74316fae17f1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227ce735474f22432fb950a3f6cc041be4\u0022\u003EJACQUI DEAN\u003C/span\u003E: Well, yes, I know. Some were for, some were against, and some abstained because they simply did not know. The rest of New Zealand is excited about the Rugby World Cup. This Government is excited about the provisions in this bill. Labour\u2014well, it simply does not know where it is. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022 data-id=\u0022785c0a10675b4401bea9b51c3b34c580\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000408\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022785c0a10675b4401bea9b51c3b34c580\u0022\u003ECHRIS HIPKINS (Labour\u2014Rimutaka):\u003C/span\u003E I am happy to take a call on the Rugby World Cup 2011 (Empowering) Bill, and, like my colleague Trevor Mallard, I rise more in sadness than in anger to say the Labour Party will oppose this legislation. Although I speak against the bill, most of my comments will be in favour of its provisions, because overall it is a good bill. The Government Administration Committee has done a very good job of working its way through a reasonably complex, although at the same time straightforward, bill. The Committee of the whole House debated quite extensively the provisions of the bill, and did so quite constructively for the most part, as well. The reason that I oppose the bill boils down to one issue: the extent to which the Minister for the Rugby World Cup, the Hon Murray McCully, would be given unbridled power to overturn decisions of the Rugby World Cup Authority, and not only to overturn a decision in a negative fashion\u2014in other words, to retain the status quo\u2014but also to overturn a decision in order to approve something that the authority has deemed would be inappropriate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000409\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003ENathan Guy, the junior Minister, spoke earlier on behalf of the senior Minister. On that note, I say that if that was his audition speech, he should not be clearing his diary for the Cabinet meeting on Monday. He talked about unelected officials, and said decisions should not be left to unelected officials but should be given to elected officials. I think that is totally the wrong approach. Where does he draw the line on that? I ask him that because a heck of a lot of decisions are currently taken by courts, judges, and various unelected panels on matters very, very similar to those addressed by this bill. If the Government\u2019s new rule of operation says all of these decisions should be taken by elected officials, it opens a whole can of worms. At some future date the Government may regret going down that road, if this sets a precedent for how it approaches future legislation. It would be very concerning if the Government said controversial decisions should now be taken by elected officials rather than there being the independence of decision making by the judiciary or by an independent panel. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000410\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003ETrevor Mallard pointed out that New Zealand is one of the least corrupt countries in the world. We constantly rank very well in our level of transparency, our openness, and in the quality of the decision making of our central government agencies. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000411\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ae94eea7-ba5f-4303-bf71-49e708bc9888\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002299018926d69e481b9de04896a14e151d\u0022\u003EJohn Hayes\u003C/span\u003E: Except under Labour.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000412\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c73f2755e0134ce8bcf0663a5ed91124\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Pansy Wong?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000413\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225471adfbab3e4afeb7557c58b590e2b1\u0022\u003ECHRIS HIPKINS\u003C/span\u003E: One could ask Pansy Wong. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000414\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222cc49ef835e04a5bb5c7114c2ee8b002\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Hayes is talking about Pansy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000415\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002269f66ee9d32c441da6248bf0a9a9b809\u0022\u003ECHRIS HIPKINS\u003C/span\u003E: That is right. One of the reasons is that in most cases there is a very clear arm\u2019s-length relationship between Ministers and the bureaucracy that administers things. In this case that arm\u2019s-length relationship is being seriously compromised by this legislation. All New Zealanders should be concerned about that, because it is a trend that we are increasingly seeing from this Government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000416\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EAll parties in the House were criticised for the Canterbury Earthquake Response and Recovery Act. The Labour Party voted in favour of that legislation, but this bill goes further than that Act. Orders in Council made under the Canterbury earthquake legislation go to the Regulations Review Committee, and there is a provision for those orders to be overturned in this House. There is no such provision in this bill for decisions that the Minister makes, so there are fewer safeguards. A similar power is being given to a Minister as was given in the case of the Canterbury earthquake legislation, but without the safeguard that we put into the Canterbury earthquake legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000417\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ae94eea7-ba5f-4303-bf71-49e708bc9888\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a351307224ef4c7ca1580cc571d3d62e\u0022\u003EJohn Hayes\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, but it has to go to more than one Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000418\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002221e9fb13d0e347578c4aef8640d9f6d8\u0022\u003ECHRIS HIPKINS\u003C/span\u003E: It does, but the Minister does not need to follow the advice of those other Ministers. The Minister has the ultimate power. The Minister gets a recommendation from the Rugby World Cup Authority and has to consult other Ministers, but then he can do whatever he likes. Murray McCully can still do whatever he likes, and this is not a Minister who, when it comes to meddling in administrative matters, has a particularly clear track record. We need only to go back to the last time he was in Government and look at the Tourism Board fiasco to find that he has a history of dabbling in things that he should not dabble in. So I have been very concerned about that provision.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000419\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ae94eea7-ba5f-4303-bf71-49e708bc9888\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022928498cda580436d8ada29c77fa86193\u0022\u003EJohn Hayes\u003C/span\u003E: He\u2019s learnt by his mistakes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000420\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002260ff663b8eae4f4e80b55e541c921084\u0022\u003ECHRIS HIPKINS\u003C/span\u003E: One can hope he has learnt from his mistakes. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000421\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EThe Rugby World Cup represents a really exciting opportunity for New Zealand, and it is disappointing to be an Opposition member who is speaking against this legislation, because I am very excited about the event coming to New Zealand next year. Right from the very beginning Labour has endeavoured\u2014as Trevor Mallard pointed out, making a bid to host the Rugby World Cup was first mooted under the tenure of the previous Labour Government\u2014to take a bipartisan approach, or a cross-party approach involving all of the parties, to ensure that there was a \u201CNew Zealand Incorporated\u201D approach to the hosting of the Rugby World Cup. We have worked very constructively, I think, with the new National Government since it was elected 2 years ago to make sure that this event will be successful for New Zealand. This will be the largest event that we have ever hosted, and it is important that we get it right. As Nathan Guy said in his speech\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000422\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267431f57-e958-4c83-b438-7da8061d479e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223d6a4f9e1937410a8ab31116bc8f595e\u0022\u003EPaul Quinn\u003C/span\u003E: Is it the largest event we have ever hosted?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000423\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002274f6f5659e054b94abd5674f05476cd8\u0022\u003ECHRIS HIPKINS\u003C/span\u003E: This will be the largest event that we have ever hosted in New Zealand. Nathan Guy said there is no opportunity for there to be a second chance. There is no such opportunity, which is one of the reasons that it is important to get the process aspects of this legislation right, and we have not done that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000424\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EI will put that issue aside for a moment and concentrate on why it is important that we get the hosting of the Rugby World Cup right. Potentially, 4 billion people around the world will be watching the event on television, and 70,000-odd visitors will be coming to New Zealand to take part in Rugby World Cup - related events. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000425\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022216e31ccef944d3ba624b7b61b9a8abc\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Some of those visitors will travel from Australia twice. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000426\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f0ff6a19e4ee40159801d79145bb16dc\u0022\u003ECHRIS HIPKINS\u003C/span\u003E: That is quite true. It will be a significant boost to the New Zealand economy and will generate $1.2 billion worth of economic activity. It will be on a scale that we have never seen here before, so it is really exciting for New Zealand. I know that the 4 million New Zealanders who live here will be 100 percent behind the event and will do everything they can to make sure it is an absolute success. The Government, of course, will do well out of it: an estimated $112 million - odd in extra tax revenue will be generated out of Rugby World Cup - related activities. So it is important that we get it right, and that is why this legislation is important, notwithstanding the reservations that I have just raised. We will be under tight time frames to make sure everything is in place. We will need to make sure that the Government can move quickly to remedy any issues that arise as we move closer to the Rugby World Cup. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000427\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EOverall, the provisions in this legislation are pretty sound. I will briefly canvass them. The liquor licensing provisions are very sensible; I have no problems with them. The point that Jacqui Dean made is one that I raised in the Committee stage. In my view, the legislation does not extend any of the powers of liquor licensing beyond those that would already be available. It simply truncates the process and speeds the decisions up a bit. That is one of the reasons why I have no qualms about supporting that. I am pleased about the provisions regarding gambling that the select committee agreed on. They will ensure that the opportunities for gambling are not extended under this legislation, because that was not the intention. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000428\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EI am pleased that we have worked through quite carefully the issues around how the Rugby World Cup Authority should be supported administratively. Having local authorities support the Rugby World Cup Authority administratively makes sense, first of all because it does not create a temporary bureaucracy that would be established and then disbanded after a short period of time, but also because it means the authority will have available to it all of the necessary expertise. In dealing with consenting issues and other local authority - related issues, having access to that quality of information, that expertise, and that knowledge of local areas will be really important for the Rugby World Cup Authority. So, overall, the provisions put in place for the administrative secretariat are the right things to do. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000429\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EI am very pleased with most of what this bill contains. I am very pleased that the Rugby World Cup will be hosted in New Zealand. I do not think I can afford to go to any of the matches myself, but, like the other 4 million Kiwis, I will certainly be watching on television and cheering the All Blacks along. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000430\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225ee58aa4fd124b1aa0d2cdc9b31c1d07\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: You can get a $35 ticket for Palmerston North.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000431\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a970661856734fe192684744ef3bebf2\u0022\u003ECHRIS HIPKINS\u003C/span\u003E: I am not sure whether I want to go to Palmerston North, even for the rugby. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022 data-id=\u00228ff3c0fa02174d46bb4c81009d2def46\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000432\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228ff3c0fa02174d46bb4c81009d2def46\u0022\u003EKEITH LOCKE (Green):\u003C/span\u003E The Green Party will also oppose the Rugby World Cup 2011 (Empowering) Bill. Like Labour speakers, we are very much in favour of the Rugby World Cup itself and hope that it will be a wonderful festival of rugby and an opportunity for New Zealand to showcase itself to the world and for those in every provincial town to mix with the teams playing games there. It will be something that enlivens our communities across the country, particularly in the pool games, and then the big games in Auckland. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000433\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThere is no excuse to override normal process under the Resource Management Act the way this bill does. We got the hosting rights to the Rugby World Cup back in 2005, and there has been plenty of time to go through all the proper processes. It is not as if this was an unknown event and that things would pop up that we had not expected in any large way. It is a good discipline to operate within the constraints of our existing law. We are having training efforts towards organising it: there was the Four Nations rugby league test, the one held at Eden Park 1\u00BD weeks ago. That was a test and, by and large, it went well. I was at the game and what happened there has been blown out of proportion. People got a bit carried away with Mexican waves. They could have been stopped at the beginning of the first Mexican wave. I was there, and in the first Mexican wave not much went up in the air. Once the wave had gone around three or four times and people got into the habit of it, more stuff went up in the air. The situation could have been handled very easily with a loudspeaker, as it was at the end of several Mexican waves. The idea that it was all a bunch of hoons is quite wrong. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000434\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EWe are on track to organising things right, but I worry about the way, in practice, that this bill will loosen up the liquor licensing, not tighten it up. We already have the concept of party central and people drinking like mad down on Queen\u2019s Wharf. When I went to the rugby league test, all the pubs were full to the gunwales with people preparing themselves for the game. That will continue in Kingsland, Mount Eden, and throughout Auckland. Unfortunately, I do not think that the extent of imbibing that takes place will be restricted by this bill. There will be a very competitive environment amongst people providing liquor to get just that bit longer hours under these emergency provisions and to be able to cram more people into their premises, etc. So I do not think the bill will lead to a reduction in alcohol consumption. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000435\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThen we have one of the major sponsors. There is a range of official sponsors, and the beer sponsor is Heineken, which will be going flat out to get people to drink beer, particularly its own brand. As I understand it, though it could change, Heineken will be selling branded cans. If those cans have a bit of beer in them when the Mexican wave starts it will be quite dangerous for those underneath the falling cans. I do not know whether the Minister for the Rugby World Cup will use his veto powers to constrain Heineken from distributing its beer in cans, but hopefully there will be some move on that between now and the 1 July date, and we can sort that out. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000436\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThere is no excuse. We know about liquor licences, and all the venues know how to apply for them. They can start applying for them now if they have not done that already. There is no reason why liquor licences cannot be sorted out without this emergency legislation, be it for a liquor licence at a venue or for one away from a venue, which this bill covers. When we talk about temporary adverse effects being allowed for under this bill, they will include more adverse effects of alcohol. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000437\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EHeineken is pushing its beer and promoting alcohol, and we have had it in other sports: there is Lion Red and rugby league, Steinlager and rugby, and all the rest. That will continue, I am sure. Even though the Law Commission is moving down the track of discouraging alcohol advertising, the major sports are reluctant to move away from alcohol advertising. So that will undercut any efforts in this bill to control excessive drunkenness that may occur around the Rugby World Cup. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000438\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThe report-back from the select committee also has a section on ambush marketing, which relates back to the Major Events Management Act passed a few years ago and which, in the Green Party\u2019s opinion, goes a bit too far in terms of protecting these major sponsors of the Rugby World Cup in all respects in quite a dictatorial way. Let us take Heineken, for example. I am not sure that Heineken will be putting forward an organic beer at the Rugby World Cup. I not sure that it will be, though I might be proven wrong and maybe between now and 1 July, when this bill comes into effect, it will start to realise that there is quite an appetite for organic beer in New Zealand and it will come out with a Heineken organic beer brand. But I can see problems arising. We saw problems arising at the Football World Cup in South Africa where people were not even allowed to wear orange dresses because they had a tiny tag on them advertising a competitor brand to the official brand of that world cup. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000439\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003ESo I can see that if the Green Party has a little stall, perhaps outside my place\u2014I live close to the Eden Park venue\u2014selling a green beer, the organic variety, I will get hustled away for breaking this ambush marketing legislation by selling much more healthy organic beer. I can see problems along that line. Under the Major Events Management Act the ban on branding and all the rest of the restrictions on so-called ambush marketing\u2014selling products that are a little different from the multinational brands, like organic beer\u2014applies for 5 kilometres along some of the access routes to the venues, so I can see problems developing there. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000440\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThe speaker for National qualified the ministerial veto by saying that the Minister will have to consult with a couple of other Ministers, but I do not think that having to consult with a couple of other Ministers will hold Murray McCully, or whoever it is, back very much. He will be the dictator in this respect and that is one of the key reasons why the Green Party is against this bill. Trevor Mallard was right to look at this bill against the background of the Canterbury earthquake legislation, which, he said, when looking back on it leaves some questions. There has been a very significant reaction to the Canterbury earthquake legislation\u2014the cancelling of a whole realm of our legislation and allowing Orders in Council to override all kinds of legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000441\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EAt the time, the Green Party moved about seven amendments along the lines of the criticisms later advanced by the Law Society, all sorts of law professors, and the like. We hope that that earthquake legislation, given that there has been quite a bit of progress in terms of rectifying the situation in Canterbury, can be ended as soon as possible. But it should warn us in terms of the public reaction to that legislation, particularly from the legal profession, not to proceed down another course that gives big ministerial veto powers, as is the case in this particular bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EWe hope that the Rugby World Cup goes very well and that there will not be too many streakers put in jail for 3 months, which is a provision under the Major Events Management Act. The two pieces of legislation together, the Major Events Management Act and this Rugby World Cup 2011 (Empowering) Bill, create the problem of a too dictatorial approach, much of it at the behest of international brands and not in terms of what will make this Rugby World Cup click as a really authentic event that everyone gets involved in, which is what we very sincerely hope will happen.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022 data-id=\u0022bb152ff12a0c4b639648bc6c937793ed\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000443\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bb152ff12a0c4b639648bc6c937793ed\u0022\u003ERAHUI KATENE (M\u0101ori Party\u2014Te Tai Tonga):\u003C/span\u003E It is a pleasure to rise to speak on the Rugby World Cup 2011 (Empowering) Bill. The bill establishes a Rugby World Cup Authority to enable applications for activities or facilities necessary for the proper conduct of the forthcoming Rugby World Cup to be determined efficiently. In doing so, the intention is honourable and commendable. It is designed to support the smooth and expedient administration of Rugby World Cup activities, and that in itself is great.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000444\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003EI acknowledge the initiative taken last week by our co-leader and the Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs, the Hon Dr Pita Sharples, in launching the M\u0101ori artwork that will feature on official Rugby World Cup 2011 merchandise next year. It was a great honour to host the Minister for the Rugby World Cup and the collective of M\u0101ori professional designers responsible for the collection of 11 designs at our marae, Takap\u016Bw\u0101hia, in Porirua. I really encourage members to look into the work of the six young M\u0101ori artists, five of whom are from Ng\u0101 Aho Inc. They will achieve international recognition, I believe, for the Rugby World Cup M\u0101ori Art Programme derived from their talents. I want to reiterate some comments the Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs made at the hui. He said: \u201CThe Rugby World Cup is not just about the rugby. It is also about the economic and commercial benefits to our country and our people, and that is the kaupapa of today\u2019s celebration.\u201D In fact, it is not just rugby that will be the winner on the day. That is a very important statement, a statement that I believe to be critical to the successful implementation of this bill. The amazing environment at Takap\u016Bw\u0101hia last week seemed to me to be an utter contrast to some of the issues we have raised in previous readings of this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000445\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003EThe bill speeds up the consenting process for Rugby World Cup - related facilities and activities, and allows for special Rugby World Cup liquor licences. That has always been an issue for us and for the general public. Our greatest concern is that the much-lauded new flexibility might lend itself to an increase in beer tents for partygoers, or a relaxed environment that will entice excessive alcohol-induced behaviours from foreign tour parties coming to support their team, not to mention our own hooligans. We have been keen to ensure appropriate management to avoid public disturbances or mass arrests from the specific liquor-licensing requirements, but I raise the concern that we might be placing too much emphasis on liquor licensing and allowing people the opportunity to become inebriated while watching the rugby.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000446\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003E For a significant sector of our population, simply getting to the game itself will be an issue. We have spoken about the need for the Rugby World Cup to be accessible and leave New Zealand with a legacy of accessible infrastructure for the growing access tourism market. For those members who are not up with the jargon, \u201Caccess tourism\u201D is tourism, travel, and hospitality that takes into account the access needs of people with permanent or temporary disabilities, older people, and anyone else who needs improved access, such as parents with prams. I refer to our partners across the ditch who have led the way in access tourism. Australia left a legacy of an accessible environment after it hosted the Sydney Olympics in 2000. Australia now has the ability to cater for the growing access tourism market, which is estimated to be worth about A$4.8 billion a year. The access tourism market in New Zealand is estimated to be worth NZ$1 billion a year. Access tourism presents a major economic opportunity and is growing in popularity in many parts of the world because of increasing numbers of post - World War II baby boomers who wish to travel and are ageing, and are therefore experiencing a degree of disability.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000447\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003EAn accessible event needs to be accessible at every point of the journey. It starts with being able to confidently book online in the knowledge that the details on accessibility are reliable and consistent. Poor information acts as a barrier and discourages people with access needs from travelling. Every aspect of transport and accommodation, as well as the event itself, needs to be accessible. Finally, the opportunity exists with the Rugby World Cup to create an accessible environment for all to enjoy a great game of rugby. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000448\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003EThe Rugby World Cup creates an opportunity for indigenous people and commercial entities to work together to produce authentic and exclusive indigenous products that can market our nation to the globe. M\u0101ori have a strong history of supporting and participating in rugby.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000449\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003EThe M\u0101ori Party has concerns that alcohol is already playing too prominent a role in the World Cup, and we are concerned that the Minister for the Rugby World Cup has too much power under the bill, but we will support the bill at its third reading. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022 data-id=\u002297884cad955d450d95543761c1e032c0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000450\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002297884cad955d450d95543761c1e032c0\u0022\u003EPHIL TWYFORD (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E It is well established now that Labour would be supporting and voting for the Rugby World Cup 2011 (Empowering) Bill were it not for the inclusion of Part 4, which grants to the Minister for the Rugby World Cup what are, in our view, excessive and unchecked powers to override the advice and recommendations of the Rugby World Cup Authority. We have said all the way through the process that we support all of the other parts, and that the arrangements put in place to establish, staff, resource, and govern the Rugby World Cup Authority, along with the requirements in the bill for highly qualified and eminent personnel to make decisions on the issuing of resource consents and other approvals, are entirely satisfactory. As my colleague Chris Hipkins said, there was a good and largely non-partisan discussion at the select committee to improve this bill and iron out some of the problems. A number of improvements have been made and we would be supporting this legislation were it not for the continued presence of Part 4, which gives the Minister, the Hon Murray McCully, what we think are excessive and unjustified powers to override the advice of the officials on the authority. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000451\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EThe Hon Trevor Mallard has described the efforts to which Labour has gone to propose a compromise. An amendment was put on the Table that would have made the system provided by this bill more democratic, and it would have meant that Labour would be happy to support the legislation. Mr Mallard also made the point that we have conventions of accountable Government that are designed to keep Ministers at arm\u2019s length and to ensure that Ministers are not making specific decisions that would affect, for example, the property rights of others. There is plenty of ministerial conduct that we can see in the career of the Hon Murray McCully that provides ample justification for that convention. We can go back to the Tourism Board affair in the late 1990s, when that member of this House set up two rival boards to the Tourism Board to provide him with advice, because he did not want to listen to the advice of the Tourism Board, and $900,000 was paid in hush money to people who were forced off the board because they were so unhappy with that state of affairs. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000452\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EThere are plenty of other examples, including the ramming through of the restructuring of NZAID last year, against the advice of Treasury and other officials. The Minister did not want to listen to officials, who provided reasoned, substantiated advice, and he rammed those changes through. More recently we saw the appointment, without tender\u2014which is highly unusual for a contract under foreign affairs\u2014with a $78,000 contract, of the former National MP Mark Blumsky. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000453\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f46ca880c07c44ad8d26a38b0d2b4e20\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Well, we know what it was. It was part of a 90-day arrangement for Mark in Niue. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000454\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022753c573b2c654b7bb4d6874d8675262a\u0022\u003EPHIL TWYFORD\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, that is what it was\u2014OK. That sort of unorthodox behaviour is par for the course for that Minister. We would be opposing Part 4 of this bill regardless, but the fact that the Minister for the Rugby World Cup is Murray McCully is even more cause for this House to stop and think about what it is doing. That Minister routinely ignores the advice of his officials and, I am told, routinely abuses officials. He ignores their advice and manipulates the normal processes until he gets what he wants. That is precisely the reason that this bill should not be giving those kinds of unchecked powers to the Minister in this case, because when this Minister has an agenda, he is willing to routinely ignore the advice of officials until he gets what he wants. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000455\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EI understand he has contracted two officials from the private sector to provide an independent source of advice, replacing the advice that he received from senior Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade officials. He did not like the advice he had from those officials, so what has he done? He has gone out and hand-picked the advice from people he wants, from outside the Public Service, to give him the advice. That is exactly the kind of behaviour we should be trying to guard against, because Murray McCully is a meddler and a manipulator and he will not respect the conventions of accountable Government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000456\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EIt emerged last week that an $8 million contract for the opening ceremony of the Rugby World Cup is being awarded to an Australian company, and that ignores the fantastic track record of our creative arts in this country. That contract is being awarded to an Australian company, which will have the job of staging the opening ceremony of the Rugby World Cup. The Rugby World Cup will have a television audience of approximately 4 billion people, I understand, and this is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to showcase New Zealand\u2019s creativity, and to showcase New Zealand to the world. But what is this Minister doing? He is handing that contract to the Australians. I ask why that Minister would do that. Rahui Katene said that in order to reap the great benefit of the Rugby World Cup, we need to ensure New Zealand gets the economic benefit of this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. What is this Minister doing? He is handing that opportunity over to the Australians, and my information is that Murray McCully\u2019s fingerprints are all over that decision.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000457\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003E We heard from Martin Snedden last week that a decision had not been made and that New Zealand companies would be able to implement some of those activities, but actually it is very clear, because of the lack of any watertight denial, that that decision has been made. Murray McCully\u2019s fingerprints are all over it, and if that is the standard of decision making that we can expect for the rest of this issue, then there should be a lot to worry about, and the New Zealand public should be very concerned. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000458\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003ETrevor Mallard talked about keeping Ministers at arm\u2019s length, and I think I have given the House a catalogue of reasons why the Hon Murray McCully should be kept at arm\u2019s length from the sorts of decisions that could be made in the granting of consents. Mr Mallard talked about the hypothetical scenario in which a building\u2014someone\u2019s house, for example\u2014could be a heritage building and could face the possibility of being knocked down. The Rugby World Cup Authority, in this scenario, could decide not to do that, because it would not think that it was a reasonable thing to do, and the Minister, under this bill, would have the power to ignore the advice of the authority. We on this side of the House think that that is unacceptable. It unnecessarily discards the conventions of accountable Government; and Murray McCully, by his own parliamentary career, has demonstrated time and time again\u2014over a couple of decades\u2014why the conventions of accountable Government are there. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000459\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EIn this case those conventions are being thrown away unnecessarily, and that is why Labour members simply cannot vote for this bill. We have argued that point from the beginning of the debate, right through to the closing stages. We have offered compromises, and we have put an amendment on the table that would have solved the problem, and this Government has just refused to accept it. As my colleague said, we will be voting against this bill more in sorrow than in anger, because we accept that the Rugby World Cup is a fantastic event that New Zealand is looking forward to, and that it offers huge opportunity for New Zealand in terms of economic benefit and of the celebration of the event itself. It is a shame that the debate had to end with this legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022ae94eea7-ba5f-4303-bf71-49e708bc9888\u0022 data-id=\u0022cdaeac401c9d415ba8780cbcc89e0cfb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000460\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ae94eea7-ba5f-4303-bf71-49e708bc9888\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022cdaeac401c9d415ba8780cbcc89e0cfb\u0022\u003EJOHN HAYES (National\u2014Wairarapa):\u003C/span\u003E I say to the people of Auckland that that was a list MP looking for a seat. That was a list MP who has failed to get a seat, and he is criticising a Minister of long standing who has been able to get a seat and win election after election. I say to the people of Auckland and also to the people of Wainui\u014Dmata, Days Bay, P\u0113tone, Lower Hutt, and Upper Hutt that their member of Parliament got up in this House this afternoon and wrongly opposed this Rugby World Cup 2011 (Empowering) Bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000461\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ae94eea7-ba5f-4303-bf71-49e708bc9888\u0022\u003EThe Rugby World Cup will be the greatest event that New Zealand has ever seen. There will be 85,000 visitors coming here and, as our Labour colleagues have pointed out, there will be a television audience of about 4 billion people watching it. This is the opportunity to showcase New Zealand to the world as a great place to live and to do business. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000462\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ae94eea7-ba5f-4303-bf71-49e708bc9888\u0022\u003EThis afternoon in the House various Opposition speakers have asserted that a Minister could override any decision of the Rugby World Cup Authority. That is not correct.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000463\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022119e947438cc4462b7e4f8bb724c84ac\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s not true! The member\u2019s reading out the Minister\u2019s speech!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000464\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ae94eea7-ba5f-4303-bf71-49e708bc9888\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222beccee8b05a4949a4cd5e73f7c1bb24\u0022\u003EJOHN HAYES\u003C/span\u003E: That is not correct, \u201CMr Duck\u201D; no, it is not true. The Minister, following consultation with at least two other Ministers\u2014two other Ministers\u2014can make a final decision on only the most urgent application, and then only in the period from 1 July 2011 until the end of the tournament. We hope the Minister will not be called on to exercise that power but, given its nature, it is entirely appropriate for that power to be exercised by a democratically accountable Minister. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022 data-id=\u00227a589f2d57c0492e83e189bc0c1f0674\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000465\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227a589f2d57c0492e83e189bc0c1f0674\u0022\u003EDAVID SHEARER (Labour\u2014Mt Albert):\u003C/span\u003E I do not agree with the point made by the previous speaker, John Hayes. I agree with my colleague Phil Twyford, who outlined the very reasons we are opposed to the Rugby World Cup 2011 (Empowering) Bill. Labour members have been very straightforward, have taken this matter right up front, and have made constructive comments and constructive interventions to enable this bill to go through, but those have been ignored.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000466\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003EThe previous speaker was right in saying that this tournament is important to New Zealand. It will bring enormous amounts of attention to New Zealand. It will be watched by an estimated 4 billion people, which I think is a gross overestimation myself, but, nevertheless, it will be watched by a large number of people throughout the world, and it will bring in 70,000, 80,000, or 90,000 people to watch the event, as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000467\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003EThis legislation would have gone through without concern, but there are problems in Part 4. I will speak to Part 4, but first I will address some of the concerns I have in relation to Part 5. Part 5 of the bill concerns the accelerated liquor licensing ability. It gives only 5 days for people to object to an application for a liquor licence and to be heard by the Rugby World Cup Authority. That provision is obviously a relaxation of the situation right now.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003ESitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000469\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228bbd07e70def4ff882472bb1c539c055\u0022\u003EDAVID SHEARER\u003C/span\u003E: I am feeling even more dulcet after dinner, so I will up the dulcet scale. Before the dinner break, I was talking about the licensing regulations in Part 5. In the Committee stage, we talked about the difficulties in alcohol licensing, and particularly the problems that emerged after the Eden Park fiasco. Eden Park is in my electorate. I have spoken to a huge number of people in my electorate who are concerned about a repeat performance of that night. There were bottles thrown, there were scuffles, there was fighting, and there was drinking on the streets. People certainly do not want\u2014and they do not deserve\u2014a more liberal climate in which alcohol can be served and sold even more easily. It is for that reason that I voted\u2014on this side of the House we had a conscience vote\u2014against Part 5.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000470\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003EI will say a couple of words on the key areas that I disliked about this part. It liberalises the ability to sell alcohol in and around Eden Park. It impacts on the local residents. It means that if people do not like alcohol being sold, they have only 5 days to protest against it. This bill basically contracts the period that is obligated under the Sale of Liquor Act 1989. With all the preparations that are going on around the development of the Rugby World Cup, it seems to be an extraordinarily ad hoc thing to do, without too much planning, to shorten a well-received and well-acknowledged process of approving liquor licences so that alcohol can be sold more easily. The police definitely opposed this measure originally. I think there were some discussions behind closed doors that made them ultimately change their mind. St John Ambulance came out against it and I believe that it was right to. So I ask why we really need to make this process more liberal when we have an authority, a regulating process, and planning that has been ongoing for many, many months.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000471\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003EOne thing that I think exemplifies the fears that residents around Eden Park have been feeling\u2014this could also be anywhere else; it could be in the other areas where the Rugby World Cup games will be played\u2014is the fact that 12 years ago, in 1998, a regulation forbade holding two games of rugby on the same day at Eden Park. The regulation also restricted how many cricket games could be played in that time as well. The real reason for that law was that two games of rugby with an excitable crowd drinking heavily might mean that there would be trouble. Last year, in 2009, without notification, that law was changed by the council. So the council has allowed for two games of rugby\u2014or rugby league, as it was a couple of weeks ago\u2014to be held at Eden Park in one day without any reference to the residents. The residents asked how that regulation could be revoked without their having any say or any input when, in 1998, the Environment Court had decided that that was an unwise thing to do. The answer is that the decision was made without due process, it was taken behind closed doors, and it was taken for all the wrong reasons, without consultation with the local people. That is the very reason today that I do not agree with Part 5. This part shortens the period during which people can protest and object to applications for liquor licences. It will mean that people have a more liberalised alcohol environment, there is greater potential for trouble, and there is less ability to protest against it. So when residents reflect on the situation in 1998, the situation today, and the process by which it has changed, they will say that they do not want processes like that to be put back into legislation so that the Sale of Liquor Act 1989 can be overridden. Those residents want to have a robust system by which they are able to protest against alcohol being sold in their area.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000472\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003EThe last part that I want to talk to is Part 4. The reason that Labour is opposing this legislation has nothing to do with trying to help the passage of the bill through Parliament, and it has nothing to do with any sort of reticence that Labour might have about supporting the Rugby World Cup. Indeed, as many of our speakers have said, it was Labour who had the aspiration, which is a word that National likes to use, to bring the Rugby World Cup back to New Zealand. The real reason for our opposition to this bill is that it gives Minister McCully, in consultation\u2014although we are not quite sure exactly what that consultation might be; it might be a phone call, a chat in the aisles, who knows\u2014the ability to override legislation and enact policies that the established Rugby World Cup Authority, which is set up under this bill, may have ruled against. We are setting up an authority with all the right types of safeguards and with the tight seniority that we need, yet we are giving the Minister the ability to override decisions that the authority might make. And that ability is in question when we think back to the experiences we saw in Mount Eden and the Sandringham area around Eden Park that we want to guard against happening once again.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000473\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003EIn conclusion, we support very much the need for facilitating legislation to make this Rugby World Cup go well, be a success, bring in visitors, and advertise New Zealand. We want the Rugby World Cup to be a standard bearer event for New Zealand so that people can really see something that brings out the best in New Zealand. But I think we are going too far, in my opinion, with Part 4, which Labour opposes en masse.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226dc89bbf-c2ef-45c9-89e4-d2b5952d8d16\u0022 data-id=\u00229308cfec8a774af6b0981eca0195dc67\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000474\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226dc89bbf-c2ef-45c9-89e4-d2b5952d8d16\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229308cfec8a774af6b0981eca0195dc67\u0022\u003EKANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI (National):\u003C/span\u003E We are on the verge of passing the Rugby World Cup 2011 (Empowering) Bill, on the completion of its third reading. This bill will provide temporary legislation to enable the timely grant of consents and regulatory approvals if they are required during the Rugby World Cup. The Rugby World Cup Authority will be established, which will have the power to grant approvals for activities and events related to the Rugby World Cup. The bill will also establish the Rugby World Cup liquor licensing scheme. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000475\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226dc89bbf-c2ef-45c9-89e4-d2b5952d8d16\u0022\u003EIt is very important for New Zealand to be able to host the Rugby World Cup successfully, as it will attract more than 80,000 rugby fans from overseas who will see New Zealand as an opportunity for investment in their businesses. This bill is a step forward towards hosting the Rugby World Cup successfully. The tournament will be held for 6 weeks in different destinations across New Zealand, and it will not only attract rugby fans from overseas but also encourage tens of thousands of Kiwi rugby fans to travel around our country to view the matches. That will generate business not only in the local economy but also for local hotels, motels, restaurants, bars, and retail outlets. The success of this event will bring tourists to New Zealand in the future, and show that a nation of 4 million people can host an event of this scale.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000476\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226dc89bbf-c2ef-45c9-89e4-d2b5952d8d16\u0022\u003ESome speakers have highlighted a clause that suggests that the Minister will override any decision by the Rugby World Cup Authority. That is not correct. The Minister can make an urgent decision on an urgent application in consultation with at least two other Ministers, and only during the period from 1 July 2011 until the conclusion of the tournament. That provision will be exercised only in the case of urgency. The regulatory approval process will be able to cater for extraordinary requirements, due to the long time required for the present approval process. It is important to mention that this bill will support existing regulatory requirements, and will provide only a faster alternative to the current process.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000477\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226dc89bbf-c2ef-45c9-89e4-d2b5952d8d16\u0022\u003EThe Rugby World Cup will not make it easier to obtain liquor licences; it will simply fast track the process to grant a licence. There will be an important provision in granting a licence to ensure that food is served during the period of opening hours, and that free water is available to guests\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000478\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002248f0cb70ceb94c64b3f38707853240b5\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Dr The Rt Hon Speaker Smith has made some comments about reading speeches in the House and proposals to change that. I know there is some debate about that, but when a speech is read for the second time in the House, as is occurring now with a member rereading the third reading speech that has already been given by the Minister, I think that goes beyond what is appropriate in Parliament. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000479\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b79577970a7c466b909459e99df8f7dc\u0022\u003EHon Gerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: Perhaps the member raising the point of order is making a good point. If we are to be hard on repetition, then I hope we will be hard on repetition throughout the considerable Committee stages we will be dealing with for the rest of this day.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000480\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002250297939fc73412cb34bf58555ce84a7\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: I look forward to the day when I have enlivened, uplifting, visionary speeches from every member of this House, but I am afraid that is not going to happen overnight. The point the member makes about reading a speech has been made in this House before; the House has changed the Standing Orders to enable members to read speeches. If the member does not like that, I suggest that he take the matter to the Standing Orders Committee and have that right taken away.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000481\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226dc89bbf-c2ef-45c9-89e4-d2b5952d8d16\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d3712adb57164f11b8ca83def5d1e6c1\u0022\u003EKANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI\u003C/span\u003E: All of the processes conferred on the Rugby World Cup Authority and the Minister will terminate at the end of the tournament. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000482\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226dc89bbf-c2ef-45c9-89e4-d2b5952d8d16\u0022\u003EI wish good luck to the Rugby World Cup Authority, and to the All Blacks. I hope they win the tournament and make us proud. I thank all the officials who have assisted us during the select committee process to bring this bill to the House. I commend the Rugby World Cup 2011 (Empowering) Bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022 data-id=\u00220446cf0e15fc4900b6cb7d90730ca345\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000483\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220446cf0e15fc4900b6cb7d90730ca345\u0022\u003ECHRIS TREMAIN (National\u2014Napier):\u003C/span\u003E The words of Te Rauparaha\u2019s haka will ring loud on 9 September 2011:\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000484\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003EKa mate, ka mate! Ka ora! Ka ora!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000485\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003EKa mate! Ka mate! Ka ora! Ka ora!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003ET\u0113nei te tangata p\u016Bhuruhuru, n\u0101na nei i tiki mai whakawhiti te r\u0101. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000487\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003E\u0100, upane! Ka upane! Upane, kaupane, whiti te r\u0101. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000488\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003E[It is death, it is death! It is life! It is life!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000489\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003EIt is death! It is death! It is life! It is life!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000490\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003EThis is the man, the hairy man who fetched up the sun and caused it to shine.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000491\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003EStep upward! Step upward! Step upward, step upward, the sun shines.] \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000492\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003EThese words will be the start of the Rugby World Cup on 9 September, with a game between the All Blacks and Tonga. It will be game on, here in New Zealand. Most of New Zealand will collectively sit to watch this game, sending the wishes of a nation on to the field with the All Blacks\u2019 starting 15. It is a day that has been long in the making, and one that this bill, the Rugby World Cup 2011 (Empowering) Bill, brings a step closer. With this bill we wish the All Blacks well in their pursuit of glory and a second Rugby World Cup victory.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000493\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003EAlthough a victory is important to us as locals, even more important is successfully hosting the Rugby World Cup. A successful event is vitally important to growing our global brand as a nation, to bring admiration of this country and the business we can do with that. The event works in closely with the \u201C100% Pure New Zealand\u201D brand, and mixes our strong environmental brand with an ability to be successful with people in business at the same time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000494\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003EJust last week the Prime Minister was overseas negotiating yet another trade opportunity for our exporters. The free-trade agreement agenda means that at the moment New Zealand is second to no other nation on the globe, which provides our exporters with huge opportunities. On the back of that, we will be hosting the third-largest sporting event in the world, proving that we can mix it not only in the heavyweight fights of global trade but also in the heavyweight fights of global sports events. Many exporters will be able to host clients during the Rugby World Cup, and utilise the opportunity to sell New Zealand products to the world.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000495\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003EI am confident that this time next year the Government\u2019s clear plan for growth will be paying dividends and driving this economy to new heights. The tax package will be bedded in, national standards will be through to their third reports, fibre will be rolling out around the country, and unemployment will be trending down. There will be significant investment in research, science, and technology, and we will certainly be making progress towards reducing the deficit this country faces.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000496\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003EIn Hawke\u2019s Bay we are very much looking forward to hosting the Canadian team, together with all its supporters. We are rugby mad in the Bay and, despite not taking our traditional place in the top four of New Zealand rugby this year, we can put that disappointment behind us for the time being to focus on the tournament. We have two games: France v Canada on 18 September, and Canada v Japan on 27 September. The province is gearing up to be a key contributor to \u201Cthe stadium of 4 million\u201D. It is going to be awesome, and this bill takes us closer to the tournament by allowing a streamlining of Government processes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000497\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003EI will close with an All Black memory. It is poignant that on the passing of the Rugby World Cup 2011 (Empowering) Bill, I recall an All Black memory of my own family from the Athletic Park test match in 1961. Many members will recall that test, when the All Blacks sneaked home in a 5-3 nail-biter.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000498\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022197d9da15e2c46389212cd8da938f063\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Which one?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000499\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002241ed5f0491bc4b1cb26e799f33fa1054\u0022\u003ECHRIS TREMAIN\u003C/span\u003E: The 1961 test match. Members will recall an 80 miles-per-hour gale that whipped off the Southern Ocean and straight down Athletic Park. With 15 minutes to play, the game tied at nil-all, a try finally came, not to New Zealand but to France. A pass from Connor had missed Wolfe 30 yards from the French line, and before Wolfe could recover the loose ball Pique had grabbed it and was making upfield. Bearing left he drew McKay infield before tossing a pass to the now unmarked Dupuy, who bolted the last 40 yards to the line, scoring 8 yards in from the left corner. Albaladejo failed with the almost impossible task of converting it into the teeth of the gale. From the restart McKay narrowly missed scoring, but from a scrum on the French line Lacroix passed down to Lacaze to clear. The fullback\u2019s kick was charged down by Tremain, who fell on the ball 10 yards in from the corner. Don Clarke took the conversion attempt back to the 25, and kicked almost parallel to the goal line for the wind to catch the ball and miraculously carry it over the bar to give New Zealand the lead, and to cruelly dash the French hopes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000500\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002211d3a4f7025342f4bd343d3122cfb747\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s good to know that one Tremain had talent.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000501\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223f3e69dafb92470494b71b534460f74f\u0022\u003ECHRIS TREMAIN\u003C/span\u003E: Ha, ha! That is fair. Although the final of the Rugby World Cup will not be played at Athletic Park in 2011, there is every chance that the All Blacks will go full circle to play the French in a final at Eden Park. I trust that the final will not be as nail-biting as was the 1961 test at Athletic Park. If it is, I am confident that our team can bring home the cup. Bring it on!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022 data-id=\u0022b11628d252274219891ef83dfb60232a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000502\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b11628d252274219891ef83dfb60232a\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I rise to take a call on the third reading of the Rugby World Cup 2011 (Empowering) Bill somewhat unexpectedly. I was so entranced by the Keith Quinn - like quality of the commentary from the senior Government whip\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227891e1617905441eb892c0e3cf989cd4\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Come on, Keith is my constituent. Don\u2019t insult Keith like that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000504\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224acbb17db4184d2f8a29b139cf87f5ac\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES\u003C/span\u003E: Does the member think he was less Keith Quinn, more Murray Mexted? Is that what the member is saying? I think it was a great tribute to the 50 Years of New Zealand Television programmes that were screened earlier in the year that the member had such instant recall of that particular game in 1961. It had a big impact on him 49 years ago. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000505\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EAlthough we are all very keen to be supportive of the Rugby World Cup and to make sure that it goes smoothly, the truth is that this legislation is not needed for the success of that tournament next year. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000506\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eb479c7232d146bdbf7558ec44395304\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Not all of it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000507\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223c4bcf87fa8a4ace8e4dc0cba0e8b2da\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES\u003C/span\u003E: The parts opposed by the Labour Opposition are not needed. That is the truth.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000508\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ba3ff0d22ed34060b4ea33d230c084b5\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s right\u2014Part 4 is definitely not needed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000509\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f07fcc63f16b46dbb6de3d26b6877f6f\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES\u003C/span\u003E: Part 4 is the part that we have struck our opposition to. The member opposite, Chris Tremain, was full of praise for trade deals, which is a bipartisan matter where the current Government is able to pick up the work of the previous Government, and it is doing a fine job in that respect.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000510\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EIt is a testimony to the failure of the negotiation skills of the Minister for the Rugby World Cup, Mr McCully, that, firstly, this bill has taken so long to go through Parliament and, secondly, it is not passing through Parliament with unanimous support. This should be the sort of legislation that all parties across the House want to agree on. I do not know of anybody in Parliament who does not want the Rugby World Cup 2011 to be a fantastic success and an amazing event for our country\u2014both the staging of the competition and, of course, the result in the final game. We all have a very strong view on that. The inability of the Minister for the Rugby World Cup to simply get an agreement on a bill like this bodes very, very badly for the organisation and planning of the wider tournament from a governance perspective in 2011. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000511\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EThe Associate Minister for the Rugby World Cup\u2014because, of course, in New Zealand we must have two Ministers responsible for such a tournament\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000512\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022211104e7a584450487650d48a1718867\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I agree. With McCully as the Minister, he needs a hand-holder.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000513\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e12ee240cdb24b7282c122723c6c5b40\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES\u003C/span\u003E: When Murray McCully was given the primary portfolio, it necessitated the appointment of an associate in the form of the Hon Gerry Brownlee, who has really brought the grunt to that portfolio. He could probably have intervened and worked with other parties, which he is very good at doing, to ensure that Part 4 was amended in a way that had parliamentary support. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000514\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221387364fce124ca287ce4a735c131f0b\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: He could have propped him up.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000515\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223b74d70e6fa4401992f938f0bd1d7f42\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES\u003C/span\u003E: He would be the ultimate prop in that respect, if he could support Mr McCully. But for reasons beyond all of us, Mr McCully has never been good at doing that. Mr McCully\u2019s consistent strength is to not only divide the opposition but also divide his own colleagues. There is a consistency in his form and in his play. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000516\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EThe Labour Opposition is saying that the aspect in Part 4 that refers to the liquor licensing provisions of the bill confers on the Minister far too much power and there is far too little oversight. The Hon Trevor Mallard, the former holder of the Rugby World Cup portfolio in the days when it did not require two Ministers but just one, had the opportunity to put forward some amendments\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000517\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cb10b5c0a2894a12bd84173eab8d04b1\u0022\u003EHon Gerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: He had Mr Cosgrove.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000518\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224b936313425745d0ba6949b4625e44f5\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Cosgrove was the subsequent Minister in that portfolio. He was a stand-alone Minister as well. It was not until the change of Government, when we were going to shift officers from the back line to the front line\u2014almost literally, I suspect\u2014that we saw we had to double the number of politicians responsible for the Rugby World Cup. This is the result. This third reading tonight is the result of two Ministers\u2019 work in trying to unite Parliament, and they have failed to do so. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000519\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EMr Mallard\u2019s amendment would have put some worthy oversight around the provisions. We are now passing into law a bill that states that when an independent authority makes a decision, that decision can be overturned by a Minister without any reference to any other authority and without any parliamentary oversight whatsoever. People know that there has been criticism of this House for its unanimous vote to confer powers on the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery. People were concerned that there was not enough oversight in that legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000520\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bdbcaf5dac064efaa295f2d999a3f17e\u0022\u003ECharles Chauvel\u003C/span\u003E: No, he\u2019s been very responsible.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000521\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229818a077774c4bdda30c0f2efffcaa1b\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES\u003C/span\u003E: A lot of parliamentary safeguards have actually been built into that law in response to some of that criticism, which all parties were cognisant of. My colleague Charles Chauvel asserts that Minister Brownlee has been very responsible in his use of that legislation. I think the consultation has been good. But in this legislation there are less safeguards for the public and there is less parliamentary oversight than there are\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000522\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022aec2919a4ec2487d8372d5a5558f6a67\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Fewer safeguards.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000523\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222817c68cad9445f59eca366e57e5e11b\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES\u003C/span\u003E: Fewer safeguards, I am told by the shadow Minister of Education, exist in this legislation than in the Canterbury earthquake legislation. That legislation was written in a hurry in response to certain events in our country for a recovery effort that all of us wanted to see made without hindrance or delay. There was a rationale for that legislation. For this legislation there is no reason why so much power should be given to a Minister. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000524\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EOne of the things we have been arguing very strongly is that this move has to be based on principles. There is a lot of pressure on the country next year to make sure that this event is well organised. We want it to be. Everyone wants it to be a success. Our fear this time, in addition to our perennial 4-yearly fear that we will not uplift the cup, is that the tournaments\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000525\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225ad786f1becc4d65a42a6a520aa9645d\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Four-yearly is not perennial.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000526\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022972a779abd2244dca76fde63300cc12a\u0022\u003ECharles Chauvel\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s quadrennial.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000527\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022398cabaf9c354387ae3c510ce4987bf8\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES\u003C/span\u003E: Quadrennial\u2014I am sorry; I am not up with this street lingo of \u201Cquadrennial\u201D that is all the rave at the Wainui\u014Dmata Shopping Centre when the member is doing his constituency work.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000528\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a55565cb9d0b4ce5b150df0b491c5b0d\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: No, well, I\u2019m not a master of Latin.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000529\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a8ff985aba36442b8bc47787b3afa937\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES\u003C/span\u003E: Well, that is true. Of course, when one is pre - Vatican Council, I guess the Latin language comes a lot earlier to those followers of Catholicism. But that blessing is not shared by all of us.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000530\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EWhen the Rugby World Cup comes along, we are always worried about the result\u2014of course we are\u2014but our additional worry this time is whether we can be organised enough to put on a good tournament. The idea of having legislation to ensure that some aspects of the planning are streamlined is not without support in Parliament. I think that a lot of people would have approached that matter favourably, but what has caused this bill to be so delayed has been the obstinancy of Minister Murray McCully in not listening to anyone other than himself. He has not listened to the amendments and he has not accepted the hand of bipartisanship. As a result, his legislation has been held up. We are trying to make the point that legislation should not be handled this way when there is an opportunity to change it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000531\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EThe amendment from Trevor Mallard would have stipulated that the Minister cannot grant an urgent approval that has not been granted by the authority. The authority is governed under its own statute for a very good reason. It is settled law, and it would have made sense for there to be some consistency when a ministerial decision has been made. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000532\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EWhat makes this even more difficult for Parliament is that Parliament will almost certainly not be sitting during the Rugby World Cup, for a number of reasons. First, Tories never go past a free ticket to a game. Secondly\u2014[Interruption] Some truths are always self-evident. Of course, we know that there is one free ticket going now, because somebody over there who would have been invited will not be any more. It is probably two members, actually, and we can guarantee that they would have taken the maximum entitlement in that respect. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000533\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EOne reason Parliament might not be sitting is that a general election will have been just held if the Government goes to the polls in August next year. John Key may well do that if he does not trust Murray McCully\u2019s organisation of this tournament, because the biggest fear that the Prime Minister would have is not that we do not win the Rugby World Cup\u2014everyone in this House thinks we will do that\u2014but that the games are not organised enough and that it will be a shambles in Auckland. He will be worried about Murray McCully\u2019s judgment, as so many leaders have been, although it is normally when they are former leaders that they worry about his judgment. Parliament will not have met for the first time. The alternative reason is that if the election is held in November, Parliament will have been prorogued for the campaign. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000534\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EWhen these decisions are made by the Minister, there are no safeguards built into the legislation, and Parliament will not be sitting. Either the next Parliament will not have been called together or this Parliament will have finished. We are investing a lot of power in Murray McCully. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000535\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EIf members opposite think that that is not a worthy question to ask, then I suggest that they go and see how Bill English feels about investing too much power in Murray McCully. If they do not get on with him, and I would understand that, then they should go and ask Jenny Shipley, whom they can contact at Pansy Wong\u2019s electorate office. They can ask her what she thinks of investing too much power in Murray McCully. If Jenny Shipley is unavailable, then those members could go and see what Mr Bolger thinks about that. There is a lot of form in this area about whether Murray McCully can take on, with regard to\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000536\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002287df65ae861c43f4855ce9bde952b7a9\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: He gets on pretty well with Tau, as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000537\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002216b049feae534be5a9f83b6d173e443e\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES\u003C/span\u003E: No, he would not get on well with Tau. He gets on so well with Tau Henare that he organised Tau Henare\u2019s coup against himself for the Mauri Pacific party. That is how good Murray McCully is when it comes to political coups. He got political suicide in that respect. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000538\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EWe have opposed this bill all the way through this House because of the fact that the Government would not negotiate on Part 4. The Government is trying to vest too much power in the Minister, and if that happens in this particular bill, then we are concerned that that will happen in bill after bill. We simply do not believe that that is correct in terms of parliamentary procedure, and also we worry intensely that by giving so much power to the individuals concerned, mistakes could be made, and we want nothing to put the Rugby World Cup at risk in 2011.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022b35e543b0fce4caeb8140805c5377b42\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 Rugby World Cup 2011 (Empowering) Bill be now read a third time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 51\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill read a third time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000539\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00225f0253b695b142a9aaf49cf3be0e2526\u0022\u003EUrgency\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000541\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00228a98d35b25644b8cae45695bca335f5b\u0022\u003EUrgency\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u00225c7b5ec2800c44758df27352ba13f8f8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000540\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225c7b5ec2800c44758df27352ba13f8f8\u0022\u003EHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That urgency be accorded the second reading of the Courts and Criminal Matters Bill, the first reading of the M\u0101ori Purposes Bill, the interrupted second reading and Committee stage of the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2), the second reading and Committee stage of the Holidays Amendment Bill, the passing through their remaining stages of the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill, the Education Amendment Bill (No 2), and the Child and Family Protection Bill, and any bills into which they may be divided, the Committee stage of the Ng\u0101ti Apa (North Island) Claims Settlement Bill, and the Whanganui Iwi (Whanganui (Kaitoke) Prison and Northern Part of Whanganui Forest) On-account Settlement Bill, and the second reading of the Television New Zealand Amendment Bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000542\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EThat is an ambitious list, which the Opposition is saying could take us right through until some time on Sunday afternoon. In fact, Parliament cannot sit on a Sunday afternoon. I have given the House a previous assurance that we will be lifting at 6 o\u2019clock on Thursday. The intention to take urgency this week was notified some months ago. Although the content of the urgency motion has a number of bills that are controversial, it is largely driven out of the fact that we have just 11 House days left until the end of the year. If we take today as being the day for the rest of the week, it gives us about 9 House days until the end of the year. There is a degree of urgency for the Government in wanting to progress bills. Some of these are widely supported; others will be more controversial. Of course, Parliament will have the time to give those bills the scrutiny required. But of course we will have no repetition at all in those Committee stages, because of the new commitment we have from the Opposition parties.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002237906cf7371045cf9761a03c60437fdd\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote  was called for on the question, That urgency be accorded.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 51\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000543\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a6d73c40651644b8b55bffa1ad4922a5\u0022\u003EBusiness of the House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000545\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022780168009aac4b77b8ba4a874ba8ca1d\u0022\u003EBusiness of the House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u00229bd95a3af1ce4eec82f8e638ab522829\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000544\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229bd95a3af1ce4eec82f8e638ab522829\u0022\u003EHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House):\u003C/span\u003E I seek leave for there to be question time at 2 p.m. on Wednesday, 17 November, and Thursday, 18 November 2010 and for questions to be lodged in the normal manner, pursuant to Standing Order 372.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000546\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022184b83ad80de447b83386880f0a6e3fe\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection to that course of action being followed? There is none.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000547\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022b7756a68675e44569521f109f73b14bc\u0022\u003ECourts and Criminal Matters Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000548\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022521fc8421e3d449eba41f896fac8a28a\u0022\u003ESecond Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022 data-id=\u0022ab627c1d46fa4a4397e254891a3bf7db\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000549\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ab627c1d46fa4a4397e254891a3bf7db\u0022\u003EHon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU (Minister for Courts):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the Courts and Criminal Matters Bill be now read a second time. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000550\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EThis omnibus bill amends the District Courts Act 1947, the Land Transport Act 1998, the Sentencing Act 2002, the Summary Proceedings Act 1957, and consequentially amends 16 other Acts. The Law and Order Committee has examined the bill and recommends that it be passed with amendments. I would like to thank the members of the committee for returning this bill to the House in a very timely manner. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000551\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EThis bill presents a comprehensive set of legislative improvements for the recovery of unpaid fines, reparations, and civil debt. It addresses a number of issues, including a general concern about the levels of overdue fines, the dissatisfaction of victims when offenders do not pay their reparation, and the difficulties of creditors and debtors using the courts\u2019 civil debt enforcement processes. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000552\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EAt 31 October 2010, $711 million of fines and reparations remained unpaid. That is $67 million less than I reported during the first reading of this bill in May 2010. The reduction is due to a combination of factors\u2014increased payments and increased remittals, the efforts of the collections unit of the Ministry of Justice acting on behalf of the District Court, and the Government\u2019s policy changes in 2009 in response to illegal street racing. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000553\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003ENevertheless, for monetary penalties to be a credible sanction further improvements are necessary. The new initiatives contained in this bill are aimed at encouraging people to contact the court to resolve their fines and reparations in a sustainable manner. The three major initiatives are: driver licence stop orders, credit reporting, and super priority. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000554\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EThe first new initiative is the introduction of driver licence stop orders, contained in Part 2, which amends the Land Transport Act 1998. Traffic offences make up approximately 93 percent of all infringement penalties imposed each year and 99 percent of all overdue infringement penalties filed at court for enforcement. A driver licence stop order will enable the court to suspend any driver licence held by an individual with overdue traffic fines. The suspension will remain in place until suitable payment arrangements are made. The Law and Order Committee recommends an amendment to the service provisions to include electronic service, which will also allow for future developments in technology. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000555\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EThe second new enforcement measure is credit reporting, contained in Part 3, which amends the Summary Proceedings Act 1957. Credit reporting will enable information on overdue fines and reparations to be released to the private sector credit-reporting system. This will provide incentives for defendants to pay overdue fines and reparations so that their credit worthiness is not affected. Credit reporting will also enable the information provided by the credit-reporting industry to the Ministry of Justice\u2014for example, updated address information\u2014to be used to collect fines. The Law and Order Committee recommends changes to clause 69 to better align the provisions relating to the release of information with current credit industry practices. After considering a report by the Regulations Review Committee, the Law and Order Committee also recommends amendments to strengthen the existing privacy provisions to clarify that the credit-reporting function is subject to the Privacy Act 1993. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000556\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EThe third major initiative, super priority, is also contained in Part 3. This tool will ensure that the court has priority over a secured party for the sale of proceeds of seized goods where the amount of overdue fines was, or could have been, disclosed by a formal credit report by the ministry. The Law and Order Committee has recommended an amendment to clause 70, to reduce the risk of secured parties relying on out-of-date credit reports. A further amendment removes the requirement for secured parties to present the credit report from the ministry within 3 working days. This change will align the legislative requirements with the current practices of the credit industry. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000557\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EThese three new initiatives are intended to encourage people with outstanding fines to enter into manageable repayment arrangements, with the objective of ensuring that fines remain an effective sanction for breaches of the law. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000558\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EReparation is an important aspect of sentencing. Reparation lessens the financial impact of offending on the victim. In addition, when it relates to an offer to make amends by the offender, it can also provide an opportunity for the offender to demonstrate a degree of remorse or at least acceptance of responsibility. This bill confirms the priority for the collection of reparations, and strengthens the consequences of not paying. Offenders can receive significant sentencing discounts for reparation, especially when the reparation is for a significant amount and relates to an offer to make amends. If, however, the reparation is later deemed to be uncollectable, the offender cannot be resentenced for the original offence. This bill removes the current restriction on resentencing an offender who cannot pay reparation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000559\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003ELast year the Vehicle Confiscation and Seizure Bill amended the Sentencing Act 2002 and the Summary Proceedings Act 1957. This current bill will align the applicable property seizure provisions with the vehicle seizure provisions. The Law and Order Committee recommended a change to the definition of leases in order to recognise that leased property does not belong to the fines defaulter.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000560\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EPart 1 of the bill amends the District Courts Act 1947 to improve the civil enforcement process. Civil debt enforcement can be complex, cumbersome, and costly for the parties involved. This bill will enable a court registrar to examine a judgment debtor on behalf of the judgment creditor and to make attachment orders, which are key enforcement tools, more easily accessible. The changes to the civil enforcement system will improve the experience of users of the service and will also free up resources needed to support the courts\u2019 enforcement processes. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000561\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EThe development of the reforms in this bill commenced in 2004 with the review of the infringement system, which was undertaken by the Ministry of Justice and the Law Commission. I acknowledge the work undertaken by my predecessor, the former Minister for Courts, the Hon Rick Barker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000562\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022343449ab6eb540ea8ec92b2eb55cfa82\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: Whatever happened to him?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000563\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220003251cc5714a8eba580b0b25acf3f5\u0022\u003EHon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU\u003C/span\u003E: I do not know\u2014he sits in the Speaker\u2019s Chair. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000564\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EWhen I became the Minister for Courts in November 2008 I was pleased to continue his work. It is important work. Initial legislative reforms were made through the Government\u2019s response to the problem of illegal street racing in 2009. This bill extends and expands those reforms. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000565\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EI thank all those members of the public who made submissions on the bill. They included a number of participants in the credit industry who were able to provide insights into current practices. I appreciate the examination of the bill by the Law and Order Committee, and acknowledge the contribution of the Regulations Review Committee. I also thank those Government departments that have assisted the Ministry of Justice, both in providing advice to the Law and Order Committee, in this case the Ministry of Transport, the New Zealand Transport Agency, and the New Zealand Police, and in developing the bill, especially the Office of the Privacy Commissioner, the Department of Corrections, and the Ministry of Economic Development. The bill has also benefited considerably from the skills of the Parliamentary Counsel Office. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000566\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003ELooking forward, the new initiatives contained in the bill are designed to encourage individuals to proactively resolve their fines, rather than punish them for incurring the fines in the first place. The new initiatives progressed through the bill are aimed at encouraging people to make sustainable and affordable arrangements with the court in order to resolve their fines and reparations. The changes to the civil system will provide better outcomes to judgment creditors and judgment debtors alike. The civil system will be transformed into a more efficient and responsive system for all involved. I intend to introduce a Supplementary Order Paper in the Committee stage to enhance this bill. I commend this bill to the House. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022 data-id=\u0022941cdb0c89394324ab566d17d6d89c5f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000567\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022941cdb0c89394324ab566d17d6d89c5f\u0022\u003ECHARLES CHAUVEL (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E The Labour Opposition supports the Courts and Criminal Matters Bill as it comes back to the House from the Law and Order Committee for its second reading. I begin by commending the Minister for Courts for making the appropriate gesture of referring to the fact that this bill largely consists of measures that were carried over from work that was under way prior to the change of Government at the end of 2008. Although, of course, I will not bring the Speaker into the debate, it is appropriate to acknowledge your role, Mr Assistant Speaker Barker, as the responsible Minister in the previous Government. You were in charge of the measures that were brought forward for approval in Cabinet so that the bill was ready to be progressed when it was introduced by the current Minister. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000568\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003EObviously, the first reason for this side of the House supporting the bill is that it had its genesis in the days of the previous Government. The previous Government thought that the driver licence stop orders proposal\u2014from memory, back in July 2008\u2014had real merit. There is real evidence from overseas, particularly from the Australian states, that those orders have had an effect. They have reduced the scofflaw factor, for want of a more elegant way to put it, so it is appropriate to trial them here, as this bill would do. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000569\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003EWhen one looks at the figures it is obvious that there is a need for some action in this area. Between July 2008 and June 2009, according to statistics from the Ministry of Justice, the courts wiped $95.1 million out of the total $806 million owing by offenders in unpaid fines. More than 10 percent of properly levied penalties are not being collected by the State. Worse than that, there is an increasing trend as far as those penalties are concerned. Clearly, there is some need for a greater power than that which exists in the current law. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003EIt is appropriate, I think, to address the problem of overdue fines for another reason, and that is the dissatisfaction of the victims of crime. Often offenders owing sums by court order will, in respect of those sums, effectively be reimbursing victims through reparation orders. It is very frustrating for creditors\u2014and debtors, actually\u2014using the court\u2019s civil debt enforcement process, which is what they have to fall back on in the absence of any better remedy. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000571\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003EI repeat the Minister\u2019s acknowledgment of you, Mr Assistant Speaker Barker. I also acknowledge the fact that the Minister made officials available to brief the Opposition when this bill was proposed as an omnibus amendment bill. I think it was a useful practice to follow. It certainly made it easier for the Labour Party to understand the Government\u2019s proposal when it brought this legislation forward, to consent to its introduction, and to support it at that stage. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000572\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003EI think it is appropriate, though, to record that there are a couple of missing proposals. I would have thought that the select committee might want to bring these proposals back on board; no doubt we will hear a long and learned discourse from Mrs Goudie about why that was not able to be done on this occasion. Perhaps those provisions will resurface in the Supplementary Order Paper the Minister foreshadowed but was unwilling or unable to give the House any detail about when she gave her second reading speech. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000573\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003EOne of the most significant reforms that Labour wanted to put in place in this area was to have a single agency responsible for fines, rather than the 80-plus agencies\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000574\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002225f8c78b-f301-4aca-a936-366f00a26bc9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d4307f3af3644404a5f3e6cb278a868a\u0022\u003ESandra Goudie\u003C/span\u003E: More bureaucrats. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000575\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ec8f5ef9c8d84fee94f8b8f71be98e83\u0022\u003ECHARLES CHAUVEL\u003C/span\u003E: There was a little snort of derision over there from the member for Coromandel, but why would Parliament not\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000576\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002225f8c78b-f301-4aca-a936-366f00a26bc9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002299c35ddc39da46d5b08026bddaa370e0\u0022\u003ESandra Goudie\u003C/span\u003E: I didn\u2019t snort.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000577\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e9ac78fd6f4145a3a6ea5275d8ef292c\u0022\u003ECHARLES CHAUVEL\u003C/span\u003E: It was a snort, but we will not go into that further. The party that trumpets rational Government structure has passed up an opportunity to do some rationalisation on this basis. Why would one not take the opportunity to reduce those 80-plus issuing authorities to one, acting on behalf of all the others, so that it is responsible for the issuing and the collection of fines? That was a sensible proposal from the last Government. It would have cut red tape, and it would have been a good thing for this Parliament to put in place. Unfortunately, we have a lost opportunity here, even with the select committee report. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000578\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003ENotwithstanding that lost opportunity, as I said before, we generally support this measure. I have mentioned the increasing unpaid fines problem. There is another reason why the legislation is important; again, it comes from the careful research we have had from the Ministry of Justice. It shows that when people cross a certain threshold in terms of the amount of money they owe\u2014and for young people that threshold can be as low as $2,000\u2014they get to a point where they think there is no point in trying to repay the money. A person is in the hole for $2,000, so why bother trying to make any effort to make repayments beyond that figure? It is a bit like the John Maynard Keynes anecdote\u2014if someone owes the bank $100, they have a problem, but if they owe the bank $1 million, the bank has the problem. The State was getting into that position with this level of unpaid fines\u2014over 10 percent. The problem, particularly with younger offenders, was that they were coming to the point where they felt that even for fines of $2,000 it was not worth putting in place a repayment plan. That was such a big figure for a lot of younger people. It was beyond their ken in terms of trying to make repayment arrangement systems. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000579\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003EThis bill goes some way to addressing that issue, but it is not entirely satisfactory in that area. The fines register established by this bill is a good measure. Lending companies and the wider community will be made aware of people who owe money. This will be another means by which there is pressure from the community to ensure that people pay the fines that they owe the Crown. That is a good thing all around. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000580\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003EThe other point I will make just before moving on to my final point, concerning the Regulations Review Committee, is to compare the process that the Minister adopted in this case with the process that has just been adopted by the Minister of Justice in respect of his latest package of criminal reforms. Those reforms were announced yesterday at about 3 o\u2019clock in a series of releases. It has been a question since then of trying to look at the detail and respond to it. The package is sold as the biggest and most significant reform to criminal procedure in 50 years, yet when the Opposition has been asked for its response it has had to make that response on the basis of analysis on the hoof. It would have been much better for Simon Power to adopt the approach that, even though Ms Goudie thinks all this consultation business is overblown, actually results in good law if it is done properly. Hopefully, this bill will be proof of that. The Minister made officials available to brief the Opposition, and the Opposition was available to intelligently offer its support and to participate constructively in the select committee under her chairpersonship, so that we are back in the House able to support the second reading. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000581\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003EThe final point I make is to credit the select committee for taking on board a lot of the advice it received from the Regulations Review Committee over particular provisions of the bill. In their original form those provisions would have been offensive constitutionally. Some change has been proposed to those provisions. I certainly commend those changes to the House. I wish they had gone further. I wish that all the Regulations Review Committee\u2019s advice had been adopted, but some change at least is proposed and that is a good thing. With those words, I commend the bill on its second reading to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002225f8c78b-f301-4aca-a936-366f00a26bc9\u0022 data-id=\u00221b62b377b3da43148023abcbfc118051\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000582\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002225f8c78b-f301-4aca-a936-366f00a26bc9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221b62b377b3da43148023abcbfc118051\u0022\u003ESANDRA GOUDIE (National\u2014Coromandel):\u003C/span\u003E I commend the excellent Minister for Courts, the Hon Georgina te Heuheu, for bringing the Courts and Criminal Matters Bill to the House. I also acknowledge the excellent work done by Rick Barker as Minister for Courts in the previous Government. I can say that it has been a pleasure, as chair of the Law and Order Committee, to go through this process in a very collegial way\u2014one of the very few occasions of that, I might add\u2014and I acknowledge the work on all sides. I was also very impressed with the officials\u2014in particular our tall, slim young man with glasses. I thought he did an excellent job. In fact, I commend all the officials for the great work that they did. I was very, very impressed. It really is a pleasure to work with people who know what they are talking about. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000583\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002225f8c78b-f301-4aca-a936-366f00a26bc9\u0022\u003EThis bill went through its processes quite well, and some very sensible suggestions were put forward for change. It is a very worthwhile bill. It is something that people have wanted to see changed in some way so that we were not wiping all those thousands of dollars of fines. I applaud the incentivisation of fine payments and the proactive nature of this bill. I think most of the other aspects of the bill have been covered. I can see this bill bringing about a very, very positive outcome in the future, where we will see people being more proactive and responsible for the fines they have incurred.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022 data-id=\u00226b1755934655482ab4cbd0a2f92dba52\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000584\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226b1755934655482ab4cbd0a2f92dba52\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E Along with my colleague Charles Chauvel, I would like to speak in support at the second reading of the Courts and Criminal Matters Bill, but, along with my colleague, I speak with a little bit of sadness that the bill, as we often find when it comes to justice matters in this House, simply does not go far enough. But, looking on the positive side, the bill enhances the court\u2019s powers and processes for the collection of fines, other monetary penalties, and civil debt. The three main policy proposals are about credit reporting, super-priority, and the driver licence stop order initiative. There are also many technical amendments. I understand that 20 bills in total are amended.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EThis is another bill\u2014[Interruption] Sorry, what was that?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000586\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022922302a7580a4661b1afd37fa47f709a\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: 20 Acts.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000587\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f20b48fe98954a3c84583434d30c170d\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much, Mr Mallard. This bill was developed while Labour was in Government. I want to acknowledge you in this House, Mr Assistant Speaker Barker; the work that you did was second to none. If I am going on too much, please shut me down, but I feel that you put a tremendous amount of time and energy into this work. Certainly, although not all of it has been picked up, much of it has. It is really sad that National has been very slow\u2014really tardy, in fact\u2014in bringing this bill to the House. It seems quite sad, when we look at many other bits of legislation that have come to the House that have been absolutely offensive to democracy, to workers in New Zealand, and to all the things that we hold dear, that this bill has languished on the Order Paper after all the hard work that you did, Mr Assistant Speaker. I know that so often in this House we are told to not bring the Chair into the debate, but on this occasion it is time for the whole House to acknowledge you. There are times when we can acknowledge people who do go the full nine yards. As I have said before, it is really sad that all of that work was put in and we have too little, too late from the Government. But we are not churlish on this side of the House, as you know, Mr Assistant Speaker\u2014not churlish at all. We will support this bill because it goes a little way to achieving what Labour wanted to achieve.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000588\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EThe Government would say that this bill is the most comprehensive set of legislative measures designed to strengthen the recovery of unpaid moneys in 12 years, and that it is critical to the justice system\u2019s credibility that these penalties are viewed as a sanction. The Government claims that the bill demonstrates its determination to address the high level of unpaid moneys. I would say that everyone in this House is concerned about unpaid moneys for misdemeanours that have happened throughout the justice system. But what we do know is that if we have unpaid moneys and the process is not efficient, then we do not get the full bang for our buck. I would say that, notwithstanding the fact that Labour members are supporting the bill, we will not get it with this bill, either; it goes some of the way but, as we always say, it does not go far enough. It does not go far enough to resolve the problems.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000589\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EWe support it because it results from the work that\u2014if I can refer to the Assistant Speaker yet again\u2014we in Labour did while in Government. We approved the driver licence stop order proposal in July 2008. Overseas, these orders have increased the success rate of collecting fines, especially in Australia. Figures released earlier this year show that between July 2008 and June 2009 courts wiped $95.1 million in fines. That is getting close to what this Government gave to private schools in New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cc9c47c0-4409-44ca-ad2f-498707f27d69\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002260a4793b6a944553ad6d5779cc5549f4\u0022\u003EJonathan Young\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s a lot of money.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000591\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229f7e2ba6bc014c2bbe24ff7f227d3a0a\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: As the member said, it is a lot of money. If we can move towards finding a remedy for the total $806 million of unpaid fines, finding a way of getting those moneys paid, then everyone in this House would acknowledge that remedy. There are general concerns about the amount of overdue fines. Concern is felt by victims when offenders do not comply with negotiated outcomes\u2014with reparation orders. Frustration is felt by creditors and debtors who use the court civil debt enforcement process. As I have said, the bill has taken very long to come before the House. If it had been brought together earlier, instead of when the Government is in such a dreadful state in terms of providing social services and health services in this country, the moneys collected would have gone a long way towards helping provide them. The Government should have got off its butt and done something constructive.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000592\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fb517d13e63e479199d182b93c365538\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Would this apply to Pansy?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000593\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c8dccf378cc94bb9b28cd8c15f4dcff3\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: Exactly. If the Government had acted more prudently, more effectively, and more efficiently, which I know is difficult for it to do, then we would have had a better health system and maybe we would not have had the education cuts that have been made in this country.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000594\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EMinistry of Justice research shows that when young people cross a certain threshold of debt, usually around $2,000, they become unable and unwilling to even try to pay off their fines. My colleague Charles Chauvel referred to John Maynard Keynes\u2019 statement: \u201CIf you owe the bank $100, then you have a problem. If you owe the bank a million dollars, it has the problem.\u201D Well, John Key knows all about that, but we are talking about the Government coffers and we are talking about what provides social services, health services, and education to people in New Zealand. This Government has sat, twiddled its thumbs, and brought in silly, silly legislation such as the 90-day sack-at-will bill, but it could have enacted more constructive legislation such as this bill, which would have helped. It would not have created jobs in this country and it would not have helped remedy the things that this Government has not done in the recession, but it would have gone a small way to resolve some of the problems with funding services and support, which are now being decimated under this Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000595\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EI come back to the bill, Mr Assistant Speaker. I know that you want me to, because in large part the bill is due to your work. Let us look at the provision to waive minor infringements. Some territorial authorities have a policy to waive infringements such as an expired warrant of fitness or an out-of-date registration of a month or less when the fault is remedied in a timely manner. That is common sense, we would have said. But that practice is not uniform across all authorities. Where it does apply, the general public are largely unaware of it. So the general public are very dissatisfied with this system. They are very dissatisfied in terms of victims receiving reparation and remedies for what they have suffered. As we have said, all members of the House recognise that Mr Assistant Speaker was responsible for this legislation and worked hard to make it happen. It is really sad that this lazy Government wasted so much time before making it happen. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022 data-id=\u00224008c8cbbffd479ca233c72cfad290ba\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000596\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224008c8cbbffd479ca233c72cfad290ba\u0022\u003EKEITH LOCKE (Green):\u003C/span\u003E The Courts and Criminal Matters Bill tries to confront a real problem, and that is the thousands of unpaid fines and all sorts of administrative difficulties involved in running around chasing after people to try to get some money out of them. But there is an intrinsic problem and I think this bill goes in the wrong direction. That is why the Green Party opposed the bill on the first reading and will oppose it on this reading as well. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000597\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThe bill is not particularly productive because the people it chases after are, in the main, the very poorest people in our society. They might get a little fine for a parking infringement, a speeding fine, or some small criminal offence, but they are the people who are down; often they are unemployed, between jobs, or in large families. It is often somewhat difficult for them to get money together to pay a fine. They tend to avoid it and put it off, then it gets bigger, and more and more problems develop. There are two ways to deal with that problem. One is to get alongside the person affected and try to work out a repayment system\u2014to work out a way that is not too much of a heavy burden on him or her at any one point in time. The other way is to just slam more penalties on top of that person in various ways. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000598\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EA lot of the people who will be affected by this bill are young M\u0101ori\u2014and maybe Hone Harawira will speak after me. That is where the concentration of unpaid fines often happens to be. The bill will only make young M\u0101ori, who are more likely to be unemployed and more likely to be poor, even poorer and in more difficulties socially in all kinds of ways, under the pressure of what is proposed in this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000599\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThis bill proposes various things like driver licence stop orders. Let us take the example of a young person with fines owing who is finding it very difficult to pay them, and who has finally got a job. If that person jumps into their car to go to work to get money to pay the fine, but all of a sudden is hit with a driver licence stop order, that person cannot get to work. They will lose their job, and get further and further in debt. So stop orders are not necessarily the answer. They are associated with amendments to the Sentencing Act 2002 to make reparation and vehicle confiscation orders more efficient. Somebody who is in this difficult position might not only have their licence taken off them; their vehicle, which is probably the main asset they own in life, might be confiscated. That really puts them back to square one, or behind square one. To make matters worse, this bill authorises unaffordable and unenforceable reparation orders to be substituted by home detention or prison sentences. Again, let us take the young person who is struggling. They have not been able to afford their fines, or, for various reasons, are a bit mixed up. Now not only do they lose their licence or lose their car; they might get chucked in jail or on home detention. That just is not the answer. It may be the answer in some cases, and the Green Party is certainly not denying that, but the whole approach is a punitive approach that does not really put us any further forward. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000600\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThere is talk often about an underclass in our society. This bill will help to enlarge the underclass\u2014the people who are really in difficulty. When they are subject to all these additional penalties they are more likely to change houses, change names, and try to get away from the authorities. That creates even more problems for them, their families, their friends, and their workmates. It does not really work. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000601\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EAnother element of the bill is to provide information on a person\u2019s fines to credit authorities. Well, that does not necessarily help. Sure, it helps if someone applies for a loan, because the credit authorities can find out that the person has a big fine and might be more likely to default on their loan. But it does not help the person to get out of the bind they are in. We should be starting at the other end, with more social workers, more people working with schools. We should work with all the sorts of organisations who are in contact with these people\u2014community organisations, wh\u0101nau organisations, iwi organisations, all of the organisations that can work alongside those people to get them to repay their debts.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000602\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003ETo my way of thinking the punitive approach does not work. It develops collective anger amongst people who are down at the bottom, a psychology of their being on one side and the people on the other side, the richer people, being out to get them. They think it is fair enough if they dodge the law and dodge the repayments, because that is the only way that they will get by in life.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000603\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThe Green Party, in summary, sees all of these measures as counter-productive\u2014that is the word for it; they are counter-productive. If we add them all up, we will not necessarily get more money for Treasury out of them; we will get more social problems, more people in prison, more people unemployed, more people who feel alienated from the system, more people who feel that they are part of an underclass, and also more racial divisions in our society in the sense that M\u0101ori are more likely to be affected than non-M\u0101ori. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002248d9e7fe-3603-456c-bd32-c8d6177395fb\u0022 data-id=\u0022239b5ae8e02a4eb8ace616662d77bff5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000604\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248d9e7fe-3603-456c-bd32-c8d6177395fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022239b5ae8e02a4eb8ace616662d77bff5\u0022\u003ERAYMOND HUO (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E As at 31 December 2008 over half a million people and organisations owed penalties totalling $790.2 million. Over 80 percent of those penalties were unpaid infringements that had been filed for enactment by the police, local authorities, and other Government agencies. The amount outstanding is increasing each year. Around 57 percent of the people with penalties owe less than $500. Many of those people can afford to pay the penalties but choose not to do so until an enforcement action is taken against them. Figures released early this year showed that between July 2008 and June 2009 the courts wiped $95.1 million of the total $806 million in unpaid fines. Therefore the amount of outstanding fines is increasing each year, and the amount of unpaid fines that the courts have to wipe is also increasing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000605\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248d9e7fe-3603-456c-bd32-c8d6177395fb\u0022\u003EThe Courts and Criminal Matters Bill seeks to address concerns about the amount of overdue fines, due to the dissatisfaction of victims when offenders do not comply with reparation orders, and to the frustration of creditors and debtors using the courts\u2019 civil debt enforcement process. Labour supports this bill and I acknowledge the great contribution made by the Hon Rick Barker, who is sitting in the Speaker\u2019s chair. In fact, the bill, as acknowledged by my colleagues earlier, resulted from work done by him while Minister for Courts in the Labour Government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000606\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248d9e7fe-3603-456c-bd32-c8d6177395fb\u0022\u003EThis bill is an omnibus bill. It amends the District Courts Act 1947, the Land Transport Act 1998, the Sentencing Act 2002, and the Summary Proceedings Act 1957, and consequentially amends 16 other Acts. The principal changes introduce three new sets of incentives to encourage people with overdue fines to enter into and maintain acceptable payment arrangements. The three sets of incentives are credit reporting, super priority, and driver licence stop orders. The credit-reporting initiative proposes the release of the overdue penalty balance of eligible people to the private sector credit industry via credit reports. The District Court will obtain a higher priority over secured property of a credit provider if the loan was advanced when the overdue penalties could have been released under the credit-reporting proposal, and when that property was subsequently seized by the court some or all of these discoverable penalties were still overdue. People were lending money to people to pay for cars, and the car lenders were always assured of getting their money back. The law stops car dealers from hiding behind the law. When the money is lent, the lender can check a register. It gives them grounds to refuse to finance people who have fines. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000607\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248d9e7fe-3603-456c-bd32-c8d6177395fb\u0022\u003EThe bill as introduced provides that if an enforcement officer serves a person with a driver licence stop order, the person must immediately surrender his or her driver\u2019s licence to the enforcement officer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000608\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248d9e7fe-3603-456c-bd32-c8d6177395fb\u0022\u003EThe Law and Order Committee received 15 submissions from individuals, organisations, and other parties. More than half of the submissions expressed support for parts of the bill. Some submissions supported the intent of the bill but would like to see the court go further in supporting the resolution of debts and encouraging financial literacy. Some of the general submissions expressed concern about its fairness and the impact on poor and vulnerable people of the current and proposed fines and civil debt enforcement mechanisms. Some of the issues raised at the Law and Order Committee are worth noting. The Privacy Commissioner is particularly concerned about the release of Government-held personal information to private sector credit reporters and the shift in the use of personal information that this signifies. The commissioner recommends that the relevant clause, clause 69, be removed from the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000609\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248d9e7fe-3603-456c-bd32-c8d6177395fb\u0022\u003ELicence suspension is another issue that we spent a considerable amount of time deliberating on. Our current collection measures focus largely on seizing goods that can be sold to resolve fines and reparation. Internationally, licence suspension is widely used as a fixed-term penalty for traffic offences and as a variable-length fine compliance measure. Queensland Transport reports a 75 percent success rate in collecting fines after threatening or imposing licence suspension. There are four further differences between Australia and New Zealand. In Australia, first of all, there is a statutory obligation to promptly update address information on the driver\u2019s-licence register; secondly, third-party body insurance is compulsory; and, thirdly, there is deemed service by post for all driver\u2019s-licence suspensions. I think New Zealand can learn a great deal from this experience. Fourthly, there is an onus on people who owe fines to find out if their licence has been suspended, rather than the state authorities having to prove service. By comparison, in New Zealand there is no statutory obligation to ensure that address information on the driver\u2019s-licence register is always up to date. The accident compensation scheme precludes third-party compulsory body insurance.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000610\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248d9e7fe-3603-456c-bd32-c8d6177395fb\u0022\u003EAttachment orders were another issue the Law and Order Committee looked at closely. Attachment orders are used to allow deductions to be made from wages and benefits to pay debts. At present, attachment orders can be imposed only after an examination hearing to assess the judgment debtor\u2019s ability to pay the debt; both parties are required to attend the hearing, which can be inconvenient and incur delays and further costs. Some ideas were floated at the select committee as to the way service can be improved, or, using alternative methods, be deemed to have occurred. Service by post is certainly one effective way for us to look at, but what about some new methods such as emails, or messages via cellphone, or Facebook?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000611\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248d9e7fe-3603-456c-bd32-c8d6177395fb\u0022\u003EGiven the large and growing amount of outstanding penalties, the effectiveness of monetary penalties as a sanction for offending is being eroded. The threat of credit reporting, together with other measures proposed in the bill, will provide people with a stronger incentive to voluntarily resolve them. There is another problem with the existing regime. Currently, there are 80-plus issuing authorities, and this undoubtedly impedes the collection of fines. Labour proposed to create a single agency to have responsibility for fines. It is regrettable that this provision is missing from this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000612\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248d9e7fe-3603-456c-bd32-c8d6177395fb\u0022\u003EI look forward to the bill\u2019s third reading. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022 data-id=\u0022609f659495904b41ab8b77f85e2a693a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000613\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022609f659495904b41ab8b77f85e2a693a\u0022\u003EDr CAM CALDER (National):\u003C/span\u003E It is a great pleasure to rise to speak on the Courts and Criminal Matters Bill. Do the crime and do the time: that is the received wisdom, and given that the State has the miscreant in custody at the time that sentencing is passed, that is what happens. Our Department of Corrections does a wonderful job and many are the prisoners who receive drug and alcohol counselling or instruction in literacy and numeracy during the course of their sentence. For lesser crimes, of course, imprisonment is not an appropriate sentence, and then do the crime and pay the fine is an axiom that is unfortunately often honoured more in the breach than in reality. A staggering $778 million of reparations, fines, other monetary penalties, and court costs remain unpaid. Over 80 percent of that extraordinary mountain of money, around $640 million, is fines for traffic-related matters. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000614\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022\u003EThe National-led Government believes this situation is untenable, and we are setting out to do something about it. As John Mortimer observed: \u201CNo brilliance is needed in the law. Nothing but common sense, and relatively clean finger nails.\u201D I am pleased to report that during the consideration of this bill the Law and Order Committee, as far as I was able to assess, displayed consummate common sense, cooperation bordering on collegiality, a precious commodity in that committee, and fastidious personal presentation. It is therefore a good tranche of law. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000615\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022\u003EThis bill continues National\u2019s commitment to working towards accountability. The bill will ensure court-ordered payments and reparations to victims are paid sooner, thus continuing National\u2019s focus on a more victim-based justice system. I commend this bill to the House. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022 data-id=\u00220f01dc4435864986b2d8a965f040515c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000616\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220f01dc4435864986b2d8a965f040515c\u0022\u003ESTUART NASH (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I stand in support of the Courts and Criminal Matters Bill. I would like to make three points. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000617\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227883c85e-a5bb-4a12-9962-80df55af0ecd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227e0c46d9e00f48b79d2e202a117bae21\u0022\u003EHone Harawira\u003C/span\u003E: Good points. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000618\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022db1a82ca1069443fa72b4776dd3f3bb4\u0022\u003ESTUART NASH\u003C/span\u003E: They are very good points. First, I say this bill is long overdue. The Hon Rick Barker, who was the Minister for Courts in the previous Labour Government, had a bill very much like this already drafted, on the Order Paper, and ready to go. If Labour was still in Government, this matter would have been well and truly done and dusted about 2 years ago. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000619\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EThe second point I make is that Labour supports this bill because Labour has always supported bills that promote common sense and fiscal integrity, and that get money back. This is a common-sense bill. Why? Because it is a Labour bill, based on Labour principles brought forward by the Hon Rick Barker. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000620\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EThe third point I make is that this is an absolutely necessary bill. Cam Calder waxed lyrical on the bill. One of his quotes was not from Shakespeare or Plato but from another philosopher. He also said the Law and Order Committee acted in a very cordial manner when it considered this bill. Of course it did, because there is no contention about this bill whatsoever. It is a common-sense bill. We all agree with it; I think all of New Zealand agrees with it. So it will be passed tonight with unanimity, and that is great. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000621\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EThere are a couple of figures that I would like to give to the people of New Zealand, because they are a bit shocking. We have heard a few figures tonight from Cam Calder and a couple of my colleagues, but I say the figures released earlier this year show that between July 2008 and June 2009 the courts wiped $95.1 million out of a total of $806 million in unpaid fines. That is amazing\u2014$806 million in unpaid fines. We have to ask what is going on. How many night classes would that pay for? How many early childhood education centres would that pay for? It is a hell of a lot. How many people in Napier would benefit from $800 million coming into their economy? There will be a hell of a lot more than that when Labour is back in power, I can tell members that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000622\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EThis bill seeks to address the concern about the amount of overdue fines, and the dissatisfaction of victims and offenders. I can well imagine that if I was a victim of crime and the court had imposed a fine or reparation to be paid to me from the offender, but it was not paid, that would just rub salt into the wound. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000623\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224effe6829e444a4695b910186943ce3b\u0022\u003EDr Rajen Prasad\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s not fair. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000624\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002253c4a5c44e024f429bef615106870053\u0022\u003ESTUART NASH\u003C/span\u003E: That is right. This bill will address that fundamental principle of fairness. Fairness is a fundamental principle. When my children are playing and they are not getting on, the thing they say is \u201CDad, that\u2019s not fair.\u201D That is what, certainly, the Labour Party stands for. We have highlighted that our concern is about fairness. Sometimes it is about fairness to the people of New Zealand, although this Government has missed the point there. This bill is about fairness to the victims of crime. This bill helps to address that situation; of that there is no doubt. That is why I am supportive of the bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000625\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EBut one of the points I make is that I wonder why this bill has taken so long to come before the House. Why is that? This measure was practically finalised before the previous Labour Government left office. As I mentioned, the Hon Rick Barker had drafted such a bill. It was ready to go; we gave it to the incoming National Government, which says it is tough on crime. Simon Power has stood here in the Chamber and delivered speeches about National being tough on crime, yet it took 2 years to produce this bill. How tough is that? I ask that question, but I have no answer to it, because there is no good answer. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EThis bill also omits some of the proposals developed by Labour. For instance, we wanted to create a single agency responsible for fines. Did anyone here know that there are now about 80 agencies responsible for the collection of fines? That is astounding. Addressing that would have helped with compliance issues and efficiency; it would have streamlined the whole process. I ask the Minister whether that problem is the subject of one of the Supplementary Order Papers that he will table on this bill\u2014an amendment to streamline the whole process. All we hear from the Government is talk about streamlining processes. Labour put in an idea to streamline this process, and it was thrown out. I cannot understand the reason for that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000627\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EThe Ministry of Justice\u2019s research shows that when young people cross a certain threshold in terms of money owed\u2014it is about $2,000\u2014they become unable or unwilling to pay even that fine. That is a lot of money for a young person, and it is also a lot of money for many, many New Zealanders who are facing increased costs due to GST rises, etc. Given the large and growing amount of outstanding penalties, the effectiveness of monetary penalties as a sanction for offending is being eroded, and that comes back to the whole point about $800 million being owed in outstanding fines. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000628\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EI have a concern about this matter, and Keith Locke talked about it earlier. This bill proposes that when people are not paying their fines, lending companies and the wider community will get that information, so it becomes a sort of \u201Cnaming and shaming\u201D thing. Today I was at a conference at Victoria University that talked about inequality. Keith Locke was dead right when he said a bill like this may, in fact, lead to increased inequality amongst New Zealanders in our communities. I will fight incredibly hard against that as long as I am in Parliament, because inequality is like a rot that eats the heart out of our community. This legislation may well increase inequality, and we must fight that at every turn. We are finding here that people get to a point where they cannot pay their fines\u2014we have been shown that that is happening. Labour proposed to put young people with large amounts of fines into a case management system, within which they had to acknowledge that they had a debt and had done wrong, then work out a system to pay their fines. That was not taken up. Instead of managing the process of paying fines, this bill proposes to name and shame defaulters. I for one have a real problem with that proposal, and, as mentioned, with increasing the level of inequality. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000629\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EA couple of my colleagues have mentioned John Maynard Keynes, which I found quite interesting. It was quite a good quote, but I very much doubt whether John Maynard Keynes ever had outstanding fines. One thing he said about equality was that if a Government gives tax cuts to people at the top, that will not stimulate the economy, but that if it gives tax cuts to those at the bottom, that will drive an economy out of recession. That is what he said. This Government has not learnt that lesson. As a consequence this economy will suffer, and I feel greatly sorry for the people of New Zealand. In this country 650 people have a declared income of $1 million or more a year, and they have just received $1,000 a week in the hand in tax cuts\u2014$1,000 a week. I can imagine that if those people had fines, they could pay them off straight away. People on the median wage in Napier received a tax cut of less than $5 a week, and that money has been eaten up and eroded by increases in the cost of living, increased GST, and increased ACC levies. Those people will not be able to pay their fines. That is what I am talking about with regard to inequality. Not only does it drive wealth down but people get named and shamed. They become more and more disenfranchised under the whole political process, and we all lose from that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EI would like to make one point here, and it is something I was completely unaware of until I read this bill. I suspect that the vast majority of New Zealanders are unaware of this point: the police and many territorial authorities actually have a policy of waiving infringements on expired warrants of fitness or out-of-date registrations that are still within 1 month of their expiry, when the fault is remedied in a timely manner. I did not know that. I put my car in to get a service, went away to Parliament, came back, picked it up, and parked it to go to visit constituents\u2014which I spend my days doing\u2014and then what happened? I came out, and there was a ticket on my window\u2014a $200 ticket for the warrant of fitness being a week overdue. Thank you very much, Napier City Council! I went off and paid that fine, but I urge any New Zealanders who receive tickets on their windscreens for unpaid registrations or out-of-date warrants of fitness, if they are within a month of their expiry, to write a letter to the local council or to the Ministry of Transport\u2014or to whomever\u2014and ask for the fine to be waived because they are remedying the situation. People will get off those fines. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000631\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EI would just like to reiterate my three points. Labour members support this bill because we support any measure that\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000632\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dc935910ad9041ec8e9433c4a68e4d26\u0022\u003EMr DEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I am sorry to interrupt the honourable member, but his time has expired.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cc9c47c0-4409-44ca-ad2f-498707f27d69\u0022 data-id=\u00227f3cf11f64244de0b76591eec5763b7b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000633\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cc9c47c0-4409-44ca-ad2f-498707f27d69\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227f3cf11f64244de0b76591eec5763b7b\u0022\u003EJONATHAN YOUNG (National\u2014New Plymouth):\u003C/span\u003E I found the previous speech from Stuart Nash to be very interesting, especially as the member opposite talked about the super-priority aspect of the Courts and Criminal Matters Bill. It actually gives the courts, as it says, priority over other security holders regarding a debt, if a person owes a fine to the court. That enables the situation to develop whereby if a person goes to a finance company and seeks to raise a loan to purchase, perhaps, a vehicle, and the finance company discovers there is a super priority against that person because of unpaid fines, the finance company is most unlikely to advance those funds, knowing that the courts will have first claim. Mr Nash talked about the \u201Cnaming and shaming\u201D aspect of that provision, but I guess he did not understand that the Hon Rick Barker has said he authored that idea. Is that not interesting? I would have hoped that those members talked among themselves about ideas like that. The Hon Rick Barker thought that was a brilliant idea. I give all credit to the Hon Rick Barker, who played a significant part in preparing this bill, over a number of years. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000634\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cc9c47c0-4409-44ca-ad2f-498707f27d69\u0022\u003EMany people whom I have talked to feel that that provision has some merit, because it will bring accountability. It will bring accountability to people who purchase vehicles, who have high amounts of indebtedness against them, and who incur incredibly high numbers of fines, but who do not pay those fines. When it was put in my local newspaper that $95 million had been written off the amount of debt owed by people in respect of fines, people contacted me, saying they were outraged that that amount of fines had been written off. People generally feel that that is unfair. They also feel that when people who have fines do not pay them, the defaulters are scoffing at, or showing contempt towards, our legal system. People feel that there is an undermining of our justice system when people do not pay fines. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000635\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cc9c47c0-4409-44ca-ad2f-498707f27d69\u0022\u003EThis bill will bring greater power to enforce payment. It will bring in a more modernised, automated system, which will enable communication to happen more readily between those who owe fines and the courts. It will enable far greater efficiency and ensure far greater compliance on the part of people who have incurred fines\u2014for whatever reason that may be\u2014in terms of their paying those amounts. As people have said, the amount that is owed could do some good to our economy\u2014indeed, that is true. We have an alarming problem, and this bill will go a long way towards ensuring that we will see increased credibility in the justice system, and monetary penalties being viewed as a credible sanction. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000636\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cc9c47c0-4409-44ca-ad2f-498707f27d69\u0022\u003EI was incredibly shocked by Mr Locke\u2019s presentation of his views regarding this bill. I do not believe that a person\u2019s not having a high income is an excuse not to pay a fine. The person can choose not to cause the infringement in the first place. We need to have a greater sense of responsibility in our country. I know that some people say they cannot afford to get their cars warranted. If that is the case, they cannot afford to drive a car. They should not be driving an unwarranted car, because that car is not deemed to be safe. It is irresponsible to other road users for someone to drive an unwarranted car. It is a travesty and an outrage that people say in this House that that issue does not matter. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000637\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cac6cf296b294aa084f7cd2511180519\u0022\u003EMetiria Turei\u003C/span\u003E: You have no idea what people\u2019s lives are like.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000638\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cc9c47c0-4409-44ca-ad2f-498707f27d69\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f24a6f0bac424f47a505e1321411305a\u0022\u003EJONATHAN YOUNG\u003C/span\u003E: Excuse me; you have no idea what I have ideas about. What you are saying is just your own opinions and your perspective. You have no idea, madam. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000639\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229b40ad68a47845a089864519cfee26f5\u0022\u003EH V Ross Robertson\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000640\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226edb88cf59984f7e8168853d1227c648\u0022\u003EMr DEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I know what that member is going to say. The member is bringing me into the debate. Members cannot say \u201Cyou\u201D, as that includes the presiding officer. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000641\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cc9c47c0-4409-44ca-ad2f-498707f27d69\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bb983a92894346f3b17f2639345e13a8\u0022\u003EJONATHAN YOUNG\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000642\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cc9c47c0-4409-44ca-ad2f-498707f27d69\u0022\u003EThis bill will address the issues regarding the payment of fines through the implementation of an automated credit-reporting system, which will create a low-cost incentive for people to proactively contact the courts in order to resolve their fines. We need to have a system in our society that addresses issues of non-compliance. I know that the New Zealand Police has an internal policy called \u201CCompliance\u201D. In the Law and Order Committee we heard about that policy and applauded it, because it enables people who have an infringement to do something about that infringement within a certain period of time, and to spend what would normally be paid on a fine on bringing their vehicles up to the compliance standard. As a select committee we thought that was a very good policy to have. We also noted that local authorities have the same ability, but that there is inconsistency throughout the country with regard to implementing that. However, it is good to know that that common sense exists. I commend this bill to the House. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022e2d194cd7c1b4c62b44f85f94443e37d\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 Courts and Criminal Matters Bill be now read a second time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 110\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; New Zealand Labour 41; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 4; Progressive 1; United Future 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\u003EGreen Party 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\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000643\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022c4195dcc1da047438d4f6f09cf10459b\u0022\u003EM\u0101ori Purposes Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000644\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002263c6d9ebfbec4f0da16bd8f7d2a92e15\u0022\u003EFirst Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002219767ece-60f1-4014-9855-74afaa34e699\u0022 data-id=\u0022a3e60f0bf2114bd3addcc4d2f40024a3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000645\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219767ece-60f1-4014-9855-74afaa34e699\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a3e60f0bf2114bd3addcc4d2f40024a3\u0022\u003EHon Dr PITA SHARPLES (Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the M\u0101ori Purposes Bill be now read a first time. At the appropriate time I intend to move that the bill be considered by the M\u0101ori Affairs Committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000646\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219767ece-60f1-4014-9855-74afaa34e699\u0022\u003EThis bill brings together amendments to a variety of legislation related to M\u0101ori affairs, including legislation affecting the estate of Pukepuke Tangiora, the Maori Fisheries Act 2004, the Maori Trust Boards Act 1955, and Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993. These changes seek to improve the administration of this legalisation by updating provisions that have fallen out of date. Monitoring legislation to ensure its continuing relevance is consistent with the Government\u2019s statements on regulation. Although these changes are largely administrative, they sit alongside a significant package of initiatives that contribute to the realisation of tino rangatiratanga\u2014M\u0101ori self-determination.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000647\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219767ece-60f1-4014-9855-74afaa34e699\u0022\u003EFirstly, the bill amends the legislation affecting the estates of Pukepuke Tangiora, a M\u0101ori matriarch who was active in numerous reform movements during the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The original will of Pukepuke Tangiora came into effect upon her death in 1936. At various stages throughout the 20th century the life beneficiaries under the will petitioned Parliament for relief from the terms of the will. These terms were modified by Parliament through provisions in various Maori Purposes Acts. These modifications date from a time when Government interference in private matters was considered more appropriate than it is today. In particular, the 1943 Maori Purposes Act removed the provision of the will requiring estate assets to be retained within the estate for 20 years following the death of the last remaining life beneficiary. Estate assets will now vest in capital beneficiaries on the death of the last remaining life beneficiary.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000648\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219767ece-60f1-4014-9855-74afaa34e699\u0022\u003EThe 1943 and 1951 Maori Purposes Acts have resulted in the Crown having more functions in respect of the administration of the estate of Pukepuke Tangiora than would otherwise be usual. For example, under the Maori Purposes Act 1943 trustees of the estate are appointed by the Governor-General by Order in Council. Typically, the appointments of trustees would be covered by the will itself, or would be performed by either the High Court or the M\u0101ori Land Court. The Maori Purposes Act 1951 also provides for the Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs to approve purposes for which money may be paid to estate beneficiaries out of estate funds.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000649\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219767ece-60f1-4014-9855-74afaa34e699\u0022\u003EThe bill removes the role of the Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs and the Governor-General in the administration of the estate of Pukepuke Tangiora. I must acknowledge the work of the M\u0101ori Affairs Committee from last season and tae noa ki t\u0113nei w\u0101, and particularly Mita Ririnui, who did a lot of work in Hastings on this matter. The bill recognises that involvement of this kind is inappropriate and interferes with the right of the estate to exercise control over its own affairs. The bill amends legislation affecting the estate in order to remove the Minister\u2019s role in appointing estate trustees. It also removes the Minister\u2019s role in fixing trustees\u2019 salaries and travelling allowances, and approving purposes for which trustees may spend estate funds. To ensure continuity in estate administration, the bill confirms the position of the present trustees. The bill clarifies the jurisdiction of the M\u0101ori Land Court to appoint and dismiss trustees to the estate and to hear all matters relating to the administration of that estate. This is consistent with the M\u0101ori Land Court\u2019s existing jurisdiction over M\u0101ori land trusts.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000650\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219767ece-60f1-4014-9855-74afaa34e699\u0022\u003EThe bill extends the period for which estate property will be held under the estate to 5 years after the death of the last remaining life beneficiary. Under present legislation affecting the administration of the estate, the estate would come to an end should the last remaining life beneficiary pass away. The estate property would then vest in the nine wh\u0101nau of the capital beneficiaries. Extending the distribution period gives the beneficiaries of the estate 5 years in which to make decisions about the future governance entity that will hold and manage estate assets. This mitigates the risk that the estate could come to an end before the beneficiaries have time to come to an agreement amongst themselves as to how to manage estate assets in the future.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000651\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219767ece-60f1-4014-9855-74afaa34e699\u0022\u003EThis bill also amends the Maori Fisheries Act 2004 to enable the transfer of mandated iwi organisation status and fisheries settlement assets between separate entities operating within the governance arrangements of the same iwi. The Maori Fisheries Act does not provide for such a transfer, as it was not contemplated when the Act was developed in 2004. Should such a transfer be attempted, protective provisions of the Act would require the fisheries settlement assets to be offered for sale to the highest bidder from other mandated iwi organisations and Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd. This is an unintended consequence of the Act. There are situations where an iwi may wish to transfer their mandated iwi organisation status and fishery settlement assets. For example, a number of iwi progressing through the Treaty settlement process desire such a transfer to enable them to better consolidate and improve their governance arrangements and asset holdings. The Maori Fisheries Act should not prevent iwi from developing stronger and more efficient governance arrangements that may ultimately better ensure the protection and value of their fishery settlement and wider assets.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000652\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219767ece-60f1-4014-9855-74afaa34e699\u0022\u003EThe amendment to the Maori Fisheries Act is technical and remedial. It is an enabling provision only. Iwi may elect to use it or not, depending on their particular interests and circumstances. The amendment provides for the transfer while also maintaining the existing strict requirements of the Act regarding mandated iwi organisations and the protection of the fisheries settlement assets. It exempts the transfer of the assets from specific provisions that would otherwise require the sale of those assets. It will not compromise the rights and interests of beneficiaries of a mandated iwi organisation or the rights and interests of other mandated iwi organisations or iwi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000653\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219767ece-60f1-4014-9855-74afaa34e699\u0022\u003EThis bill also amends the Maori Trust Boards Act 1955 to provide for direct accountability between trust boards and their beneficiaries. Presently the Maori Trust Boards Act requires trust boards to be accountable to the Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs for their financial arrangements. Trust boards are required to have their financial statements audited by the Auditor-General. They receive their audited accounts from the Auditor-General via the Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs. They must also send their annual budget and other financial information to the Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs for approval. This accountability relationship between trust boards and the Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs does not reflect the environment in which trust boards operate. It is also inconsistent with generally accepted practices for similar governance entities, which require primary accountability to exist between an entity and its beneficiaries.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000654\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219767ece-60f1-4014-9855-74afaa34e699\u0022\u003EThe bill amends the accountability relationship within the Maori Trust Boards Act. Each trust board must now hold an annual general meeting to report to its beneficiaries on its activities and plans for the future. This includes the presentation of audited annual accounts, budgets, and other financial information. The bill also provides that the trust boards must have their financial statements audited privately instead of by the Auditor-General. It replaces the role of the Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs in approving a trust board\u2019s annual budget with a requirement for a trust board to supply the Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs with audited accounts and an annual budget for information only.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000655\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219767ece-60f1-4014-9855-74afaa34e699\u0022\u003EFinally, the bill makes various minor drafting changes to Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993 and the M\u0101ori Incorporations Constitution Regulations 1994 to allow for more effective administration of this legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000656\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002219767ece-60f1-4014-9855-74afaa34e699\u0022\u003EIn conclusion, I thank those who participated in consultation on these amendments, which provide the necessary updates to M\u0101ori affairs legislation, particularly the last two M\u0101ori Affairs Committees. I commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022 data-id=\u0022afe06f3db6d64f00a37bd3f60f5a089d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000657\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022afe06f3db6d64f00a37bd3f60f5a089d\u0022\u003EHon PAREKURA HOROMIA (Labour\u2014Ikaroa-R\u0101whiti):\u003C/span\u003E E tika atu ki te mihi atu ki te \u0101hua o te pire nei. E mihi kau ana ki te Minita M\u0101ori m\u014D t\u014Dna kaha ki te whakaoti atu i t\u0113nei take e t\u016B roaroa atu. Mai i te t\u012Bmata o te k\u014Drero m\u014D te pire nei, e tika atu ki te mihi atu ki te kuia whaea m\u014Drehu a Nan, e rere atu, e t\u0101puke atu r\u0101 r\u0101tou i te w\u0101hi r\u0101 o Pakipaki. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000658\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022\u003E[It is appropriate that I acknowledge the make-up of this bill. I congratulate the Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs on his efforts in bringing this longstanding matter to fruition. I commend matriarch Nan Bartlett, who was involved in the genesis of this bill from the outset and who lies in her resting place at Pakipaki.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000659\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e59bb5ae04ff44f993511c5700321bcd\u0022\u003EMr DEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I am sorry to interrupt the member. Our interpretation channel is not working. We are asking for the interpreter to come in. [Interruption] The interpreter is here. I ask the member to start from the beginning again, because we have not had an interpretation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000660\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b4b6ff3140aa4f04ab2904b7e6eadd22\u0022\u003EHon PAREKURA HOROMIA\u003C/span\u003E: T\u0113n\u0101 t\u0101tou. E tika atu i runga i te t\u016B nei ki te mihi atu ki te pire nei, te otinga, e mau roaroa atu engari, e tae atu t\u0101tau, e tata ana ki te otinga. E tika atu ki te mihi atu ki te Minita M\u0101ori i mau atu i te take nei ki roto i te Whare, hei oti pai atu ng\u0101 take e wh\u0101 e puta ana mai i te tuhinga nei. E mihi kau ana ki te rere haere o te whaea matua o te wh\u0101nau nei a Nan Bartlett, e t\u0101puke atu r\u0101tou a te kuia r\u0101 i te w\u0101hi o Pakipaki.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000661\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022\u003EE kite atu t\u0101tau te t\u012Bmata m\u014D te k\u014Drero m\u014D te poari o Pukepuke Tangiora, e pai ana t\u0113r\u0101, e haere atu ki te k\u014Drero m\u014D te h\u012B ika, t\u0113r\u0101 an\u014D w\u0113tahi o ng\u0101 take e roaroa atu. N\u0101, te k\u014Drero i roto i te pepa nei m\u014D ng\u0101 poari o ng\u0101 whenua me ng\u0101 take e p\u0101 ana ki ia iwi, ki ia iwi, kei te puta atu i roto i te tuhinga nei. Ko te ture whenua w\u0113tahi o ng\u0101 tino ture e tuku atu t\u0101tou a ng\u0101i M\u0101ori mai r\u0101 an\u014D. N\u0101 te pai hoki e whitiwhiti atu tat\u014Du ng\u0101 take e wh\u0101, hei oti pai. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000662\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022\u003E[Greetings to us all. How fitting it is that I rise to commend this bill as it nears its concluding stages. It has been a long time in the making, but we are nearly there, and close to completion. It is fitting that the part played by the Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs in bringing this matter to the House is acknowledged so that the four issues that emerge in this document are addressed satisfactorily. I acknowledge the matriarch of this family, Nan Bartlett, who seemed to be here, there, and everywhere in the process, and who lies buried there at Pakipaki.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000663\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022\u003EWe saw the beginnings of the talk pertaining to the Pukepuke Tangiora Trust, and that was fine. It went there to talk about fishing, but there were also some longstanding issues. Now, included in this document is a statement about the boards of the lands, and the issues relating to each tribe. From a long way back, the Land Act has always been of huge significance to M\u0101oridom. The great thing about it is that we can exchange views about the four issues and arrive at a satisfactory outcome.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000664\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022\u003ELabour will certainly be supporting the M\u0101ori Purposes Bill brought here by the Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs. The bill brings together four separate, relevant issues that have been spread out over a period of time. The Pukepuke Tangiora estate is one that has developed its assets and progressed the fortunes of the beneficiaries. It is seen fit for the bill to ensure that the beneficiaries can define for themselves how they want to do things, and that is something we support. The rationale of moving it to the M\u0101ori Land Court is something that needs a bit more work. We cite that it is being unbundled from the Crown, but it is going to the Crown in a different form, so we need to be really clear on how we are differentiating that. The departure in one sense\u2014from what I have heard from the Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs\u2014and still hanging on at the end is something that needs to be differentiated, because I do believe that the Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs should not be too far away from supporting the beneficiaries and the estate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000665\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022\u003EThe bill removes, as earlier suggested, the Crown\u2019s involvement in the administration of the estate and confirms the M\u0101ori Land Court\u2019s jurisdiction. That is quite interesting because in the initial stages the removal from the courts was one of the essences really pushed by the trustees and the beneficiaries, and it is going back there. We will see how it progresses over time. The bill also extends the distribution period to 5 years after the death of the last remaining life beneficiary in order to provide sufficient time to make decisions on a future governance entity to hold and manage the estate assets. This is certainly supported, but, surely, if they can come to an agreement within 3 months, 6 months, or 1 year, then I hope there is enough in the legislation to allow that, and that the period is not prolonged for the sake of setting a time line that has outreached too far.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000666\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022\u003EThe original will of Pukepuke Tangiora, which came into effect in 1938, provided for the estate to be managed for the benefit of her son, his wife, and their nine children. A number of changes have been made to the administration of the estate through legislation from 1943 to 1976, resulting in the Crown being involved in the appointment of trustees, the fixing of trustees\u2019 salaries, and the expenditure of certain funds. If it is now about putting the onus on the beneficiaries, then that is well done if they are supported. It would be too untoward to hope that no differences will arise, but how that is managed is another issue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000667\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022\u003EAlso, under the will of Pukepuke Tangiora, as modified by legislation in 1943, the residual estate will be distributed to beneficiaries on the death of the last remaining life beneficiary. It is important that we define that again. How do we quantify \u201Cresidual\u201D in the sense of this estate, where does it go, and why does it need to go? The collective effort of the past trustees and the beneficiaries\u2019 guidance has seen the estate grow, consolidate, and be well worth while for the family.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000668\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022\u003EOfficials consulted the trustees and beneficiaries. The trustees support the amendments, and the beneficiaries support the removal of Crown involvement but are unable to agree on the appropriate length of time for the extension period. That is something I think needs to be firmed up in the legislation as we pass it through Parliament. We need to be quite clear, so that they have options; it should not be so defined or narrowed down that they cannot move. This is supposed to be about freeing things up for the sake of the beneficiaries. It would fare well if we were a bit more definitive in relation to how the funds of the estate are distributed. Certainly, people like Nema Bartlett and the other trustees need to be commended for the efforts they are presently putting in. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000669\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022\u003EI move on to the amendments to the Maori Fisheries Act 2004. The bill will allow the transfer of the status, and certain fisheries settlement assets, of a mandated iwi organisation to another separate entity within the governance arrangements of the same iwi. That is a very, very strong banner that needs to be supported to ensure that it becomes what it says and that it means what it says. At the outset of building the mandated iwi organisations, there were tensions and strains over who should manage them\u2014the capability of our people. It has been well proven, in the sense of M\u0101oris\u2019 role in managing the fisheries estate and business; they have lifted it to a level in recent years that it was never lifted to before. Currently, the Maori Fisheries Act 2004 prevents this transfer without triggering protective provisions requiring the sale of assets to the highest bidder from other iwi organisations and Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd. This is an unintended consequence of the legislation, and to ensure that the assets are still within those iwi who choose to maintain them within their organisation brings another opportunity to the fast-growing asset-holders in this country\u2014that is, M\u0101ori iwi. I think that is really good.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000670\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022\u003EThe M\u0101ori trust boards issue has been a long journey. Years ago, when I was the Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs, in the beginning the books were behind by 6 years, on average. Now that they have been tidied up, the trust boards have caught up. It is certainly encouraging to hear that people put the responsibility of the running and the development of these assets and the maintaining of the trust boards\u2019 interests back on to the beneficiaries. Again, I would encourage the Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs not to be too far away from that action. Some trust boards are firing ahead very, very well. They have sizable assets and a lot of support, like the T\u016Bwharetoa board and others, but there are\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000671\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267431f57-e958-4c83-b438-7da8061d479e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229a403da1f2b04f49a86369e0b6973b62\u0022\u003EPaul Quinn\u003C/span\u003E: Ng\u0101ti Awa.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000672\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b3db0a273df54bfe9dc41e5d0ce7e1e2\u0022\u003EHon PAREKURA HOROMIA\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014and like the Ng\u0101ti Awa board\u2014others that are struggling. Some are like the Ng\u0101ti Awa board, which is progressing very well since it has had new management and support all around it. All of those who are involved in developing it need to be thanked, as is the case with all the trust boards. But the time has come when we have enough strength, we have enough capability, and we have enough modernisation, and we do not need to be patronised. I would certainly commend that we support these changes, albeit they are incidental. I commend this bill for further discussion.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022 data-id=\u0022703e5ed99a134a358c98cdc955cbb911\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000673\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022703e5ed99a134a358c98cdc955cbb911\u0022\u003EHon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU (Associate Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs):\u003C/span\u003E I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak in support of the M\u0101ori Purposes Bill. The amendments within this bill make a number of timely changes to M\u0101ori affairs legislation. Although they are largely administrative, these changes are none the less important to various groupings of M\u0101ori. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000674\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EFor members of the estate of Pukepuke Tangiora, these changes are about removing unnecessary Crown involvement in the affairs of a private wh\u0101nau. For M\u0101ori trust boards, these changes are about providing a direct line of accountability between trust boards and their beneficiaries. For iwi, the changes are about amending unintentionally restrictive provisions of the Maori Fisheries Act. For M\u0101ori landowners, the changes are about improving the administration of Te Ture Whenua Maori Act. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000675\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EPukepuke Tangiora was a politically active M\u0101ori woman with substantial land holdings in the Hawke\u2019s Bay area. During her lifetime she was an active member of the Kotahitanga movement for an independent M\u0101ori Parliament, the R\u0101tana movement, and the Women\u2019s Christian Temperance Union. Pukepuke Tangiora\u2019s original will came into effect upon her death in 1936. Under her will, her estate was held for the benefit of her only son, Te Akonga Mohi, his wife, and their nine children. Throughout the 20th century the Crown intervened to assume responsibility for the appointment and removal of trustees to the estate. The Crown also assumed responsibility for approving purposes for which estate moneys could be paid to estate beneficiaries. These are functions that the Crown continues to perform today. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000676\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EThe Crown\u2019s continued role in the administration of this estate is an unnecessary limitation upon the ability of the estate beneficiaries to manage their own affairs. Therefore, the bill removes the role of the Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs and the Governor-General in the administration of the estate. This includes the appointment of estate trustees, the fixing of trustees\u2019 salaries and travelling allowances, and the approval of purposes for which trustees may spend certain estate funds. The bill instead confirms the M\u0101ori Land Court\u2019s jurisdiction to hear all matters relating to the administration of the estate. The bill also creates a 5-year window between the death of the last remaining life beneficiary and the distribution of the estate property. This is intended to give the beneficiaries time to realise their aspirations regarding the future of the estate. The National-led Government supports wh\u0101nau making decisions about their own future. The beneficiaries of the estate of Pukepuke Tangiora have the experience and expertise to allow them to manage their own affairs. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000677\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EIt is in the same spirit that the bill also makes changes to the Maori Trust Boards Act 1955. It provides for a more direct line of accountability between trust boards and their beneficiaries. At present, trust boards are accountable to the Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs for their financial arrangements. This involves having their financial statements audited by the Auditor-General. Trust boards then submit their annual budgets and other financial information to the Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs for approval. This relationship is not consistent with the right of trust board beneficiaries to hold their own trust boards to account. It is also not appropriate in this day and age, when M\u0101ori seek independence and self-reliance. The bill amends this relationship to provide for a direct line of accountability between trust boards and their beneficiaries. Trust boards will be required to hold an annual general meeting to report to beneficiaries on their operations and future plans. This includes making available financial information, such as audited annual accounts and budgets. They will no longer be required to have their financial statements audited by the Auditor-General. Instead, they will manage that privately. Trust boards have long wanted this change. The idea that in the 21st century they have to come back to the Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs to have every \u201Ct\u201D crossed and every \u201Ci\u201D dotted has been long resented.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000678\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EThe bill also makes changes to the Maori Fisheries Act 2004 to ensure iwi are able to transfer mandated iwi organisation status and fisheries settlement assets between separate entities within their governance arrangements. At present the Maori Fisheries Act does not provide for such a transfer. It requires fisheries settlement assets to be offered for sale to other mandated iwi organisations and Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd. In amending this unintentionally restrictive provision of the Maori Fisheries Act, the bill helps iwi again manage their own affairs. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000679\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003ELastly, the bill also makes technical changes to Te Ture Whenua Maori Act. These changes improve the administration of this Act, and are consistent with this Government\u2019s priorities concerning better regulation. For example, the bill amends the provision of Te Ture Whenua Maori Act relating to the ability of a M\u0101ori incorporation to amend its own constitution. This clarifies the language of the provision, making it easier for M\u0101ori incorporations to interpret. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000680\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EIn summary, the M\u0101ori Purposes Bill makes a number of timely changes to M\u0101ori affairs legislation. The bill contributes to the Government\u2019s goal of a brighter and more prosperous future for M\u0101ori, and, more than anything, it supports M\u0101ori in the management of their own affairs, whether it be in the form of wh\u0101nau trusts, trust boards, or commercial organisations. I support the referral of the bill to the M\u0101ori Affairs Committee .\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002273f60731-048d-4a21-81c5-52d588de2325\u0022 data-id=\u0022e4c4c648c24b4197a213ff42c8883feb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000681\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002273f60731-048d-4a21-81c5-52d588de2325\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e4c4c648c24b4197a213ff42c8883feb\u0022\u003EHon MITA RIRINUI (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E \u0100, k\u0101ti kia ora t\u0101tou kei roto i te Whare. T\u016B tautoko ana i ng\u0101 mihi m\u014D t\u0113r\u0101 ake o ng\u0101 kuia, a Nan Bartlett te uri o Te Akonga Mohi, n\u0101na i kawe mai t\u0113nei take ki mua i ng\u0101 mema P\u0101remata i te w\u0101 i a Reipa te K\u0101wanatanga. Me te mihi an\u014D ki te Minita m\u014D t\u014Dna kaha ki te whakapouahia r\u0101 i t\u0113nei kaupapa, kia oti ai ng\u0101 p\u014Draruraruhanga i waenganui i ng\u0101 uri o te kuia r\u0101. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000682\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002273f60731-048d-4a21-81c5-52d588de2325\u0022\u003E[So greetings to us in the House. I stand to endorse the acknowledgments made in respect of Nan Bartlett among the elderly womenfolk, and descendant of Te Akonga Mohi. She brought this matter before members of Parliament when Labour was in Government. I also acknowledge the Minister, and his diligence in advancing this matter and settling the problems that the descendants of that matriarch had among themselves.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000683\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002273f60731-048d-4a21-81c5-52d588de2325\u0022\u003EMay I first congratulate the Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs, who boldly brought this bill to the House, particularly as it refers to the estate of Pukepuke Tangiora. I am aware that the Minister has a relationship with this particular wh\u0101nau. I am familiar with them myself, and during my time as Associate Minister in charge of Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations and also as a member of the M\u0101ori Affairs Committee, I met with kuia Bartlett on a number of occasions to talk about \u201Chow this injustice could be rectified\u201D, as she put it in her own words. The wh\u0101nau of Pukepuke Tangiora considered this an injustice because the Crown had intervened in a way that it should not have. Regardless of the reasons, the uri of this particular kuia, who were responsible for the inheritance and her estate, were quite capable at that time\u2014the 1940s\u2014of representing and taking care of the estate to the best of their ability and for the benefit of future beneficiaries. I warmly remember the old kuia, whom I visited at her home in Hawke\u2019s Bay, on the sunny coastline of Ocean Beach. We had a nice conversation and a nice afternoon tea. She was a beautiful old lady, who had a lot to talk about. She shared her life stories with me. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000684\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002273f60731-048d-4a21-81c5-52d588de2325\u0022\u003EI congratulate the Minister on his bold move. Labour, during its term in Government, tried to alleviate the concerns of the old lady by driving this matter to a similar stage that the Minister has come to today, but unsuccessfully. However, that is of no importance at this stage, because the bill is here now. Future generations of the descendants of Pukepuke Tangiora will make their own decisions, based on their strong concern for the well-being of their future generations. Therefore, I congratulate the Minister. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000685\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002273f60731-048d-4a21-81c5-52d588de2325\u0022\u003EThe Labour Opposition will be supporting the bill. There are some very, very good amendments to the four Acts in question. But I have to say to the Minister that this is an opportunity where, for example, he could have freed up the land management requirements of Te Ture Whenua Maori Act and the M\u0101ori Land Court to the point where we could have addressed the issues around M\u0101ori land utilisation, rather than retention, because the two collide with each other and some issues need to be discussed around some particular parts of that Act. But I will come to that later. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000686\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002273f60731-048d-4a21-81c5-52d588de2325\u0022\u003EIn terms of the Maori Trust Boards Act, I had a discussion earlier this afternoon with the general manager of one of our local Bay of Plenty trust boards. The same concerns were expressed by that general manager as have been expressed by a number of managers and trustees on trust boards around the country\u2014that the Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs had far too much control over the day-to-day business of trust boards. They had wished that a more commercial model had been put in place for them to be guided by, but instead the Crown decided in its wisdom some years back, in 1955, that perhaps M\u0101ori were not in the right frame of mind to have total responsibility over their lives, so it introduced an Act that had very, very long paternal apron strings attached to it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000687\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002273f60731-048d-4a21-81c5-52d588de2325\u0022\u003EOnce again, this is a very, very bold move. But I have to say, as I said earlier, that this is an opportunity lost. M\u0101ori unemployment now is at 16 percent and rising. M\u0101ori land all around the country is hugely underutilised, and much of the blame for that can be attributed to Te Ture Whenua Maori Act. The Act looks more at land retention, rather than at land utilisation. As I said before, the two collide with each other. This would have been a great opportunity for the Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs to have made a thorough examination of those barriers within Te Ture Whenua Maori Act, with a view to freeing up the Act to the degree whereby landowners, land trustees, incorporations, and societies were in a position to make more bold decisions and were able to negotiate with banks and lending institutions a way forward on mortgages and what have you. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000688\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002273f60731-048d-4a21-81c5-52d588de2325\u0022\u003EThe other opportunity lost in this particular case relates to M\u0101ori housing. The Minister may be aware that under the former Department of M\u0101ori Affairs, many M\u0101ori land blocks were developed to accommodate M\u0101ori housing in urban and rural areas. That is no longer the case. The provisions within the Maori Land Act were tightened to the point where a consensus of 75 percent must be reached before any major decisions can be made, and that in itself is a very, very difficult barrier to overcome. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000689\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002273f60731-048d-4a21-81c5-52d588de2325\u0022\u003EThis bill was an opportunity. I had some discussions with Te Puni K\u014Dkiri staff a while back, and I put to them the proposal that land could be freed up for M\u0101ori housing. I gave the Tauranga - Western Bay of Plenty examples of where land was available but could not be developed properly for housing because of the limitations within Te Tura Whenua Maori Act 1993. Although the current amendments to the Act deal with minor issues in terms of administration, they do absolutely nothing to alleviate the strain on M\u0101ori housing. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000690\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002273f60731-048d-4a21-81c5-52d588de2325\u0022\u003EAs the Minister would know, throughout the 1960s, 1970s and part of the 1980s, M\u0101ori housing projects also alleviated M\u0101ori unemployment and accommodated, to a very high degree, M\u0101ori trade training. This was an opportunity for the Minister to revisit that arrangement and to look at a complete package that would include not only M\u0101ori land development but also M\u0101ori employment, and that would alleviate the strain on M\u0101ori housing. As I have said, this was an opportunity lost. But, hopefully, the Minister will consider this very issue in the next 12 months and put in some appropriate policies that may satisfy M\u0101ori landowners and do something constructive to alleviate the very high unemployment rate amongst the M\u0101ori population. I wait in anticipation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000691\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002273f60731-048d-4a21-81c5-52d588de2325\u0022\u003EI will revisit some of the points mentioned earlier on, particularly with regard to M\u0101ori trust boards. The Hon Georgina te Heuheu said that this bill is very timely; I say that it is well overdue. In fact, M\u0101ori trust boards around the country are looking at reconstructing themselves. They want to repeal the current legislation with the support of the current Minister, with a view toward severing those apron strings so that they can have total responsibility over their daily business activities. The Minister touched on the fact that it is ridiculous that a trust board has to notify the Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs before it can undertake major expenditure\u2014well, I would not consider it major expenditure; I cannot remember what the limit is. The Minister may be able to enlighten me on that, but I know that it is not a great deal. If a private company had to operate along the same grounds and was expected to make a sound investment that would benefit its beneficiaries on a wider scale, then this would not be the way to go about it. I look forward to the Minister acknowledging that and introducing more changes in the months to come. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000692\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002273f60731-048d-4a21-81c5-52d588de2325\u0022\u003EA good example that the Minister might like to refer to is the disestablishment of Te Arawa M\u0101ori Trust Board and the repeal of the Te Arawa M\u0101ori Trust Board legislation and its replacement with the Te Arawa Lakes Settlement Act, which was driven through this House by the former Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs. It essentially freed up the activities of the Te Arawa Lakes Trust to perform its undertakings and responsibilities in a more commercial way. By all accounts, it is doing very well, and projected returns in the future are looking very, very good. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000693\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002273f60731-048d-4a21-81c5-52d588de2325\u0022\u003EAlthough I congratulate the Minister on bringing this omnibus bill to the House\u2014it amends a lot of Acts\u2014I still think it is an opportunity lost. But there is still time to recover that ground.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022 data-id=\u00220b90e8860da241258f28d6b3900a7f10\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000694\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220b90e8860da241258f28d6b3900a7f10\u0022\u003EMETIRIA TUREI (Co-Leader\u2014Green):\u003C/span\u003E I will take a short call on the M\u0101ori Purposes Bill. The Green Party will be supporting this bill. It has been very special to hear the stories of Pukepuke Tangiora and the issues surrounding why her estate, her land, and her legacy are part of this legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000695\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022\u003EThe only issue the Greens have concerns the Maori Fisheries Act, and I was on the select committee that considered that legislation. We just want to make sure that this is a genuine oversight and that there are no unintended consequences, particularly for smaller iwi on whom this change may or may not have a significant impact. They are often the ones who are most forgotten and left out in issues around M\u0101ori fisheries. With that, I reiterate that the Green Party will be supporting this bill and we are pleased to do so.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022 data-id=\u00223186cde16c69470c8ecb845f0e2bf583\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000696\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223186cde16c69470c8ecb845f0e2bf583\u0022\u003EKELVIN DAVIS (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E The M\u0101ori Purposes Bill is an omnibus bill that changes how the Pukepuke Tangiora estate is administered, and amends three other Acts, those being the Maori Fisheries Act 2004, the Maori Trust Boards Act 1955, and Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000697\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022\u003EThe changes to the Pukepuke Tangiora estate have come about as the result of a petition of H\u0101riata Baker, one of two sisters who are the surviving beneficiaries stipulated in the will of Pukepuke Tangiora, their grandmother. The original will of Pukepuke Tangiora, which came into effect in 1936 upon her death, provided for the estate to be managed for the benefit of her son, his wife, and their nine children. H\u0101riata Baker and her sister Ker\u0113ni are the last two of those nine children. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000698\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022\u003EParliament has changed the effect of Pukepuke Tangiora\u2019s will through a Maori Purposes Act on six separate occasions between 1943 and 1973. As a result of these Acts, current legislation relating to some aspects of the will of Pukepuke Tangiora differs significantly from that which pertained when the will was written. H\u0101riata Baker and her sister Ker\u0113ni are in their late 70s, and upon their deaths the land will be free to be sold. They sought the reinstatement of the provision that land be held for another 20 years after the death of the last beneficiary, as envisaged by Pukepuke Tangiora but removed by the Maori Purposes Act 1943. However, the bill as written proposes to extend that period instead to just 5 years after the death of the last beneficiary, to provide enough time for beneficiaries of the estate to make decisions on a future governance entity to hold and manage the estate assets. H\u0101riata fears that upon her death pressure will continue to mount for the land to be sold to clear the way for the coast to be developed, ultimately destroying the unique and valuable character of the area\u2014that area being Ocean Beach, which was described in an editorial in Hawke\u2019s Bay Today as one of the gems of Hawke\u2019s Bay. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000699\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022\u003EThe M\u0101ori Affairs Committee believes that the Hastings District Council and the trustees have not acted in good faith towards the beneficiaries, which has led to a prolonged and unnecessary court case in order to protect their land. As the Hawke\u2019s Bay Today editorial continued to say: \u201CThere are a number of vested interests pulling in different directions at Ocean Beach\u2014Puke Puke Tangiora Estate, Waipuka Incorporation, which cannot agree with each other, or among their own beneficiaries, Tennyson OB which stand to make a lot of cash if the dice rolls in their favour, Haupouri Station Ltd a several-generations old farming business which wants to continue farming, but has gifted land to the council and sold land to potential developers. Then there is the anti-development group Future Ocean Beach,\u201D\u2014and, as well, the council. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000700\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022\u003EReverting to the original terms of the will would considerably ease the tension over the land. Although it would not bind the land in perpetuity, it might safeguard the land until more enlightened attitudes to coastal development prevail. The bill also proposes amendments to the Pukepuke Tangiora estate so that the M\u0101ori Land Court and not the Crown has jurisdiction to hear all matters relating to the administration of the estate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000701\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022\u003EThis bill also makes amendments to the Maori Fisheries Act 2004. An unintended consequence of the Act was that it prevented the transfer of fishery settlement assets of a mandated iwi organisation to another separate entity of the same iwi. Any attempt to transfer those assets would trigger a provision that would require the sale of those assets to the highest bidder. This, in effect, could strip fisheries assets away from an iwi. This bill proposes that iwi are able to transfer certain fisheries settlement assets to other separate entities within governance arrangements of the same iwi, which, in effect, rightfully allows iwi to assert tino rangatiratanga over their own assets. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000702\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022\u003EThis bill also amends the Maori Trust Boards Act 1955. At present the Act makes M\u0101ori trust boards accountable to the Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs. Similar governance entities are not subject to the same conditions of accountability. They are instead accountable to their beneficiaries. This bill proposes that the same practices that apply to those other entities also apply to M\u0101ori trust boards. As a result of this bill, M\u0101ori trust boards too will become accountable to their beneficiaries. This means that trust boards will be required to hold annual meetings where they will report to their beneficiaries on their activities over the course of a year and present an annual report including a financial statement and a budget. This means that the beneficiaries of trust boards can attend those annual meetings and hold the trust board to account. It is no longer the Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs to whom the trust board reports; instead, those annual reports, financial statements, and budget will be sent only to the Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs for his information. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000703\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022\u003EPart of the bill relates to the M\u0101ori Land Court and extends its powers to reflect those powers of the District Court to award interest on debt or damages. The amendments will ensure that an order of the M\u0101ori Land Court filed in the District Court may be enforced as if it has equal status as an order of the District Court, which includes being removed to the High Court for enforcement. The M\u0101ori Land Court has been in existence in one form or another since the passing of the Native Lands Act 1862, and the M\u0101ori Appellate Court has existed since the 1890s. The M\u0101ori Land Court has jurisdiction to hear matters relating to M\u0101ori land, including successions, title improvements, M\u0101ori land sales, and the administration of M\u0101ori land trusts and incorporations. It also has jurisdiction to hear cases under the Maori Fisheries Act 2004, the Maori Commercial Aquaculture Claims Settlement Act 2004, and a number of other statutes. As at September 2009 there were approximately 1.47 million hectares of M\u0101ori land, which comprises less than 5 percent of land in New Zealand. Although the total area of M\u0101ori land is small, the court in its administration recognises the special bond that M\u0101ori people have with this land. Thus the maintenance and preservation of the court\u2019s record, containing as it does invaluable customary information including whakapapa, or genealogy, remain a fundamental feature of the work of the court. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000704\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022\u003ELabour supports this bill being referred to the select committee. However, with M\u0101ori unemployment double that of the general population, this bill does miss an opportunity to make real progress for M\u0101ori. The issues burdening our people are unemployment, the cost of living, inadequate housing, and real progress in lifting wages. The cost of fruit and vegetables continues to rise. We heard today that it is getting more expensive to go to the doctor, and with the cuts to early childhood education funding, parents are being expected to dig deeper into their pockets to get their young ones an education in their most formative years. This is happening at a time when Statistics New Zealand\u2019s Income Survey shows that the median M\u0101ori income from all sources has gone backwards over the past 2 years by $41 a week, which probably explains why we heard over the weekend that families are being forced to buy cheaper cuts of meat normally used for dog food. When people get to that stage, we know that more drastic measures than what are being amended in this bill are necessary to improve outcomes for M\u0101ori. The Labour Party supports this bill being referred to the select committee, but it is a missed opportunity to make a real difference for M\u0101ori and to reduce disparity for our people.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227883c85e-a5bb-4a12-9962-80df55af0ecd\u0022 data-id=\u00228e07acef6ddf4a758fa9ed11f0b504f5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000705\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227883c85e-a5bb-4a12-9962-80df55af0ecd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228e07acef6ddf4a758fa9ed11f0b504f5\u0022\u003EHONE HARAWIRA (M\u0101ori Party\u2014Te Tai Tokerau):\u003C/span\u003E T\u0113na koe, Mr Deputy Speaker. The M\u0101ori Purposes Bill is certainly very important to the affected parties, but it is essentially technical in nature. I sincerely hope that it attracts the support of the whole House, as it certainly enjoys the support of all of the members of the M\u0101ori Party. Thank you very much.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002267431f57-e958-4c83-b438-7da8061d479e\u0022 data-id=\u0022c5753f44a8d8478c80fe44d684970602\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000706\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267431f57-e958-4c83-b438-7da8061d479e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c5753f44a8d8478c80fe44d684970602\u0022\u003EPAUL QUINN (National):\u003C/span\u003E It gives me pleasure to stand to support the M\u0101ori Purposes Bill, because this is just another step in the continuing journey of this Government\u2019s contribution to extend the tools for, and the capability of, M\u0101ori development. It is in the spirit of the extraordinary work that this Government is doing to advance M\u0101ori causes across the disciplines of economics and commerce, and in educational growth. I look forward to deliberating on this bill and hearing contributions during the course of the select committee\u2019s consideration of it. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022 data-id=\u00229bb26bb120f44b8ea68a27cf72b505c3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000707\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229bb26bb120f44b8ea68a27cf72b505c3\u0022\u003EHon SHANE JONES (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E T\u0113n\u0101 koe, Mr Deputy Speaker. Ng\u0101 mihi nunui ki a t\u0101tou i t\u0113nei p\u014D. As I give this short but very important speech, I would like to acknowledge the presence of very notable identities from Kait\u0101ia in the gallery this evening. Amongst other things the M\u0101ori Purposes Bill\u2014and this has been conveniently overlooked and ignored by Hone Harawira\u2019s and Paul Quinn\u2019s contributions, the content of which was inversely related to the size of the problems confronting M\u0101oridom\u2014isolates outstanding challenges in relation to the implementation of the M\u0101ori fisheries settlement, which a number of us realised\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000708\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002213287b0bc6a747909420ed66ed2d1086\u0022\u003EMr DEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I am sorry to interrupt the honourable member, but the time has come for me to leave the Chair. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000709\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003EDebate interrupted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000710\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003ESitting suspended from 10 p.m. to 9 a.m. (Wednesday)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id201011161ab7958519384ca885f1492180c97f76000711\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cbr\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000001\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022990939479d9047de9c60223060683bc5\u0022\u003ETuesday, 16 November 2010\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000002\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002206d63751363144488ce2bd3ccac8d4a4\u0022\u003E(continued on Wednesday, 17 November 2010)\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=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000003\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002257c4a218dfdd4bec8d39ea20b84602d3\u0022\u003EM\u0101ori Purposes Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000004\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00228d6e550918a449b7ac026228447ff1f9\u0022\u003EFirst Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000005\u0022\u003EDebate resumed.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022 data-id=\u00229b811fa4243e4aa3a7dd37661ffa066c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000006\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229b811fa4243e4aa3a7dd37661ffa066c\u0022\u003EHon SHANE JONES (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E Kia ora an\u014D t\u0101tou; greetings. This speech carries on from a flow of great ideas that was rudely interrupted last night, but such is the timetable of the House. A part of the M\u0101ori Purposes Bill that Labour members are very keen to support lies in Part 2. Unlike M\u0101ori members of the House who are not in the Labour Party, I will not read a prepared speech; I will speak as a parliamentarian should do, from prior experience and from the heart.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000007\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022\u003EPart 2 enables M\u0101ori asset-owning organisations that hold interests in the fishing industry to go through a transition of structural reform without having to add an additional burden on to what is essentially a bureaucratic process. It will allow organisations, when they restructure, to move from one organisation that is deemed to hold the mandate for iwi governance purposes, to another organisation. That is sensible because the social and political circumstances surrounding M\u0101ori are not static; they are dynamic. In order for this dynamism to continue unabated, we must not and should not leave in law impediments that create additional costs for people wanting to ensure that the structures that hold the assets can change. We do not want to see people lumbered with structures ill-suited to the circumstances that they confront when trying to make revenue, money, and create dividends from the Treaty settlement endowments.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000008\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022\u003EIn addition to that, changes are contemplated in the operations of the M\u0101ori Land Court. The M\u0101ori Land Court, as you would know, Mr Assistant Speaker Roy, is a source of great debate and dissension on the marae in M\u0101oridom. At one level it is seen as an agent of dispossession; on the other side it is seen as an institution that safeguards the rights of current generations, and also provides a buffer of support so that future generations will not lose their birthright or, indeed, their heritage that is tied up in land. At all times, the judges of the M\u0101ori Land Court and the staff associated with the administration of the court need to be operating in an efficient manner that does not cause additional costs to lie upon the communities of M\u0101ori landowners, who are probably in the lowest tax brackets.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000009\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022\u003EThat reminds me that, recently, when the tax reform changes went through, it was a source of considerable concern to our kaum\u0101tua and people around M\u0101oridom that the Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs had overlooked the fact that M\u0101ori landowners now face a higher tax rate as a consequence of his inattention. As a consequence of his not moving the M\u0101ori landowner tax rate in a fashion commensurate with the other tax changes that the Hon Bill English brought in, perversely enough those groups of taxpayers are at the moment lumbered with a disproportionately higher tax rate. I am quite sure the Minister will get around to it, but I rather fear for his long-term survival\u2014the election will arrive prior to that Act coming into force.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000010\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022\u003EI will continue by talking about other parts of this bill. A number of us on the M\u0101ori side of the parliamentarian community have had some experience with M\u0101ori trust boards. The trust boards were created, in most cases, during the 1900s, and they were designed to enable the iwi and their leaders of that day to have corporate statutory organisations to hold their assets and to distribute the dividends. As governance has improved, a greater level of importance has been attached to the actual people, who are the defined beneficiaries, having authority over these organisations, as opposed to the Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs. This bill moves in a direction whereby those organisations will not be responsible in an exclusive fashion to the Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs. Such changes have been promoted by the office of the Auditor-General, who has a responsibility to audit these organisations on a regular basis. They often represent a very high cost in terms of their audit fees, but that is another matter. This movement towards establishing the authority back with the people to exercise oversight in relation to these organisations is a development that should be welcomed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000011\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022\u003EOf course, these organisations nowadays are regarded as somewhat anachronistic. The Tainui M\u0101ori Trust Board, the Ng\u0101i Tahu M\u0101ori Trust Board, and a host of others have since been superseded\u2014in the case of Ng\u0101i Tahu, by their r\u016Bnanga and a variety of satellite organisations, the papatupu organisations, which give their major authority mandate. But underlying all these structures is the important principle, which is why we are keen to support it, that the people who are legally entitled to enjoy the fruits\u2014or, indeed, suffer the costs, if things go wrong\u2014of the endowment have the authority to direct how the organisation should be run. Indeed, they should have the authority to nominate\u2014either appoint or elect directly\u2014the people who will be the individual governors. Although it is a change that comes after a lot of protestation, it is a change that signals that unless people are actually put in a position where they control what is happening to the organisations that they are putative owners of, we cannot expect accountability to improve.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000012\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022\u003EIn fact, there is probably a good lesson here in terms of how organisations in mainstream society have gone off the boil, as well. For everything that might be said of a negative character about M\u0101ori organisations, they did not lose $6.5 billion that was turned into chaff as a consequence of the various directors and other people\u2014some of whom will go to jail, I hope\u2014squandering all the money of the nanas and granddads and other investors, which got poured into what has proven to be a bog of embarrassment called the financial sector community. So whenever I hear the ACT Party and others prattling on about problems with M\u0101ori stewardship, I love to remind them that the last time I checked there were not very many M\u0101ori organisations involved in the $6.5 billion meltdown of investor wealth, etc. It is almost as if when that happens in our P\u0101keh\u0101 community it is natural, so there is not a large hue and cry, but when there is a fraction of that loss within M\u0101oridom, it constantly makes the front page. Unfortunately, it is one of the crosses that M\u0101ori governance organisations have to bear.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000013\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022\u003EI will round up this contribution, which is the final contribution from us on this side of the House. It is the calm before the storm, because legislation is about to be debated that goes to the actual heart of M\u0101ori citizens\u2019 individual well-being and wealth. But that is to do with labour relations, and those speeches will soon follow. The fisheries structure has been a successful waka for M\u0101ori, and it is not unrelated to the aquaculture changes, which I support and I am glad that they are going to the Primary Production Committee. But the changes to the M\u0101ori fisheries iwi organisations and the changes to how M\u0101ori iwi organisations might eventually receive their 20 percent entitlement to aquaculture are connected, and everything we do to improve the governance capabilities of those organisations and their ability to generate wealth should be supported. N\u0101 reira, t\u0113n\u0101 koutou, t\u0113n\u0101 t\u0101tou, kia ora t\u0101tou katoa.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022badb0a39-849c-462a-b32f-77fc017c9fc2\u0022 data-id=\u00222d24243384ce4056865e66df4c1edfa2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000014\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022badb0a39-849c-462a-b32f-77fc017c9fc2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222d24243384ce4056865e66df4c1edfa2\u0022\u003ESIMON BRIDGES (National\u2014Tauranga):\u003C/span\u003E It is good to take what I hope will be a very brief call on the M\u0101ori Purposes Bill, which will come to the M\u0101ori Affairs Committee, ably chaired by Mr Tau Henare. This is an omnibus bill. It is a fairly technical bill, really, that will amend three Acts. It will be split into parts later down the track: the M\u0101ori Fisheries Amendment Bill, the M\u0101ori Trust Boards Amendment Bill, and Te Ture Whenua M\u0101ori Amendment Bill. I suppose if there is a common theme in what we are doing\u2014and there generally is\u2014it is that we are working to improve lives and the prospects of all M\u0101ori by cutting red tape and streamlining regulations. Effectively, I suggest that this bill is pro-business. It is for better management and governance skills for M\u0101ori generally and in M\u0101ori organisation trust boards, estates, constitutions, and the like\u2014really providing a good environment and good policy settings, sound settings, for business success.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000015\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022badb0a39-849c-462a-b32f-77fc017c9fc2\u0022\u003EI will take this moment, while we are talking about doing that, and M\u0101ori business, to just bear a thought for the kiwifruit industry. It is not widely known that part of the backbone of the industry, a strength, is M\u0101ori. Through Te Awanui Huka Pak in the Bay of Plenty one has with its amalgamation with, from memory, Seeka, the biggest pack-houses in New Zealand. They are M\u0101ori-run for M\u0101ori. They have for many, many years been working with and supporting M\u0101ori kiwifruit owners, of which there are many. So the idea that is out there that M\u0101ori are not good at business and that they are new to business is absolutely not true, if one looks at the kiwifruit industry. They are, as I said, a backbone of the kiwifruit industry\u2014certainly in the Bay of Plenty and I am sure, if I look through it, in other parts of the nation as well. They are going through a difficult time at the moment. It is an uncertain time, but the Government is working very hard on it. I am sure that the very best solution to a difficult set of facts will emerge very shortly.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022 data-id=\u00229723cb5bdc954506a41b044bd57e11ea\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000016\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229723cb5bdc954506a41b044bd57e11ea\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE (National):\u003C/span\u003E I will take just a very quick call with regard to the estate of Pukepuke Tangiora. When Labour was last in Government\u2014yes, I know I have something growing on my lip, but if you want to donate, by all means donate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000017\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226a8fb8e9bbb44a618ceee6445e0ab335\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: The member should not include me in his speech.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000018\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223e09894ba7d6449fb75b0994efbfd764\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I thought Mr Assistant Speaker might want to donate. That is fine; it is OK if you do not want to. But can you imagine 120 people giving $5 each for a worthy cause? But I digress. I wanted to take a brief call on the estate of Pukepuke Tangiora, because it should have been sorted out by the previous Labour Government\u2019s Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs then. He was given a report by the M\u0101ori Affairs Committee asking him to sort it out. It is only now\u2014nearly 3 years later\u2014that our Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs, the Hon Dr Pita Sharples, has seen fit to do what the select committee asked the previous Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs to do. So I say thank you to the Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000019\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003EI will finish by saying this is a great place\u2014this is a great place\u2014when one of my enemies from a long time ago can walk across the House and donate $5 to a worthy cause. I publicly say thank you to the Hon Trevor Mallard.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000020\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003EBill read a first time. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000021\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003EBill referred to the M\u0101ori Affairs Committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002221aa6503e85f4092b067eaccce234c28\u0022\u003EEmployment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000023\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022d3735c27c4c24e83af328e4dc838657e\u0022\u003ESecond Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000024\u0022\u003EDebate resumed from 11 November.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022 data-id=\u0022ef219974832b4bbeb8aae1020019b06c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000025\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ef219974832b4bbeb8aae1020019b06c\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I am very pleased to stand with my colleagues and continue my speech in very strong opposition to the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2). I think that when I was interrupted for no other reason than the House rising last time, I was talking about the effect on young people of the 90-day \u201Csack at will\u201D legislation being extended to every employer in the country. I remember what happened a very short time ago, when the Minister ploughed the 90-day trial through the House, under urgency. Of course the Government said then that the legislation would affect only employers with fewer than 20 employees. Under this bill that practice will now extend to every workplace in New Zealand. So this is a very, very sad day for workers\u2019 rights and, indeed, for job creation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000026\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EIt is ironical that the Government says it is intent on creating jobs, growing the economy, and getting us on to a level with Australia in terms of wages and conditions. That is just a joke, when every step that the Government takes undermines the ability of workers to get a fair deal. Our concern is all about workers in New Zealand having the ability to get a fair deal, without fear of retribution or fear of being undermined. It is all about equalising the employment relationship, because if people think that new employees who go into a workplace now, fearful of being sacked within their first 90 days of employment, have an equal relationship with the employer, they are dreaming. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000027\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EI acknowledge that there are many, many good employers in this country, but there are a tremendous number of good employees, as well. My concern, and the concern of members on this side of the Chamber, is about the way that all those good employees are to be treated unfairly\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000028\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022293aa13806b5496f961d4856fac50cb6\u0022\u003EDavid Bennett\u003C/span\u003E: It only works one way. That\u2019s true for Labour, isn\u2019t it? It\u2019s only for one side.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000029\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228bf440faf9f84842a7e619a8da8dc41f\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: That is all right, thank you, Mr Bennett. We are concerned about the way that employees are treated when they enter the workplace and start the first 90 days of their work. The Department of Labour\u2019s survey revealed that the workers it interviewed felt vulnerable and were concerned about job security, and that nearly a quarter of workers were sacked within that 90-day period. If anyone in New Zealand thinks that a quarter of the people in the workplace are not worthy of retaining their job, I think that is an appalling indictment. That is what the National Government obviously thinks, because it has given employers free rein to sack people\u2014and often they are young people\u2014without any reason whatsoever. Maybe an employer does not like the employee\u2019s hairstyle or the employee wears an earring. Employers do not have to give people a reason for sacking them. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000030\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225ed6e003b36e49ea9bc2a637e9c045d3\u0022\u003EDarien Fenton\u003C/span\u003E: Could be too much sauce.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000031\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002234d4b18de57343bb820896bce633764f\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: That is right; they could put too much sauce on the food. That is absolutely appalling. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000032\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EIf my memory serves me correctly, I am pretty sure that someone from the Government benches said the survey findings meant that 75 percent of employees kept their jobs. Well, whoop-de-doo! If we think that a 75 percent retention rate after 90 days for new employees is acceptable, that is a real indictment on this Government\u2019s thinking\u2014if it is thinking. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000033\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EAlso, while I am on the subject of employment rights, I point out that if workers do manage to get through the first 90 days and then subsequently take a personal grievance for wrongful dismissal, reinstatement is the primary remedy under the current Act if it is found that they were wrongfully dismissed. I think that is a very good thing; so does my colleague Darien Fenton. Why? Because it states that retention of employment, particularly in this environment, is the most important thing, so if an employer has unjustifiably dismissed a worker, then reinstatement should be the primary remedy. We all know that if the employer is an absolute bully, or if there are irreconcilable differences between the employer and employee, then of course the employment will not continue, but that should be the primary remedy. This bill removes reinstatement as the primary remedy, so even if a worker is dismissed unjustifiably\u2014that is, it is deemed by the Employment Court or by the whole proceedings that the worker is not at fault\u2014the person still does not get the job back. That person will join the thousands and thousands of people in the unemployment queue, because this Government is not creating jobs. Apart from the fact that this is grossly unfair, it is offensive and is just plain dumb. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000034\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EThis legislation is not about creating jobs, and it is not about retaining people in work. It is just about tripping back to the 1990s under a Government that simply cannot get out of that mode. Although under the previous Labour Government we had finally put ourselves in a position where New Zealanders could hold our heads high internationally because we had labour relations that stacked up, this back-to-the-future lot is taking us back to the 1990s. We are being taken back to a time of shame, back to a time of people being fearful of losing their jobs, back to a time when workers\u2019 conditions were slashed\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000035\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002252f5d33dc772455ebc1ae14bd0a571fb\u0022\u003EDavid Bennett\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, come on!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000036\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d39b9d0a6f63492c9559cac50374690e\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: \u201COh, come on!\u201D, says Mr Bennett, the chair of the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee. This Government is bad enough, but the chair and the Government members on that committee did not listen to the vast majority of the submitters, who opposed this bill. That chair made a mockery of the select committee process. I congratulate the Labour and Green members on their minority report, because what the chair and the Government members did on the committee was absolutely shocking. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000037\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EI thank Mr Assistant Speaker Roy for letting me know that it is time for me to close this speech. I look forward to the Committee stage on this bill. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022749d97b8-a772-4227-83da-b5e264c37bc0\u0022 data-id=\u0022b36634f7598843cfb5acc8e7a4938ae5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000038\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022749d97b8-a772-4227-83da-b5e264c37bc0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b36634f7598843cfb5acc8e7a4938ae5\u0022\u003EALLAN PEACHEY (National\u2014T\u0101maki):\u003C/span\u003E Goodness me, what a tirade of hyperbole and exaggeration! I think I said in my first reading speech that in this House during this debate on the Employment Relations Bill (No 2) we are seeing a re-creation of a world that ceased to exist many, many years ago. The once-proud Labour Party, proud to represent the working class of New Zealand, now simply wants to re-create the class wars of the 19th century, without recognising just how much the world has changed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000039\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022749d97b8-a772-4227-83da-b5e264c37bc0\u0022\u003EThis legislation is all about greater flexibility, and about greater responsibility for workers, whether or not they choose to belong to trade unions, and employers. I suspect that I am like many, probably all, members on the Government side of the House, and probably like most New Zealanders, in that I am getting sick and tired of seeing employers\u2014those people who take out mortgages on their homes to start their businesses and to keep their businesses running, and who often go without, and whose families often go without, to make sure that the workers are first and foremost paid\u2014being kicked around. But, then again, if we step back to look at them, who are these Labour members debating this legislation? They are certainly not the representatives of the working class.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000040\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022749d97b8-a772-4227-83da-b5e264c37bc0\u0022\u003EIn fact, that begs the question of where the next great working-class leader of the Labour Party is. The party has not had one for 40 years; the one it had then took a long time to develop. Where is the next one? I tell the House that that person will not come from the core membership of the current Labour Party. The core membership of the current Labour Party is no more than a group of trade union officials. I was staggered, when this legislation was being debated last time the House sat, to hear during Mr Henare\u2019s speech that those people on the other side, whom I have heard boasting of having led strikes, also continued to take their wages at the same time. I wonder how many New Zealand families tremble at night at the prospect of a bunch of trade union officials, who now control the Labour Party, taking their husbands and wives, fathers and mothers, out on strike so they can build a reputation for themselves and so they can get a bit of publicity, with absolutely no regard for the good of the working-class people of New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000041\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e31d3b10c55a4b6890f3f530031acd8c\u0022\u003EDarien Fenton\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I thought we were on the second reading of the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) and were not talking about the trade union movement and Tau Henare\u2019s strike bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000042\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b0dafc26390a4e73ac28dc8e0b342abf\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, the second reading is the tightest of the three debates, and I would ask the member to draw his analogies into the second reading.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002282e734e6d3e24fafad9a35181daea2a1\u0022\u003EChris Tremain\u003C/span\u003E: Speaking to the point of order\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000044\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002246b3988fdbe4420f86affd759c8c28cf\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: No, I have ruled.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000045\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022749d97b8-a772-4227-83da-b5e264c37bc0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002214abe35fca8245889bbba941e7efb87f\u0022\u003EALLAN PEACHEY\u003C/span\u003E: I will pass just one observation, which is that it is interesting to note just how sensitive that crowd over there are to the truth about the real nature of trade unionism in New Zealand, and to what that party now represents. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u0022f4e953ee0197455183c789009d524b21\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000046\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f4e953ee0197455183c789009d524b21\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I say to the honourable member Allan Peachey, who preceded me, that he reminds me of Jekyll and Hyde. He goes to the Education and Science Committee and is a highly competent chair there, which is in absolute contrast to what happens when he goes to the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee. At the Education and Science Committee he is someone who gets the business through and who can work with the Opposition and with his colleagues. He is a highly talented chair, using his experience. Then he comes into the House and hears industrial relations legislation being debated, and it is as if he was back as the employer in a bulk-funded school, and it is pretty pathetic. It is almost like a reversion; he is back in the past, back in the Dark Ages. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000047\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EIt is amazing that Allan Peachey\u2019s colleagues cannot see his talent\u2014the way that he can take on roles. I am not sure what he taught when he was at school. Maybe it was English, because he certainly gives the impression of being a drama queen, and has an ability to take on different roles and different characters when he comes into the House. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000048\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EI have had a bit to do with Allan Peachey recently. I actually think that the reason why Allan Peachey is closer to the truth\u2014but I admire him for his ability to come into the House\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000049\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e384c431da0c40eda19392dab31330d8\u0022\u003EChris Tremain\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Speaker, how is this relevant?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000050\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228a0fbdac7c984cfa998fbb43f3a781ab\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: After that, Mr Assistant Speaker wants me to narrow my speech. He is intervening on those members\u2019 side, but not on ours. That is interesting\u2014[Interruption] There was a point of order earlier. It is not that I am referring to it, because that would be inappropriate, but the member\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000051\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022682725fe2c904cc19c7709570e49bdc4\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, the member is referring to it. He must get on with the speech.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000052\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228791b27f8c554147a938c41c4200ad57\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: I note the wide debate that Allan Peachey was allowed by the Assistant Speaker. I will now focus on this Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) and look at how this legislation fits very well with the attempt being made by John Key and his Government to drive down the conditions of wage earners and salary earners all around the country and, in particular, in the Mana electorate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000053\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EThis bill is focused on poor people. It is designed to drive out the gap between the rich and the poor, between the Aussies and the New Zealanders. This is a bill designed by John Key to make sure that his mates do not have to pay decent wages to people who are wage earners and salary earners. These amendments are unfair; they are absolutely unbalanced. In fact, they are about as balanced as Allan Peachey\u2019s previous speech. The amendments are unnecessary, because our system is working pretty well already. The amendments are ideological. We can tell from where they were announced that ideology, not logic, was involved. The amendments were announced at the National Party conference. They were hauled out of the blue, with promises of consultation that were broken by John Key. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000054\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EIt is interesting to see how often, now, John Key is being caught breaking his word. One thing that Kiwis think is important is truthfulness in their leaders. This is a good example of how John Key has been caught being untruthful and not being loyal to his word. He made a commitment on this legislation to go back to people and to talk about it, before it was announced, and he broke his word. He did that deliberately. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000055\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EWe have a Prime Minister whose word cannot be relied on\u2014a Prime Minister who, time and time again, makes a commitment and breaks it. One of the things that Kiwis value in their leaders is that they are people who tell the truth, people who are reliable, and people who do not break their word. Kiwis also like loyalty from those people. What do we have now? We have hundreds of photos of John Key and Pansy Wong, smiling and waving\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000056\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022359f2b35fff443feb9710b914d45a369\u0022\u003EHon Tau Henare\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I ask whether we should not just concentrate on what is front of us.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000057\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224ee04edb7f6a4406aa9d093717fcd5bc\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: I will be consistent. I ask members to read the suite of Speakers\u2019 rulings on pages 106 and 107 of Speakers\u2019 Rulings about what is and what is not in the bill. In the same way that I asked Mr Peachey to draw his analogies into the debate on the bill, I ask this member to do the same.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000058\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022252acd788cd94d7bacccc2a5f1c76638\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: I will focus on Pansy Wong and the changes in the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) that apply to her. This is a four-pronged approach in an attack on job security. A loyal employer, someone who was a good manager, would not weaken the processes in the way that they are being weakened here, and were weakened for Pansy Wong. Arm in arm with Pansy Wong was the Prime Minister going around the ethnic communities, until there was a problem, and where was his loyalty then? It was a case of \u201Csmile and walk away\u201D. The amendments extend the range\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000059\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002225f8c78b-f301-4aca-a936-366f00a26bc9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229067b0899fc44af2aff8ef4282f1ae30\u0022\u003ESandra Goudie\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I fail to find the relevance of what the member is saying to this bill. I fail to see how he is responding to the fact that we are speaking on this legislation, when his comments seem to have no relevance to it whatsoever. I am very concerned about that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000060\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f3f189ab90c74d19914b7f7b63b43d73\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: Speaking to the point of order, I say the bill has a lot to do with job security, processes for dismissal, rights to appeal, and rights to reinstatement. All of those apply to Pansy Wong. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000061\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022260af5f9b6bf45e3b8c1d14d4347a782\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: Members are still expected to discuss the main purpose and contents of the bill. I ask that members do that. If they are making analogies, then they must draw them into the main purpose of the bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000062\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002211b84e6029e444b1a69bc829a4009f35\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: This bill makes it easier to dismiss people and harder for them to be reinstated. It is absolutely clear that that is part of the purpose of this legislation. We now have a classic case under the existing legislation where Phil Heatley jumped and was reinstated, and under this legislation Pansy Wong will go and will not have a hope of being reinstated. Why? Because there is no loyalty on the other side of the House, and members opposite do not care about processes as we go forward. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000063\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EJohn Key tried to sell this bill as part of a plan to grow the economy, but we all know what the evidence is in this area. In New Zealand we have people who will not change jobs for fear of this legislation. We have what is known internationally as a sticky labour market. We used to have a pretty flexible labour market. In fact, I have had debates with some of my colleagues in the past about how our labour market was perhaps too flexible. But people could go from job to job, to where they would be valued, to where they would be paid more, and to the opportunities, and that was good for our economy. But this bill says to people that if they are on $100,000, it might be worth going to a job paying $110,000, but that will be no damned good if they will lose the job in the first 90 days. What sort of security for one\u2019s family is that? It is about the same sort of security that Pansy Wong had, and about the same sort of loyalty that Pansy Wong was shown. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000064\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EIt is clear that there has been no attempt on the part of the Government to close the wage gap with Australia, because this legislation is designed to drive down conditions for wage earners and salary earners in New Zealand. It is the intention of this Government to drive down conditions in order to make wage earners and salary earners earn less, so that the Government\u2019s mates can make bigger profits. That is a very short-term approach, because all the international evidence now shows that when workplaces are working well together\u2014where workers are valued, where they are trained, where their skills are better, where there is a two-way commitment, and where workers know their employer will not do the \u201Csmile and wave\u201D goodbye or take the \u201Csmile and walk away\u201D approach towards them\u2014workplaces become more and more productive. Profits go up and everyone is better off: the owners, the managers, and the wage earners and salary earners. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000065\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003ENew Zealand already has amongst the most flexible labour laws in the developed world. I think it is fair to say that during the time of Margaret Wilson and when I was the Minister of Labour, a pretty deliberate decision was made not to go back to the rules of the 1980s, to take a more progressive approach, to attempt to get something that New Zealanders could unite behind, and to have some consistency in labour relations legislation over a period of time. We had an indication from the National Party, even before the election, that it also thought that was the case. But what we clearly have now is an approach from National that it wants to drive down the conditions of people around New Zealand. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000066\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EIt shows gross incompetence on National\u2019s part that it is choosing to progress this legislation, and progress other legislation later that takes away peoples\u2019 holidays, as it goes into the Mana by-election. People in Mana are among the most disadvantaged, and they will be affected the most by this legislation. I do not know whether Gerry Brownlee hates Hekia Parata, or whether he is just incompetent\u2014it might be both. It could be both, but debating this bill under urgency while going into the Mana by-election is probably the biggest case of incompetence I have seen for a long time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022 data-id=\u00225a1cc2ba8d424e2a9a08de5b1fab1caa\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000067\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225a1cc2ba8d424e2a9a08de5b1fab1caa\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National):\u003C/span\u003E I am very grateful to the previous speaker, Mr Mallard, for pointing out that there are differences between this Government and the previous Government. Indeed, there was a very speedy process, which he claims was quite unfair. I want to contrast that with the previous Prime Minister, Helen Clark, and her support of Taito Phillip Field. She stood up and defended him and said all that he was guilty of was working hard for his constituents, and she paraded around South Auckland with Mr Field in complete defence of the indefensible. Well, if that is the contrast between this Government and the previous Government, bring it on. I would really like Mr Mallard to talk as much about that as he can. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000068\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003EHe also raised the chagrin that the New Zealand Council of Trade Unions has over the Prime Minister not giving any heads-up to it. Well, here is the news: we now have a Prime Minister who does not have to go cap in hand to the unions every time we want to change employment law. We are not beholden to the unions. There is a very sound relationship, and if the president of the New Zealand Council of Trade Unions got a bit angry about that, I am sure she will get over it. This is a Government that thinks for itself. It does not have to go to the unions every time it wants to make changes, and that is a significant difference for employment relations in this country.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000069\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b9ef7d1ab89e4f5091933a354c5c39a8\u0022\u003ESue Moroney\u003C/span\u003E: Why did he promise he would?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000070\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224ec48f31e64e4efa8aba79e3a20bde7b\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE\u003C/span\u003E: I was not there. I do not know what he said, but I know he does not have to go cap in hand to Ms Kelly every time he wants to make changes to employment legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000071\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003EI want to drill into some of the matters that came up during the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee\u2019s consideration of the bill, and in particular the 90-day probation period. Again, I thank Lynne Pillay for providing an excellent example of how the 90-day probation period will work. She quoted a fellow who lost his job because, he claimed, he put too much aioli sauce in the pasta. Here is what she did not say. The 90-day probation period will not apply in a situation like that. That case may be before the courts, so I will not talk about it specifically, but a person who does not sign an employment agreement cannot be subject to the 90-day probation period. So yet again the New Zealand Council of Trade Unions has scored an own goal. This is an example of the process working, not of the process not working. No one who does not sign an employment agreement can have the protection of the 90-day legislation, which has been in place for a couple of years now. The Department of Labour has done some very good research into how effectively the law is working. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000072\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003EMembers on the other side can take a \u201Cglass three-quarters empty\u201D approach to what is going on. But I point out that a great number of those people who were taken on by small businesses under the 90-day provision would not have been employed were it not for that opportunity. It is just too hard otherwise. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000073\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003EIt is also really interesting that of all of the small and medium sized enterprises that were able to use that legislation, only half of them did so\u2014only half of the organisations. They did not all rush out and slap on 90-day probation periods. They thought very carefully about when that would be appropriate and when it was OK to take a chance on employees who might be marginalised\u2014they might be coming back from a long period of unemployment or might be new migrants to this country\u2014and give them a chance. But of the half only of the employers that used that provision, they did not even use it for all their staff. They used it for only just over half of those staff. So for all the wailing and gnashing of teeth, only just over a quarter of the people who could have been employed under a 90-day probation period were. The rest were employed permanently. And here is the good news: nearly 80 percent of them still have their jobs. Nearly 80 percent of them are still employed. For those who are not, they were not all sacked. Some of them left of their own volition; for some it simply did not work out. That is one of the consequences\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000074\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022518c5c07b922454b80717fef7e927bce\u0022\u003ECarol Beaumont\u003C/span\u003E: How many workers were surveyed in that survey?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000075\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229be36ce403f34ddc852dee4efde70a6d\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE\u003C/span\u003E: Enough to make the survey scientific. Nobody is questioning the validity. I understand that members on the other side are worried that those conducting the survey did not speak to employees, but it is not employees who are doing the 90-day probation period employing. It is employers. When we are talking to the employers\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000076\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224317fac937354bcf88259fa5b39fd8dd\u0022\u003ESue Moroney\u003C/span\u003E: So they don\u2019t count?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000077\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226153a04bee0e492ea38c6c003a2fe158\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE\u003C/span\u003E: I did not say that. Nobody is putting words in my mouth. Of course they count\u2014that is why we are doing this. I have absolute confidence that when this measure is extended, we will see similar discernment from other employers. We had the Association of Salaried Medical Specialists\u2014the junior doctors\u2014come in and say that they would all be put on 90-day probation periods. Well, that is nonsense, because employers are much more discerning than that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000078\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e266518ce8e8412ba40ef167ac688703\u0022\u003ESue Moroney\u003C/span\u003E: How do you know?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000079\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fbf7a9a4500644578b008fc79cbd983e\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE\u003C/span\u003E: Because I have been one and I know what they are like. As Lynne Pillay said, and I will quote from her second reading speech, there are many, many good employers, just as there are many, many good employees. But what she did not say is what Labour members really think but do not say out loud, which is that they have no problems with there being a few errant employees. They ask why on earth we would want to wrap law up around controlling errant employees, but when it comes to errant employers, they say we should lock them down. They say we should put all the red tape around them that we can, and all the good employers can suffer the consequences of having to put up with that\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000080\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224136e04a362b4b62938bdd1e0967d1d8\u0022\u003EHon Maurice Williamson\u003C/span\u003E: Darien Fenton\u2019s saying \u201CYes\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000081\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022229c36c1af1248fb88023bf05e0a9b5e\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE\u003C/span\u003E: Exactly; she has admitted it. Why would she not? It is what she believes. Labour members believe that all employers are errant, so we should lock them up in red tape. Well, I do not think so. I think employers deserve to be given much more confidence in their ability to grow this economy, to employ staff, and to have the flexibility that this bill will give them, and I support it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002209cc556b24f14e7db8a87b8f8322b86b\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendments recommended by the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee by majority be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\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=\u0022ae36ad8c993c4ed38b65640b6a55d1fc\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 Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) be now read a second time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill read a second time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000082\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00227ffc4923305e47b29409060af174687c\u0022\u003EIn Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000083\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022483e2be6c157477e80443f40e66f8b24\u0022\u003EPart 1  Amendments to principal Act\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u0022b20ea4fc6b984ad7ac6146997e758efa\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b20ea4fc6b984ad7ac6146997e758efa\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I think it is interesting that for a bill that is so important and so vital to the economy, we have sitting in the chair the Hon Maurice Williamson, a junior Minister from outside Cabinet, someone with very little experience in this area, and one for whom there is so little respect that the officials have not even turned up to support him. I think it is a sad state of affairs when the Minister of Labour, herself not the sharpest pencil in the National box, is replaced by Maurice Williamson, who, I think it is fair to say, although he has opinions on lots of things, would not claim to be an expert in the labour relations area. He does pretty well on statistics, but his talent is relatively limited.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000085\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EThis is the first substantive part of the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2). There will be some more substantive parts as time goes on and extra parts start to hit us here in the Chamber. But Labour, for starters, has tabled a set of amendments that we will be working through in order to attempt to make this legislation\u2014I will not say palatable, but\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000086\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002225f8c78b-f301-4aca-a936-366f00a26bc9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002210232e21684246eaa66fb34899b8ac98\u0022\u003ESandra Goudie\u003C/span\u003E: He doesn\u2019t even understand it!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227978ee9c28f24b76901525ea3dde9213\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry? What happened there? That is the woman with the brain of Paul Quinn and the voice of Judy Keall. But I am not quite sure what she said\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000088\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022448e9ed0e68349e3bd49a75a8f99e18e\u0022\u003EChris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: You\u2019re not going to be invited to Judy\u2019s for dinner again any time soon.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000089\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225544b26b2367445abe5134e1fd21025e\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: Good. We have a number of amendments here that are designed to make a bill that can never be palatable, in being part of legislation that itself is unpalatable, slightly better than would otherwise be the case. We have attempted to get the support of the M\u0101ori Party and the Greens for some amendments that are reasonable. They are not radical; most of them do not have the substance necessary to turn the legislation round but they would make it slightly better.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000090\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EThe first amendment, for example, would put in a clause that would require the employer to provide access to information about a decision to dismiss an employee\u2014and that, to me, seems just a pretty basic human right. It is part of the fairness that is ingrained in New Zealanders about their relationships at work. If someone gets the sack, that person has a right to information about that decision.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000091\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EThere is another amendment on the issue of the 90-day trial period not being advertised as a condition of employment. I think that is pretty important, because at that stage it shows an absolute lack of openness on the part of the employer about whether that will be a condition. One of the things I say to my colleagues is that I think we will get to the point, at some stage, of good employers doing the opposite. I think that over a period of time we will find that good employers will put in their ads that they do not use the 90-day trial procedures, because they trust their own ability to recruit, and they trust the processes that flow.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000092\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223d36ece5d4604b5c961f04792963007b\u0022\u003EMichael Woodhouse\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s just what I said.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000093\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002224c03fe2531044fba0549b85656a771a\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: That is exactly right. The member \u201CMichael Woodcock\u201D has just accepted that good employers will not use this system.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000094\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222094b268a91d48a7b0d51c23e2e65c6f\u0022\u003EChris Tremain\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000095\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002227c1d4ac37d7456e9883e2b5b3ada3ab\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: I think I can anticipate the point of order\u2014that is, that we use correct names. The member did not say \u201CWoodhouse\u201D, so I ask him to pay just a little more attention to that in future.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000096\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bafe02534ad5436cbb96e6de59ec1287\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: I think members on this side understand that members opposite come and go, and I get them mixed up over a period of time. Although the member is considerably more talented than the average member on that side, it is not a particularly high test. I acknowledge Mr Woodhouse, whom I have sat on a select committee with, and who regularly supplies me with bottles of wine as his team loses to Wellington-based teams. I acknowledge his name.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000097\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EBut I want to emphasise what Mr Woodhouse said. He said good employers will not use this system. I go one step further and say I think good employers will make it clear that they are not using this system, in order to attract better employees into their workplaces and to give people some security. As I indicated earlier, if someone is a talented person who is being well paid, has a family to support, and maybe has a mortgage, such a person does not want to go into a situation, even if it is worth a few thousand dollars a year more, where he or she could be sacked next week, without a reason and without the income necessary to support a family.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000098\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EThere is another area of amendment, for which we are suggesting that unjustified dismissal and personal grievance remedies may be sought when good faith has been breached. I agree with Michael Woodhouse that most employers are good employers. The vast majority of them are good, but, you know, there are some who are not. There are some who are dogs that self-respecting fleas would not sit on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000099\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cf9b9668391643a39ccc97a89f116367\u0022\u003EHon Tau Henare\u003C/span\u003E: Hotel workers union.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000100\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022303e09f3e16a437eb42d4cf8639929d5\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: Tau Henare used to be on the workers\u2019 side against those\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000101\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ba1d7df3c8cf404b99e8989082585d61\u0022\u003EHon Tau Henare\u003C/span\u003E: The hotel workers union was the worst employer in Auckland.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227ba8a4cdbac74b8cba71a6239d4890ce\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: There have been a few sacked since Tau Henare\u2019s time. In those days, Tau Henare used to go toe-to-toe with employers\u2014in fact, he used to go toe-to-toe with union officials, too, except that he just hit some of them from behind, with bottles. Tau Henare knows that it is important to have procedures when there is unjustified dismissal and when good faith has been breached.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000103\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002222164fb4b36a471789c0967109ff00f7\u0022\u003EHon Tau Henare\u003C/span\u003E: What good faith?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000104\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eeb294ce11f84a8a9554f9db6b176c59\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: That is exactly the point; for some employers there is no good faith. When that is the case, there must be a process for their employees.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000105\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222c68732546b5463ba89e532d2ec8368e\u0022\u003EHon Tau Henare\u003C/span\u003E: Feeling the pressure of Unite union, are we? How\u2019s Matt?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000106\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002207cf9bb8edad440b8bc4d2cad257c300\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: I understand that Matt McCarten is not very well. I want to say nothing more than that Matt is not very well; that is something we all know. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000107\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EThere are amendments about communication through collective bargaining, because this bill does not require good faith to occur on the part of employers. This bill takes away the requirements for good faith on the part of employers during collective bargaining.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000108\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EI ask members opposite what sort of country they want to live in. What sort of New Zealand do they want? Do they want one where we can work together as wage earners and salary earners and employers, or do they want to go back to the Allan Peachey approach\u2014the class war? I was trying to work out the analysis that Allan Peachey was giving in relation to this measure when he was speaking in the House, and it was actually a Marxist analysis. His analysis was that of someone whom I think has spent quite a lot of time looking at Das Kapital and not enough time looking at the way\u2014[Interruption]\u2014well, Marx and Engels\u2014Kiwis work and what Kiwis\u2019 values are. The cooperation, the loyalty, and the approach of working together as a team, which we pride ourselves on in New Zealand, is something that members opposite are trying to destroy, from the basis of their outdated ideology\u2014the sort of ideology that now exists in very, very few countries that are succeeding. We just do not see that ideology in northern European and Scandinavian countries at the moment, and in other countries that are growing. Actually, this legislation is just so much worse than that of the Australians, and National members want to try to close the wage gap between the two countries. We know that they cannot do that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022 data-id=\u00227ec3f14ac79f4d00886b93eecc98dc5d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000109\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227ec3f14ac79f4d00886b93eecc98dc5d\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National):\u003C/span\u003E I will take a quick call on Part 1 of the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2), but before I do so I acknowledge the retraction of a little faux pas that Mr Mallard made in respect of my name. I can assure the Committee that I have been called a heck of a lot worse than that, but I can also assure the Committee that it is not wooden. I will just pick up on a point and tweak the paraphrasing that Mr Mallard made in respect of my comment about good employers not using the 90-day probationary provision. What I said was that some good employers will use it; some good employers will see the need not to use it. Those who do use it might use it sometimes, but they will not use it all the time. It is a thing called choice. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000110\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003EWhat we heard from submitters\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000111\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220cbcc3d89d4f4d6cb0a357264f876902\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Whose choice?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000112\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022300d3d7ec82546e98de3e4a153b4f12f\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE\u003C/span\u003E: That is a very good question, and it is the sort of question that submitters to the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee were asked by members on the other side in respect of the choice that employees have if they are offered an employment agreement with a 90-day probationary period in it, and they do not feel comfortable about that. The answer was, of course, that they have a choice: either to accept the offer on those terms, or not to accept the offer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000113\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022aee7956d9fab4454a6bfdc79c8a57c76\u0022\u003EHon Members\u003C/span\u003E: Oh!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000114\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226e68c4a53bf347f9bb468e8e8704193f\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE\u003C/span\u003E: Here we go\u2014we hear the wailing and the gnashing of teeth. How terrible it would be that people would possibly back themselves to make their own minds up about the terms and conditions of employment, including a 90-day probationary period! \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000115\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003EI will contrast that with Labour\u2019s position on Mr Henare\u2019s member\u2019s bill in respect of a secret ballot for strikes. What Carol Beaumont confirmed was the Service and Food Workers Union position in respect of what union members can do if they do not like the rules that say there must be an open ballot process. What were we told? We were told that members are free to leave the union\u2014if they do not like it, they can just go. People who listen to this debate will acknowledge the terrible inconsistency about saying that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000116\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228c6f148b1f384474b082c9d9993b8855\u0022\u003ESue Moroney\u003C/span\u003E: They still have a job.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000117\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cae80bd67e9044bf9f22316643290e4d\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE\u003C/span\u003E: No, it is protection, but it is protection as long as someone wants to go with the flow, and does not possibly have an independent thought about what is going on in the union. If someone does not like it, there is the door. We have an inconsistency between choice for employers and employees in respect of the employment relations agreement, but no choice for union members if they want to have a secret ballot\u2014\u201Cwe couldn\u2019t possibly give them that, because we don\u2019t trust them.\u201D I think there is a serious inconsistency in Labour\u2019s position on that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000118\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003EI will touch for the first time on the issue of access to workplaces by unions, because I think we will hear quite a bit about this in the Committee stage. The submissions went something like this: there is no problem, so why are we putting in this solution? Actually, that was not entirely what we heard. We heard that there were problems. Again, there were problems at the margins, but, as Carol Beaumont tells us, the Labour Party believes that as long as there are problems with employers they are to be locked down, but if there are problems with a few errant unions and employees, there is no need to do that. I think that is another inconsistency. We heard from fast-food outlets in Auckland that unions that had no members in certain workplaces were demanding rights of access at the most inconvenient times. We heard that they were creating high levels of disruption to the business and intimidating and bullying workers, some of whom were just 16 and 17 years old, into joining unions, and that that required a remedy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000119\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003EI accept that in the vast majority of places where unions are involved, where employees are members of those unions and those relationships are strong, access is not a problem. But certain courtesies should be put in place. Even when I had those good relationships, particularly with the New Zealand Nurses Organisation, there were times when I was quite irked about the fact that I did not know that the union delegates were on the worksite, or that they had actually stopped operations during their presence. I would have appreciated the courtesy of knowing they were coming; it does not take much effort to provide that information. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000120\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003EAs the Service and Food Workers Union pointed out, it has 21,000 contacts involving its union delegates going into workplaces every year, and it just does not make sense to put in place an overly burdensome process for arranging access. And this bill does not do that. The bill is not prescriptive in respect of the manner in which access agreements can be reached. They can be ex ante arrangements; they can be arrangements in writing in advance that say that when certain conditions are met, union access is granted, and the unions are free to come and go. But employers can also have a right to expect that they have sovereignty over the premises that they own or lease. This is an important point. They should have the right to deny access to people who have no business coming in when there are no union employees in the workplace. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000121\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003EWe had an interesting discussion on this point, and I think we want to flesh it out further. There are clearly two differing points of view around this question of sovereignty and rights of access. The employers tell us that the workplace is their place, and they should have a right to come and go. The unions\u2014and particularly some of the members of the Service and Food Workers Union who came into the select committee in Auckland\u2014had a different perspective on the workplace. They saw it as their place: that they were part of a broader family, and that the union delegates\u2014who were not employees, but were nevertheless connected to them through the union\u2014should have similar rights to come and go freely. I do not think those two points of view are actually irreconcilable. I think that when we have good workplace relations between the employer and the employee, we can have a different point of view about that common ground, but still not impede access. I think this amendment will provide employers with an opportunity to better control some quite dysfunctional things that were being described to us in the select committee, and for that reason it is a good amendment. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000122\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003EI can speak for all employers, I am sure, who have good relationships with the Service and Food Workers Union, and say it simply will not be the case\u2014the union can rest assured on this\u2014that when arrangements are put in place, it will need to write 21,000 letters, wait 2 days, and get 21,000 replies. Those relationships are stronger than that. The bill will achieve better arrangements that will not impede access, but that will provide the sorts of controls that are necessary. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022 data-id=\u00228f4c0c5d4d24413cb55f8d3e1a6bfc61\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000123\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228f4c0c5d4d24413cb55f8d3e1a6bfc61\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E Thank you for the opportunity to make a contribution to the debate on Part 1 of the Employment Relations Bill (No 2). This is the substantive part of the bill. As the previous speaker, Michael Woodhouse, said, there will be a lot of discussion. But the key thing I want to talk about in my first contribution is the access provision in clause 5. Michael Woodhouse has put forward the National point of view, and I want to put forward the Labour Party point of view and also the view that we heard from all of the union submitters and all of the union members who came to the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee. They came in large numbers and expressed real concern about the unnecessary restrictions that are being put on access.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000124\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EWhat is interesting about this whole thing is that it is really a solution looking for a problem. If we go right back to the regulatory impact statement that goes with the bill, we know that the Department of Labour advised that \u201CThere does not appear to be widespread evidence of union representatives exercising their current rights to enter workplaces in an inappropriate way, resulting in disruption for business operations \u2026\u201D and so on. It went on to say: \u201CThe Department has no evidence to suggest that unions are not, in general, meeting this requirement,\u201D under the existing Employment Relations Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000125\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EThe existing Act, contrary to some beliefs around this Chamber, already has a number of restrictions relating to access. There are quite specific requirements on union organisers and representatives entering workplaces, and a number of conditions have to be fulfilled. It is not carte blanche. They cannot just walk into the workplace without having regard to any conditions like health and safety or security, without telling the employer on the premises, and so on. The conditions in the Employment Relations Act actually come from case law that was developed over many years. In fact, under the Employment Contracts Act there were incredible problems and incredible difficulties with access provisions, which I think is why the unions are fearful that this restriction will lead back to those problems and, indeed, back to the courts. This will be a bonanza for lawyers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000126\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EThe only reason I can see for this provision to be in this bill is that it was a National Party manifesto pledge. It was one line in its manifesto. Like many of National\u2019s promises before the last election, it obviously was not well-thought-out; it was just one of those ideological things plucked from thin air, and there it was in the manifesto. I accept that, given that National had said it would do it, it had to do it. I accept that, even though it has decided to do some things that it did not say it would do, which are in this bill. As I said, the bill will be discussed quite vigorously, I imagine, throughout the morning as we go through it. As I say, other than that, I cannot understand why we are even having this debate about access. I cannot understand it, because there is not a problem. But this provision will create a whole lot of problems, and the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee heard about them. I do not accept the example that Michael Woodhouse gave about unions\u2014that McDonald\u2019s, I think, was complaining about unions being unreasonable. Under the existing law employers have the ability to do something about that. They could have stopped that behaviour. I do not condone it. But I do not see anything in this bill that will stop that sort of behaviour. If errant union officials are rushing into workplaces and disrupting things, they will do that anyway\u2014they will do it anyway. The employers will have to prosecute them. They will have to go through the court. There will be a court decision about what this provision really means. There will be litigation all the time. It will be an absolute nightmare.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000127\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EOne of the other things I am really puzzled about is that the initial Cabinet paper on access that Cabinet signed off stated that this provision would not apply if a union organiser was seeking to access the workplace to look after the health and safety of his or her members. That was in a Cabinet paper dated 11 August 2010. It was advice that was supported by the Department of Labour. Apparently, it was drafted, but it never made it into the bill. If the Minister in the chair, the Hon Maurice Williamson, is able to tell me, I would like to know what happened to that provision about health and safety.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f99bcf9e-1ad4-4ed4-9a97-1cccb5b1e11a\u0022 data-id=\u002224be7899ffbe46ad84454fb7113ea47a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000128\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f99bcf9e-1ad4-4ed4-9a97-1cccb5b1e11a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002224be7899ffbe46ad84454fb7113ea47a\u0022\u003EDr JACKIE BLUE (National):\u003C/span\u003E I am pleased to speak in the Committee stage of the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2), and to speak on Part 1, in particular, which is definitely the substantive part of the Bill. Part 2 deals just with consequential matters. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000129\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f99bcf9e-1ad4-4ed4-9a97-1cccb5b1e11a\u0022\u003EI pick up on a comment made by the previous speaker, Darien Fenton, who said this bill was the result of a one-liner in a manifesto, was not well-thought-through, and was ideological. I absolutely refute that. In particular, on the extension of the 90-day trial to all businesses, virtually every other country in the OECD has a trial. It is actually longer than 90 days in many countries, so our 90 days is extremely moderate. The bill is certainly well-thought-through, and it will be good\u2014good for workers, good for employers, and good for our economy, ultimately. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000130\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f99bcf9e-1ad4-4ed4-9a97-1cccb5b1e11a\u0022\u003EI will focus on the extension of the 90-day trial to all businesses. As members will be aware, in 2008 our policy really pertained just to businesses of fewer than 20 people. This bill proposes that that policy be extended to all businesses, no matter what their size. This bill will give businesses confidence to expand, to diversify, and\u2014importantly\u2014to employ workers who do not have a work record. Those people might be migrants, youths, students, or women returning to the workforce. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000131\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f99bcf9e-1ad4-4ed4-9a97-1cccb5b1e11a\u0022\u003EI think it is important to note that one cannot just pluck jobs out of thin air. Businesses have to want to offer jobs to workers. The only way that will happen is by giving businesses confidence that they can increase their business and employ more people. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000132\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f99bcf9e-1ad4-4ed4-9a97-1cccb5b1e11a\u0022\u003EThis Government is absolutely focused on creating jobs and growing the economy. We have a number of measures on that, which include tax reform, trade\u2014and I congratulate our Prime Minister on the free-trade agreement talks that have started at APEC\u2014and research and development. Another way we are doing it is by boosting infrastructure. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000133\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f99bcf9e-1ad4-4ed4-9a97-1cccb5b1e11a\u0022\u003EThis legislation perfectly dovetails into our Government\u2019s plan for growing the economy, raising living standards, and moving forward as a country. It will do that by giving businesses confidence. That is really quite a simple comment. It will give businesses confidence so that they can employ more people, expand, and have greater productivity, so we as a country can more forward in the background of the economic recession that we have been facing. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000134\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f99bcf9e-1ad4-4ed4-9a97-1cccb5b1e11a\u0022\u003EJobs are not plucked out of thin air\u2014they are not plucked out of thin air. The surveys we have done to date show that 80 percent of employees were still in employment once their trial finished. They were not fired, let go, or dismissed at day 89. This is not a fire-at-will bill, as the Opposition likes to call it. That is absolutely the truth. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000135\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f99bcf9e-1ad4-4ed4-9a97-1cccb5b1e11a\u0022\u003EThe policy is very moderate. Heavens above! As I have mentioned before, many countries have trial periods that are much longer than 90 days; they are up to 1 year in some countries. Until we had the 90-day trial, Denmark was the only other country in the whole of the OECD that did not have a trial period. We were clearly out of step with the rest of the world. We are not marching alone on this; we are with many other countries. The sky has not fallen in those other countries. This policy will work for business, employees, and the country as a whole. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000136\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f99bcf9e-1ad4-4ed4-9a97-1cccb5b1e11a\u0022\u003EThe policy has been positively received. I quote just one employer who talked about this bill. He said: \u201CI felt that under the last Labour Government the odds were well and truly stacked against small businesses. The cost of employing someone was 6 times more when they were voted out than it had been 3 years earlier \u2026 We have used the 90 day rule, but the person would have been sacked anyway\u2014for stealing! It would just have taken a little longer and caused more stress to other employees and the business.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000137\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f99bcf9e-1ad4-4ed4-9a97-1cccb5b1e11a\u0022\u003EA very interesting survey called What Next? National Conversation about Work was done by the Human Rights Commission. A whole lot of myths were absolutely thrown out the window. One of the myths was that employers are bastards. They are not. The survey showed that employers treated their employees like family. Let us face it: we have to have a good working relationship for a business to go forward, to grow, and to be productive. It was very much a family affair for many of those businesses. There were many other positive comments.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022 data-id=\u0022e323d01a65d048d1b995562d7b6a4f8d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000138\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e323d01a65d048d1b995562d7b6a4f8d\u0022\u003ECAROL BEAUMONT (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I will speak about the combined effects of the provisions in Part 1, but before I do that I note that we are talking about people. When we talk about employment relations legislation, we are talking about people. An employment agreement is not like any other contract. It is not about buying and selling a product; we are talking about people. When we talk about the 90-day trial and making it easier\u2014so-called\u2014to employ people, we are also saying we will make it very easy to sack people. I think that is important. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000139\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003ECaritas, the Catholic social justice organisation, noted in its submission: \u201CCatholic social teaching does not recognise employment contracts as being equivalent to other kinds of business contract, such as for the purchase of goods or services. We recognise that these working relationships take place in a wider environment of respect for human rights.\u201D I think that is a very powerful statement. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000140\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EThe principal Act is called the Employment Relations Act. It is about relationships. This amendment bill changes the balance and takes away rights from people in the workplace\u2014I want that to be put on record. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EI will now talk about the combined effect. A couple of members opposite have talked about our good old values, but I say that one of the strongest New Zealand values is a commitment to fairness. We like to think we are a country that believes in giving people a fair go and having fairness for all people. Much of our legislation has been ground-breaking in giving rights to people and making sure they have an opportunity to be engaged and to participate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000142\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EThe Council of Trade Unions commissioned some research on the 90-day trial legislation. The survey asked a straight question: \u201CDo you think that all employees should have the right to appeal if they think they have been unfairly dismissed, even if their dismissal was during the first 90 days of their employment?\u201D. That is a very straight question. I will put on record the response to that question. The response was that 80 percent of respondents said \u201CYes\u201D\u2014they thought that employees should have the right to appeal if they think they have been unfairly dismissed, including in the first 90 days\u201418 percent said \u201CNo\u201D, and 2 percent were unsure. Fairness is one of the key values, and New Zealanders believe that it is fair to have the right to challenge an unfair dismissal, even in the first 90 days. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000143\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EThe effect of the provisions in Part 1 will impact on those people who are already the most vulnerable in our society and in the labour market. If we get down to tintacks, it will be those who have less bargaining power. The Employment Relations Act outlines a number of key objects, and one of them specifically acknowledges that there is an inherent inequality of power in employment relations. That is a fundamental object in our employment relations legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000144\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EThis amendment bill flies in the face of a fundamental object of the principal Act. It shows a real difference between members on each side of the Chamber. Labour members know that inherent inequality is a reality of the labour market. Members opposite think the labour market is a level playing field\u2014that everybody has the same bargaining power. I say that those members should tell new migrant workers that they have the same bargaining power as others. They should say that to young people going into their first job. They should say that to a mother who is going back to work, having been out of the paid workforce for a while. Those members should tell those people they have the same bargaining power as, say, an information technology specialist or somebody of that nature who has had an unbroken work record over many years. There are differences in bargaining power. Those who will be most affected by the changes in the bill are those who are already most vulnerable. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000145\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EIt is very interesting that members across the Chamber seem to think that a \u201Ctake it or leave it\u201D employment offer is fair. Lots of other people do not think in that way. The people in Mana, for example, probably do not think a \u201Ctake it or leave it\u201D employment offer is fair. If people do not have a job, and they may be getting a benefit or they may not, depending on their circumstances, they are\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000146\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022615fabad501248b0aa03f57bea4a439d\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: I call the Hon Tau Henare.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000147\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c50010bc7fad47c190f35fdc112e7f55\u0022\u003EHon Members\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, no! \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000148\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022490ccdbf-7c22-4e12-98f2-f3aa08f8e676\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022456373a7aa2d467581db7e2e8948e9ae\u0022\u003EIain Lees-Galloway\u003C/span\u003E: Sell-out!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022 data-id=\u0022821568f4d0ba49d49c9c0443ef5ac956\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000149\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022821568f4d0ba49d49c9c0443ef5ac956\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE (National):\u003C/span\u003E That is what you get from that side, Mr Chair. I remember that the worst employer in my day was the hotel workers union.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000150\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022531621da64ce47728cbcdfb44a2da291\u0022\u003EDavid Bennett\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s right.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000151\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220f35f97639a24ea4a658af50933b2a7a\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE\u003C/span\u003E: That is right. I wonder who the secretary of the hotel workers union was. I refer to none other than Mark Gosche. Every time I was called out to a job to assist one of the clerical workers in trouble, it was always down the road at the\u2014sorry, Mr Chair\u2014Northern Amalgamated Workers Union, as it was called in those days. Who was the worst employer? It was always the union. On a Tuesday I would get another call from some poor clerical worker, who was under the cosh from the employer. Guess who the employer was? It was Ray Bianchi and his mates. They were all the old-style unionists. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000152\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022668821c57b624effbcfb5da9ec3892ef\u0022\u003ELynne Pillay\u003C/span\u003E: Not the ones like the member?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000153\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002299c342bb870e440b8d5b23a2c2f29267\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000154\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002263034734b11947dea000b985f98ddbb7\u0022\u003ESue Moroney\u003C/span\u003E: The worst union organiser in the history of the universe.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000155\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c256539f207246da81e21d5262d3a7ff\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, big yawn! Anybody would think that with this bill the Government had gone back to 1951, and it was about to smash the unions on the waterfront. This is nothing of the sort. All this does is to tinker with legislation to make it more palatable to both sides, more palatable to a person, an immigrant, who is looking for a job, and who wants to show his wares, who wants to say to the employer: \u201CLook at me. I can do this job and if you give me a chance, I\u2019ll show you.\u201D That is all it says. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000156\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227144fe336929426db742ea73dc69111a\u0022\u003ELynne Pillay\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I think the member is bringing you into the debate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000157\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227d64a1fb186b48089b78f9235783bd77\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: Members on occasions do take the word \u201Cyou\u201D a bit literally. I did not take it that the member was referring to me; it was a rhetorical question: \u201Cgive me the job and I\u2019ll show you\u201D. It was not referring to the Chair. The word \u201Cyou\u201D is not proscribed. It is usable, but it is in its context, and I did not take offence.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000158\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224b26cf503cc14c1b98291778e853c045\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. The exact point that I am trying to make is about somebody who is looking for a job and who really wants a job in whatever profession or whatever job. It is about putting a hand up and saying: \u201CI can do this job and I want to be able to show the employer what I can do.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000159\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bae40d78689049f281ba72a12ea9c255\u0022\u003EDarien Fenton\u003C/span\u003E: Like Pansy?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000160\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d560979931a14dc0869c900ae5fb8018\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE\u003C/span\u003E: Now we hear about Pansy. This has nothing to do with Pansy. The 90-day legislation has nothing to do with Pansy, because she has been a Minister for 2 years, for goodness\u2019 sake. If it were about the 90-day legislation, it would have happened a year and a half ago, for goodness\u2019 sake. Talk about timing! They are out of time. [Interruption] Who told me to sit down? There is only one person who can tell me to sit down, and she is at home.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000161\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003EI also want to talk about union access. You see, we have had 9 years of no manners, and no courtesies, and we are trying to say that if unions want to go into our workplace, into our sovereign territory\u2014as my colleague Mr Woodhouse described it\u2014it would be good manners, it would be a courtesy, to call or write and say \u201CI\u2019ll be there at 11 o\u2019clock on Tuesday. How about it?\u201D. It is manners, it is courtesy, and that is what this Government is all about, too. If that is exactly what happens now, why is there the big hullaballoo? If it is what happens now, are we not just codifying what is happening now? So why the big hullaballoo? Why the big question mark from Labour members? Or is it that they are still fighting the battles that have been fought, won, and lost back in the 1950s, 1960s, and even in the 1970s?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022 data-id=\u0022021b6b60a0e246f29b61fe4a1c8b832a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000162\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022021b6b60a0e246f29b61fe4a1c8b832a\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E As I follow the speech made by Tau Henare I acknowledge the young people who are in the gallery today. They were taught at school to treat people with dignity and respect, yet they hear that sort of barrage from the Government side of the Chamber. For Tau Henare to be talking about manners is a teensy bit funny, I have to say. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000163\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EI will get back to the bill. The Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2), as we have said before and will say again, is unnecessary and unfair. As I predicted, Jackie Blue\u2014whom I have a tremendous amount of respect for as a person; I think she is a fair-minded person\u2014has missed the plot on this bill. What did Jackie Blue say in this Chamber? She said 75 percent of people are keeping their jobs under this legislation. Seventy-five percent of people are keeping their jobs, but 25 percent of people are losing their jobs in their first 90 days of employment. That is outrageous. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000164\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EAs I look at the young people sitting up in the gallery, I wonder how they would feel if out of every 100 of them, 25 were sacked in their first 90 days of employment for not necessarily any reason at all. What does that say to young people entering the workplace? What does that say to young people who are taught to have good self-esteem and who are taught to have respect? They go to work, and for whatever reason\u2014they put too much sauce on the hamburger, or they have an earring that the boss does not like\u2014suddenly they are down the road with no explanation whatsoever. That is appalling. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000165\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003ELet us talk for a moment about the consultation on this bill. The Department of Labour commissioned a report to measure the impact of the 90-day trial period. To reflect the real consequences, over 3,500 employers were spoken to. That is OK. Labour members would say that speaking to over 3,500 employers is a really fair and reasonable level of consultation\u2014over 3,500 employers. Thirteen employees\u201413 employees\u2014were consulted on the impact. I ask members where the fairness is in that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000166\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022331a1f4da5fd4ceab6e41d84037a0eb8\u0022\u003EDarien Fenton\u003C/span\u003E: No balance.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000167\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002204aaf6b38a504383b4423dbd0a59d5d2\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: There is absolutely no balance. I go back to what I said before: this bill is unfair and unbalanced, as is the Government\u2014in particular, Tau Henare. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000168\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003ELet us talk about access to the workplace. I tell members that as a union official the only time I had problems with access to the workplace was in the 1990s. I was threatened. I think that everyone here will accept that I am a pretty reasonable person. I know that my colleagues often say I would be one of the most reasonable people in our caucus. Am I right?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002288dca177a68d4dd490e695d03cadafe4\u0022\u003EHon Member\u003C/span\u003E: Soft.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000170\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002214acb6cae4914bb4b6636d6eaa9df33e\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: They call me a bit too soft. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000171\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229534b2390473475fa003160add77f917\u0022\u003ESue Moroney\u003C/span\u003E: Too soft.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000172\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002229cb93fa714a4427a043b5dcbd11a49f\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: Sue Moroney says I am too soft. The only time I had difficulty with access, I had to call the police because an employer threatened me. We are wearing white ribbons in support of anti-violence. That was what happened when access to the worksite was restricted, because a bully-boy boss would not let me on to the worksite. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000173\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223f0101a359d946ff8390d820792421b5\u0022\u003EHon Tau Henare\u003C/span\u003E: Where was that? What job was that?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000174\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002212b8689935554272bad0cde00be0f09f\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: I am not going to name the place. I am not going to do that, because I do not languish in the past. Unlike that member, I do not languish in the past. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000175\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EWe know that when the Employment Relations Act was enacted under the previous Labour Government, the number of disputes went right down. What are we seeing under this Government? We are seeing the number of strikes go up, because this Government does not work on relationships. It does not recognise the importance of relationships between unions and employers. How many times have union officials gone into the workplace and the employer has said it knew the official was coming today, but it actually has a big order on? The employer asks whether it is OK to put off the meeting and for the official to come back tomorrow. What does the official say? He or she says: \u201COf course.\u201D That is reasonable. Officials are from the union. They are there to help.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022 data-id=\u00221f452bb5f0d3413fad3bd28754b0be18\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000176\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221f452bb5f0d3413fad3bd28754b0be18\u0022\u003ECHARLES CHAUVEL (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I will speak a little about the proposed provisions for restricting union access, because I think my colleague Darien Fenton made some very good contributions on that point. The proposal in the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) to make access to workplaces conditional on the consent of the employer is very problematic. It is an ideological and deliberate attack on the democratic right of wage earners and salary earners to join unions and resolve issues that arise in the workplace. It is therefore ironic to look at the explanatory note of the bill. It states: \u201CThis change is intended to increase levels of choice and fairness for employers \u2026\u201D. Well, of course, that change comes at a cost, and the cost is to employees. They are the ones who lose out in terms of their freedom of choice and their access to fairness in the workplace.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000177\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003EI hope the Minister in the chair, the Hon Georgina te Heuheu, might take a call on this; it would be good to hear from a representative of the Government why this change is thought to be necessary. I know that the Minister will want to tell the Committee why this aspect of Government policy has been put in place, because the regulatory impact statement, as well as Kate Wilkinson\u2019s own policy paper dated 15 May last year, says: \u201CThere does not appear to be widespread evidence of union representatives exercising their current rights to enter workplaces in an inappropriate way, resulting in disruption for business operations or adversely impacting on the employment relationship between employer and union members.\u201D That was the point just made by Lynne Pillay. There is no evidence of any need for this change. There is no evidence of abuse; there are not even anecdotal stories being told about unions abusing their current right of access to workplaces. So why is this change being mooted? I hope we can hear from the Minister, because if we do not, then we have to conclude that it is an ideological change, an ideological attack on the unions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000178\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003ENational might think that will play well electorally, but we will see, because New Zealanders are becoming sick of these attacks on ordinary wage earners and salary earners. We have seen those attacks already in a number of pieces of legislation, and we cannot expect to see the erosion of these sorts of terms and conditions time and time again with no evidence of the need for it. We hear pious speeches in this House all the time about how we should only ever legislate if there is a clear need. That is why we brought in the regulatory impact statement process. Members opposite say we should always be very clear about why we are legislating, but it is not clear why this provision is needed. There is no evidence anywhere of abuse. Even Business New Zealand said that this measure was not a high priority for it. It does not receive many complaints from employers about union access.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000179\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003EThe Prime Minister tried to sell this policy to the National Party conference as one of the steps to a \u201Cmore productive economy and increased employment.\u201D Yet even he, in October, told the Council of Trade Unions that this issue was not a \u201Cdriving priority\u201D. So why on earth is Parliament here in urgency, ramming through a piece of legislation to restrict the right of the representatives of wage earners and salary earners\u2014ordinary Kiwis\u2014to ensure that workers\u2019 terms and conditions are being met by their employers via meaningful inspection in the workplace? Why restrict workers\u2019 rights to be visited and comforted by their union officials without their being impeded by employers? Why is this being done when it is very clear from the evidence that there is no need for the change?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000180\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003EThe access provisions in the current legislation were very carefully thought through. They are there because it is necessary to ensure that union officials can check whether health and safety employment standards and what have you are being honoured in the workplace. Of course, an employer will run into difficulties if he or she is not honouring those standards. Those employers will take advantage of the provisions that Parliament will be enacting in urgency today, because only the dodgy employers will want to keep out the representatives of unions. That is plain, because there is no evidence of abuse of these provisions at the moment. The access provisions at the moment enable wage earners and salary earners to choose to be represented by knowledgable people in grievance situations. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022 data-id=\u0022ac2060d38091494c805c325bfb276d8d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000181\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ac2060d38091494c805c325bfb276d8d\u0022\u003ELOUISE UPSTON (National\u2014Taup\u014D):\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=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022 data-id=\u00222481c2d56a5a4709b17ad0412f0a8b9f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000182\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222481c2d56a5a4709b17ad0412f0a8b9f\u0022\u003ESUE MORONEY (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E Part 1 of the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) amends the principal Act, the Employment Relations Act. I think that with all of the issues facing New Zealand at the moment, if we were to amend the Employment Relations Act, we might do something about creating more jobs. We might do something about closing the income gap with Australia. Part 1 does none of those things and, in fact, it goes in the opposite direction. I will explain why. Despite what the Government is trying to portray, this amendment bill does not create one job\u2014it does not create one job. In fact, it makes decent working people more reluctant to actually seek to further themselves and progress into another job. It will cause people who have families dependent on them, who have mortgages to pay, who have food bills to pay, and who have school fees to pay to stay stuck where they are\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000183\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022be992b5f19444f3fb45ed81c3307f0bc\u0022\u003EHon Tau Henare\u003C/span\u003E: No!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000184\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022741667624ce74f8eaf5ac5311e3e79a5\u0022\u003ESUE MORONEY\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014because that is the only way they can have a guarantee of any job security, and Tau Henare knows that. He knows, and he wants\u2014and John Key wants\u2014New Zealand working people to stay stuck where they are. He knows that that will be the only guarantee for all New Zealanders, no matter what sized workplace they work in\u2014that will be the only guarantee of their knowing they can put food on the table next week. The minute they take the opportunity to actually improve themselves, to take that step up, to take the risk of another job, to perhaps change careers or to even just go for progression within their own career, they put themselves at risk of the National Government\u2019s fire-at-will bill. That is what Part 1 does: it seeks to take that job insecurity that is in small workplaces and mete it out to every single New Zealander. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000185\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003EI sat on the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee when this legislation was put up in the last term of the previous Labour Government. It was a member\u2019s bill from Wayne Mapp, so we have already visited this legislation in the previous Parliament. The previous Parliament said: \u201CNo way! That is not the New Zealand we want to create.\u201D We heard that something in the order of the massive figure of 200,000 New Zealanders every year change jobs\u2014or used to. We can double it: 400,000\u2014have I got it hugely under? Every year, 400,000 New Zealanders used to change their jobs, and change locations. Maybe it was to get a higher wage; for whatever reason we had that type of labour market. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000186\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003EI predict that that will come to a screaming halt. In fact, we know that it has come to a screaming halt already, but it will get worse, because who would do that when they have their family dependent on the income they bring in? Who would put themselves at risk? Certainly not the people that we need to come from overseas to be nurses in New Zealand, for example, and doctors, teachers, and people whom we need in order to make sure we have the sort of services in this country that New Zealanders rely upon. Are those people going to take that risk, knowing that they could face, for no reason at all, being told within the first 90 days that they are just not suitable? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000187\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003EIt may be that someone just used too much sauce. When we had decent law in this country and fair legislation under a Labour Government, if I were to use too much sauce the employer would be required to tell me that I had used too much sauce. The employer would have a conversation with me about the hollandaise, or the aioli, or whatever type of sauce it may be. The employer would actually have a conversation with me, whereby I would come to realise that perhaps I had used too much sauce, or perhaps I could say to the employer that the reason I put on the amount of sauce was that it was not covering the fish properly. We could have a normal conversation and sort it out in the workplace. I would not have to lose my income, as one chef did because he put on too much sauce. There was no conversation, no discussion at the workplace, but he lost a job. I am really sad that Michael Woodhouse cannot understand the impact on working people of not having a job. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022 data-id=\u0022dde4f1c5030349498028c87590b2c886\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000188\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022dde4f1c5030349498028c87590b2c886\u0022\u003EHon PAREKURA HOROMIA (Labour\u2014Ikaroa-R\u0101whiti):\u003C/span\u003E Mr Chair, m\u014Drena. Te pai hoki e t\u016B atu p\u0113nei tonu e kite atu te ng\u0101rara e mau atu m\u014D ng\u0101 tangata e whai atu i te mahi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000189\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022\u003E[Good morning, Mr Chair. It is really good to stand so as to see the monster that people seeking employment have to pursue.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000190\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022\u003EThe Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) is one of the most important and relevant issues at this moment. We have seen the Warner Bros debacle and we have seen other debacles, and the unions are getting the blame for them. I was really pained to hear the speech from the chair of the M\u0101ori Affairs Committee, which I sit on. I think he does a wonderful job, and I can assure members that if this bill had been referred to the select committee, we would have done something about it. But somebody has not done anything about this bill, and it is shameful. People will be rolling their eyes in Blackball today, people will be struggling in Te Atat\u016B, and people will be wondering and pondering in Wairoa. Let us talk about the workforce. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000191\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002227a611fdcf4d4af0a0a6eedafbc9a9e3\u0022\u003EHon Tau Henare\u003C/span\u003E: Where? Blackball? Does anybody live there any more? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000192\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227df48d861ccb428a8f5c204a88654117\u0022\u003EHon PAREKURA HOROMIA\u003C/span\u003E: That M\u0101ori member opposite should understand better. And I mihi to the M\u0101ori Minister in the chair, the Hon Georgina te Heuheu.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022\u003ELet me point to some real facts. The 90-day bill was supposedly a test to work things out. It jumped from being a test to the whole group of employers being allowed to set sail on workers. This is one of the worst bills that this debating chamber has ever seen. It is an extension. All we have seen from this Government are extensions that hurt families and ruin and wreck their lives: the extension of GST, the extensions provided in this bill, and the extension of payments to big companies who put their money at risk, and the Government finds $1.75 billion for them. Helping workers is not in its psyche. Mr Tau Henare especially should know better. He has been a union organiser and he knows where the people are at.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000194\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022\u003EI will give people some clear facts about what this 90-day legislation will do. It is unfair, it is unbalanced, and it is uncoordinated, and it is unclear why the Government is doing it\u2014supposedly. But those who know about the labour market know that this is one of the biggest jack-ups in this country in relation to the workplace. It is unfair and it is low-down dirty. I will tell members something from a M\u0101ori perspective: nearly 42 percent of M\u0101ori women who are between the ages of 15 and 23 have nothing. They are not in work, not on benefits, and not in study. When we add together the capping of study in universities, the changes to make sure that benefit tests are totally unfair, and the introduction of this major monster to the workplace, I do not know how those people opposite can come to work and say to their colleagues in the Chamber \u201CGood morning\u201D. Shame on them! This bill is an outright disgrace.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000195\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022\u003EThe M\u0101ori unemployment rate is now tracking at 17 percent. It is 1 percent behind the rate it was at when National last left Government, when we ran it out of town and it left a shambolic mess. This bill is adding to it. What do members opposite have to say about that? The number is three times the mainstream average. What do they have to say about that? People seem to hide away from it, as if it does not happen. I say the National members should tell that to the 190 people who have had only 9 days\u2019 work this season at the freezing works in Wairoa. They should tell it to those people who were put out on the streets for 9 weeks. They were just trying to prove the basic issues of the right to collectivise and to make sure that they maintained\u2014not extended\u2014the rights they that had. Those rights are fundamental; they are about fairness, equity, and all of that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000196\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022\u003EThe miserable member opposite, Louise Upston, stood up to call this debate to an end. Shame on her! I see the Minister shuddering in the chair, but she knows that it is downright truthful to say that M\u0101ori women are really struggling. I have been to food banks, and it reminded me of the 1980s. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000197\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c76150bc5daf4082981253879110e2f7\u0022\u003EHon Tau Henare\u003C/span\u003E: What have you got to go to food banks for? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000198\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b29311fb33104fd7999f9b024973b03c\u0022\u003EHon PAREKURA HOROMIA\u003C/span\u003E: People need food banks, I say to Mr Henare, because this sort of legislation sends them there. It stops them getting into work, and the displacement factor that is behind a whole lot of other legislation that his Government has pushed through in this term is helping that. This bill is about the rich getting richer, it is about the poor getting poorer, and it is about trying to pull the rug out from under the unions, which is the one platform that many workers have to get by. What is so wrong with unions? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022 data-id=\u00225a6739984ebe46c88065851b3526a463\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000199\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225a6739984ebe46c88065851b3526a463\u0022\u003ECHESTER BORROWS (National\u2014Whanganui):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000200\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022effa208f803c40dd8d9cc5b722491bce\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: I have had a good, thorough look through the bill, and it seems to me that almost everything of substance is in the first part. There is not much anywhere else. So, having said that, I am prepared to allow this debate to go on a little longer. But I say to the Committee that on the other parts members can expect pretty short shrift from the Chair and a closer look at things. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022 data-id=\u0022de89b162b57f4d94b4b029ccfd9a793d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000201\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022de89b162b57f4d94b4b029ccfd9a793d\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I appreciate that National members do not like having to debate employment legislation, because they know that what they are doing is absolutely unfair and absolutely not required. The changes that they are making in Part 1 of the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) are ideological, and there is no other basis for them. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000202\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EI start by talking about the provision that removes reinstatement as the primary remedy for personal grievance claims. I will talk about the 90-day issue a bit later on, but this bill extends that provision to other people. We have been talking a lot about the first 90 days of employment, but what happens when someone gets into the period of employment when they are past the first 90 days, something happens, and a personal grievance claim is taken? If the employee is deemed to have been unfairly treated\u2014for example, if they were dismissed unfairly and the Employment Relations Authority ruled in their favour\u2014it would seem only fair that they could be reinstated in the job they should never have lost in the first place, if that was what they wished. This legislation removes that ability. This bill states that when someone gets past that first 90 days all that an employer needs to do is get rid of someone, and it does not matter if it is unfair, because now the employer will not have to take the employee back, even if there is a ruling that the person should never have been dismissed from his or her place of employment. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000203\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EIn a way, this bill almost extends the 90 days in terms of removing that security for employees. It says to those employers out there who want to get rid of someone very easily that they can do it because they will not have to take the person back, even if they were wrong in removing the person. I cannot imagine why National thinks that is fair. We know that employment law is all about balance. We have to balance the rights and responsibilities of the employee versus the rights and responsibilities of the employer. National thinks that employees should have to bear all the risk in an employment relationship, and that they should have no security in that relationship, whereas Labour believes we have to strike a balance in the middle that is fair to employers and employees. Neither side will get everything that it wants. That is part of being in the relationship, but Part 1 drastically skews the rights towards the employer against the employee. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000204\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EThe contribution from Tau Henare just showed how incredibly out of touch this Government is with the reality for workers. He asked why, if Labour said unions were now really good in terms of access in the workplace, we were fighting the change. We are doing so because that is not the case in every circumstance. This is about a worker\u2019s right to support when something goes wrong in the workplace. It is about a worker\u2019s right to call the union when something happens: when the worker is given an unfair employment choice or is worried about health and safety. National says that workers should not have access to their union without the approval of the person who may well be the problem. It is in those circumstances that the protection of the law is incredibly important, and that is what is being removed in Part 1 of this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000205\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EWe know right now that unions are voluntary organisations, and they do not want to get offside with bosses. They do not want to have a bad relationship with employers. They work with employers for their employees and their members, and they do so responsibly. But where there is a situation where workers need to have that support, National now says they have to get permission to have that support. A lot of people remember when workers had to go and stand off site on the footpath to meet with their union\u2014the people who represented them\u2014whereas, for example, a big company could bring in hordes of lawyers, and no one would say it would need anyone\u2019s permission to have the kind of support it wanted when it came to employment law. A worker who just wants the union organiser to come in, give some advice, and maybe solve a problem now has to get permission to do that. That is a very, very dangerous move in terms of the rights of those workers and their ability to get the help they need in the workplace. It is unfair. It is not needed. At the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee, no one could come up with a single instance of where access was a problem. The officials told us that there was no problem.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000206\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022955fb1cc4dfb4752969edf73c6205e06\u0022\u003EMichael Woodhouse\u003C/span\u003E: Yes they could. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000207\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002275294b6c1402477fa6cf9a6c2c8c61f2\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY\u003C/span\u003E: That is not true, I say to Mr Woodhouse. When we dug down into it, there was no problem. When unions have had to come on site without telling the employer, there was a very good reason for it\u2014there was a very good reason for it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000208\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002277b9cde6029b47a5b27f4f7d6b1735ec\u0022\u003EDavid Bennett\u003C/span\u003E: Be truthful.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000209\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225886ad7ca70b4703b1aa3a8507d8432a\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY\u003C/span\u003E: I am being truthful, I say to Mr Bennett. That member should be very, very careful, because his conduct as the chairman of that select committee was appalling on this legislation\u2014absolutely appalling. Let us talk about the young woman who wrote to us.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022 data-id=\u0022ab627c94582b479b901ae359eb1deb3d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000210\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ab627c94582b479b901ae359eb1deb3d\u0022\u003ECAROL BEAUMONT (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I come back to the combined effect of the provisions in Part 1, which is where all the substantive changes are. I believe that the consequences of this legislation\u2014the changes that are being made to the Employment Relations Act\u2014will mean that we will have multiple labour markets in which rights will be dependent on certain things. Highly skilled workers probably will not have the 90-day provision imposed. One will not tell a heart surgeon moving into one\u2019s area that they will have to have a 90-day trial period. It just will not happen to those people. But for the many low-skilled or so-called unskilled people in the labour market, it will be a \u201Ctake it or leave it\u201D scenario. It will be automatic. It will be in employment agreements. That will just be the reality, and that will be the difference between those two labour markets. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000211\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EThere will be a difference between unionised workplaces and non-unionised workplaces. As we heard clearly through the submission process, the reality is that these 90-day provisions will not generally apply in unionised workplaces. The reality is that some of the employers who submitted on this bill are probably not that happy about it, but it will not apply in those certain circumstances. We will see very different labour markets between those people who have work experience and those who do not have experience, or recent experience. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000212\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EPeople coming back into work, or who frequently move in and out of work\u2014perhaps women who have primary childcare responsibilities and who come in and out of the workplace\u2014will potentially have 90 days of no rights on multiple occasions in their working lives. Other people may have that only a few times, or once, even. There will be big differences between the experiences of men and women due to the provisions of this legislation. For example, the Women\u2019s Studies Association went into some detail about why it believes that the provisions of this bill will disproportionally affect women. It noted that women are more likely to have broken employment patterns and to change jobs more often. The association also noted that it is nonsense to argue that a young female worker, desperate for a job, has equal bargaining power with an employer in any business. It talked about the fact that preventing women workers access to their union by restricting the access of unions to worksites will restrict the right of women union members to secure advice and support. Many women are more likely to be working in the types of industries that are not yet unionised, so this will undermine their ability to improve their wages and conditions of employment if the access provisions are abused. The association also went on to talk about the fact that women will probably be less likely to bargain with their employers over the 90-day trial period in circumstances where there is a choice about whether there is a 90-day so-called trial period. Other submitters have also noted that the effects of this legislation will disproportionately affect some workers rather than others. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000213\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EThe Human Rights Commission took on the issue of what it called \u201Cconstrained consent\u201D. On the other side of the House, members seem to think that a \u201Ctake it or leave it\u201D job offer is a choice. Well, the reality is that that is nonsense, and the Human Rights Commission said that the idea that the proposed legislation rests on contract and agreement and cannot be imposed on employees who do not agree to a trial period is \u201Cunrealistic, particularly at a time of high unemployment and job scarcity\u201D. The commission also went on to talk about the impact on women, and on migrant workers. It looked at the Department of Labour evaluation of the 90-day period, and said that even though most employers knew a trial period must be mutually agreed, they generally did not seek employees\u2019 acceptance of a trial period. Rather, it was stated in the employment agreement, along with other terms and conditions. Thus, in practice, the job offer was conditional on the employee accepting the trial period. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000214\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EThe Human Rights Commission also noted the impact on employees of losing their job, without reason and without recourse, during that first 90 days. It could be for completely unfair reasons, as that will be allowable. Who will ever know? The reality is that those people will then experience prejudice in seeking subsequent work. The Human Rights Commission made that point very strongly. I think that we will have multiple labour markets, and that is of great concern to me. I think that fairness says there should be basic human rights that apply to all people in the labour market. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022 data-id=\u00223b53346d92004e588cce6ca53d6fd358\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000215\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223b53346d92004e588cce6ca53d6fd358\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National):\u003C/span\u003E I want to talk about the costs of recruitment in the context of the 90-day probation period. At the select committee we heard a lot of Draconian stories of employers in sweat mines dragging along these poor people for 89 days and on the 90th day flicking them out the door because that is what employers do. The reality is somewhat different. Even if one accepts that employers are financially motivated\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000216\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bb7737f974534b93abd6eb07acba6da4\u0022\u003ELynne Pillay\u003C/span\u003E: Twenty-five percent of them do that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000217\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022520c3ab45cb840f2903428fa6e59a4ad\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE\u003C/span\u003E: Here we go! There is a \u201Cglass three-quarters empty\u201D approach to the world. Lynne Pillay is essentially saying never mind that the other 75 percent who were given a go, who might have marginalised or new immigrants, got a permanent job out of it. Never mind the fact that the 25 percent who were let go might have gone of their own volition. The Department of Labour did not say in its report that they were sacked. All it said was that they were no longer employed at the end of 90 days. So it did not take into account that a lot of those short-term workers were people who decided that they did not want to work where they were and left of their own free will. No, no, according to Lynne Pillay, 25 percent of them were sacked. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000218\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003EI want to come back to the issue of money. The Labour Opposition talks about money-grubbing employers, and if that is the case, if employers are motivated by that single thing, the dollar, then they will weigh up very carefully the costs of hiring and firing. At the select committee we heard that, even for basic jobs in retail, the costs of hiring somebody can run into thousands and thousands of dollars. There is the cost of advertising, the cost of screening, the cost of the appointment, and the cost of legal advice. There is the cost of getting an employment agreement in place. There is the cost of uniforms, training, health and safety training, and induction, and there is the loss of productivity while someone is buddied with the new employee. During that 90-day period a substantial investment in the employee has been made. Yet we are being asked to accept that these callous employers will, on day 89 or day 90, say: \u201CTau you\u2019re out the door\u2014down the road. There is no excuse, and it doesn\u2019t matter that we\u2019ve invested not only several thousand dollars but several tens of thousands of dollars.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000219\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228f6399008be448c0a8382748c7cff732\u0022\u003EDarien Fenton\u003C/span\u003E: No one said that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000220\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227a57c6d783de408ba0d35985d783f316\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE\u003C/span\u003E: That is exactly what is being implied. The member opposite said that no one said that, but, actually, they did. They came to the select committee in Auckland and said that callous employers will use employees and abuse them, and then dump them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000221\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229ed256fbf93447759781e2673e176241\u0022\u003EDarien Fenton\u003C/span\u003E: Who said it?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000222\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002299ad68572af64bb88f0941ee61090306\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE\u003C/span\u003E: Members of the Service and Food Workers Union, who lined up one at a time, with the reverend on the end\u2014I cannot remember what his name was\u2014actually went through that process. We heard that it would be terrible. Before that particular submission we heard from McDonald\u2019s Restaurants of New Zealand. McDonald\u2019s said\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000223\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223f0c545dc4d04b30964f4400d6e3ad4a\u0022\u003ESue Moroney\u003C/span\u003E: Scrupulous record!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000224\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227c933690d4274a18ba1e80c3584cbe21\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE\u003C/span\u003E: If the member uses her ears and not her mouth, she might learn something. She was not at the select committee hearing. We heard that those terrible employers actually have\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000225\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228363250b825b42aca031fd16bbd1f081\u0022\u003ESue Moroney\u003C/span\u003E: Not from that member, I won\u2019t.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000226\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b1a87bc7cd95428f9ec1f15f1d6c34d8\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE\u003C/span\u003E: Maybe she will learn something, maybe she will not, but if she is quiet just for once she might learn something. McDonald\u2019s has a performance measure for its managers\u2014it is probably related to bonuses\u2014on the retention rate of their employees at 3 months, and they are not the only organisation that has that. It is considered a failure if an employee whom they have screened and employed is not working at the end of the 3-month period. So much for callous employers using, abusing, and turfing out their staff! They are simply not doing that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000227\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225912421da252449aa08692bbc88110df\u0022\u003EMoana Mackey\u003C/span\u003E: Does every employer have that?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000228\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227bd6f10204e841239c728d5df04dcedc\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE\u003C/span\u003E: No, but here we go again\u2014here is the inconsistency. Because every employer does not have it, then we must wrap them all up in bureaucratic processes, but we do not worry so much about the occasional errant employees. According to Labour, we have rules for employers but not for the poor old employees. It is completely inconsistent, because it is the employer who is investing sometimes not just thousands but several tens of thousands of dollars in an employee. Nobody in their right mind, even if they are a bad employer, motivated by money, will then flick off that employee. It simply does not occur.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022 data-id=\u002232a872d7ec2444a1a8d7c3bd9592f4a5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000229\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002232a872d7ec2444a1a8d7c3bd9592f4a5\u0022\u003EKEITH LOCKE (Green):\u003C/span\u003E The assumption behind Michael Woodhouse\u2019s speech on Part 1 of the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) is that the overwhelming majority of employers are good employers. They have the interests of employees at heart, they will spend a lot money hiring and training them, they will be very reluctant to let them go, and all the rest of it. It is true that good employers think in those terms, and they also think in terms of having good relations with the workforce and with the collective organisations of the workforce\u2014that is, the unions. But there are also a lot of employers who do not want anyone to be pushing for better conditions, to be a member of a union, or for a union to be active on the job. They think that they can make more money if that is the case. Sometimes that is not a rational calculation and sometimes it is just that they want to be the big boss, but that does exist. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000230\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThe very fact that we have such a low rate of unionisation in New Zealand, particularly in the private sector\u2014and it is much lower than it was during the period of national awards before we had the Employment Contracts Act\u2014is in part testimony to the fact that a lot of employers would rather not have the union on the job. Of course, we have Peter Jackson and Richard Taylor, who are prime examples of this. They are doing everything possible to keep an organised union force off their production of The Hobbit and the other productions they have, and they have been reasonably successful to date in doing that. That attitude is not unusual amongst employers. If that was not the case, then I ask why we have this provision on union access to workplaces. We have the situation where union access has worked pretty well so far. The unions have walked on and off jobs all over the place. They talk to their members without any great problems. Of course any good union official is very sensitive to the fact that he or she should not disrupt the work process more than is necessary. There is often somewhat of a disruption of the work process by the very fact that union officials have to talk to workers who are on the job for 8 hours a day, or whatever it is, but that is minimised. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000231\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003ENow we are putting in procedures that will seriously disadvantage unions in getting that access in that they can be delayed for up to a couple of days. The procedure that many union officials work on is to go to perhaps eight worksites a day and have a bit of flexibility as to when they arrive at the next worksite, because they do not know exactly what the issues will be at the worksite they visited at, say, 10 o\u2019clock. It might take them half an hour or 2 hours to work through the problems at that particular worksite. They have to have that flexibility, and they operate in a situation of reasonableness and through notification of the employer in terms of access to worksites. But all of that will be thrown up in the air by putting all the power back on to employers and by allowing them to delay union officials for a couple of days. That provision will disadvantage the unions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000232\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EOther provisions, like the removal of reinstatement as a primary remedy in personal grievances, will push things back against the unions, too. A lot of employers want to get rid of, particularly, the more stroppy, active union officials, so what will they do? They will say that they will sack that union official. It will perhaps cost them a bit of money at the Employment Court, but with reinstatement not being a primary remedy any more, they will have got rid of that union official. They would value that result more than the $5,000 or $10,000 they might have to pay in compensation. That is biasing everything against the unions, too. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000233\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EWith regard to the 90-day provision, I think Michael Woodhouse said that job applicants would have to agree to the 90-day provision in the employment agreement. But unemployed workers\u2014and the unemployment rate is running at about 7 percent\u2014can find it hard to get a job, and they will not say: \u201CI will take this job that you have kindly offered me, but you need to cut out the clause that says there is a 90-day trial period.\u201D If they do that, an employer will thank them very much and say that he or she has not quite decided who to hire and will come back to the worker on that one, but the employer will never come back. The 90-day trial is not really a voluntary arrangement, and if that worker shows a bit of a disposition towards the union and perhaps even joins the union, come the 75th day, 85th day, or 89th day, the employer will just get rid of that worker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022 data-id=\u0022570fbc23c8bd4f1f9727061bb9a66a92\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000234\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022570fbc23c8bd4f1f9727061bb9a66a92\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE (National):\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=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022 data-id=\u002274a5c822ce074704a89acb99eb6b47bc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000235\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002274a5c822ce074704a89acb99eb6b47bc\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E Although I am critical of the bill, I will raise something that I believe was overlooked at the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee. I am particularly pleased to see that the Attorney-General is the Minister in the chair, because he is a details person\u2014like me\u2014and I am sure that once this matter is pointed out, he will agree. If the Minister and the Committee could look at new section 20A, which is to be inserted in the Employment Relations Act by clause 6, they will see the words, \u201Cthe employer or the representative of the employer must advise \u2026 the union of the employer\u2019s \u2026 decision as soon as is reasonably practicable but no later than \u2026\u201D, and the following words were changed at the select committee from \u201C2 working days\u201D to \u201Cthe working day\u201D. The section now refers to \u201Cthe working day\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000236\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225032e13aafeb4b19a84447ef2aca4c23\u0022\u003EHon Christopher Finlayson\u003C/span\u003E: Clause what?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000237\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222d4f0c2d711e471e87d25a0bf856bdec\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: New section 20A(2)(b) in clause 6. The Minister will see that the words \u201Cthe working day\u201D are underlined. Then section 20A(2)(c) refers to \u201Cwithin 2 working days\u201D. The phrase has not been changed there to \u201Cthe working day\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000238\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226d08e6751f924f7c8eb3fa7e2bd61fdb\u0022\u003EHon Tau Henare\u003C/span\u003E: Is this the calibre of the union movement?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000239\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022afbdcd9db22d4c5a82880b8271cd847e\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: If the member would just be quiet for a minute, I will point out to the Minister in the chair that, under section 20A(3), the provision requiring 2 working days has been amended to \u201Cno later than the working day\u201D. I feel very confident in saying in light of section 20A(2)(b) and (3), which refer to the day after, that either there is an error or it just has not been amended. I can see that the Minister has already picked up on that. He is nodding wisely. If we can have that fixed, that would be good. I thank the Minister for that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000240\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EWhile I am on this clause, I also request that very serious consideration be given to the other very, very good amendments relating to union access that have been put forward by Trevor Mallard. They particularly refer to some reasons where access would not be able to be declined, or where prior consent does not have to be gained. One amendment would add the words \u201Cunless the access is required for urgent health and safety matters\u201D. That is really important if otherwise a whole day is spent waiting. If it is an urgent health and safety matter, such as an unsafe machine, and the union is called in, it is very important for consideration to be given in those circumstances. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000241\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EAnother amendment would add the words \u201Cunless the access is required for matters relating to harassment or discrimination of any employee\u201D. If we look at the worst-case scenario, where perhaps a woman worker is being sexually harassed, she will want to call the union organiser in to discuss that matter. It is absolutely untenable, we suggest, that that worker will have to wait for the next day. If it is about harm to employees, or where the health and safety of employees is paramount, we say that it is very important that in those instances, prior consent for access is not required.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000242\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EAnother amendment would add the words \u201Cunless the access is required for matters relating to redundancies or potential dismissals or where the union representative is seeking to represent a worker in an employment dispute.\u201D I can put my hand on my heart and say in many cases if the union comes in, the matter can be resolved without that worker losing his or her job, and without the situation escalating, rather than bubbling, bubbling, bubbling over 24 hours into a seriously dysfunctional one. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000243\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003ESo I request that the Minister, although he has accepted one amendment, look really carefully at these amendments. I think they are very, very good amendments. Certainly, we would rather the bill did not come into effect at all.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022 data-id=\u00223928d46b10ec45ea9cbeb2673c0f93f3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000244\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223928d46b10ec45ea9cbeb2673c0f93f3\u0022\u003EHon MARYAN STREET (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I am pleased to speak in the Committee stage of the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2). Albeit I am addressing myself to clauses in Part 1, I will go back to some basic points on industrial relations. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000245\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EAt the end of 2008 this country voted for a change of Government. People voted for a change of Government on the basis that some of the best things that the previous Labour Government did in this country in our 9 years in office would be retained by the incoming National Government, according to the party\u2019s promises on the hustings. In this legislation and in every move on industrial law that National has made since it came into office we have a concerted attack, a concerted chipping away at the rights of the worker. Even more than that, it has been undermining the way of organising and running a society. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000246\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EI will take a moment to move back from some of the specifics of Part 1 to talk about some of the principles behind an approach to industrial relations. The previous Labour Government was intent on developing, promoting, and sustaining a tripartite approach to industrial relations\u2014and not just industrial relations, but promoting and underpinning an inclusive approach to all of the significant social questions and economic questions before the country. We engaged with Business New Zealand, we engaged with small businesses, and, in fact, we set up the Small Business Advisory Group. We engaged with the Council of Trade Unions and those unions that are not affiliated with the Council of Trade Unions, but predominantly with the Council of Trade Unions as the peak body representing the largest number of workers in this country. We began to build and develop a very stable and very sound structure and basis for an inclusive society. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000247\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EThat is the kind of industrial relations that I aspire to and that I practised in my time as an industrial relations practitioner, both as a union official and as an employer representative\u2014an employment relations manager. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000248\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EThat kind of approach to industrial relations is the only kind of approach that will provide stability, and stability is important for workers. Stability is important because workers need the security of a job. They need to know that their job is secure and they need to know that the conditions they are working under, on which they budget from week to week, will remain the same or improve. The conditions should not be diminished or cut away so that suddenly people find themselves with less money every fortnight to pay the mortgage than they had before, rather than more money, as we would all like the situation to be. Stability is important for employers. Employers need to know they have a stable regime and a stable regulatory structure around them in order to plan their operations. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000249\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EThis debate is not about being anti-employer; I think Mr Woodhouse was keen to paint Labour that way earlier in the debate. It is certainly about being pro-worker. But more than anything, it is about wanting in New Zealand an industrial relations framework that provides the greatest stability for the greatest number and for the greatest good. This legislation does not do that. This legislation diminishes, chips away, and erodes workers\u2019 conditions and workers\u2019 rights in a way that we have not seen since the 1990s. We hoped we had put the years of the 1990s behind us. It is due to the short-sightedness, malevolence, or perhaps ignorance of the Minister of Labour that there is no understanding of the impact of this steady erosion of workers\u2019 rights. Perhaps it is simply an ideological difference that is to be pursued at all costs, which prevents this Minister from seeing the big picture around industrial relations. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000250\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EThis kind of legislative change is not needed in order for industrial relations to proceed smoothly, cooperatively, and in a negotiated way to the benefit of all players. I would like the National Party to identify where the drivers for these moves are coming from. Where are these drivers coming from? Business New Zealand has said that it does not need a number of measures in this legislation; it is OK without them. Business New Zealand has said that it is OK without the requirement of medical notes or some kind of note from mother for absences. It is OK with that. It has good systems going and it does not need this kind of intervention. Business New Zealand has said that the extension of the 90-day trial period to all workplaces in New Zealand is not necessary in its industries, because it has a reasonably good arrangement with its unions. It does not have a problem with giving unions access to workers, because it has a good cooperative relationship. It is not always smooth, but it has a fundamentally respectful relationship with the unions that represent its workers. It has no problem with giving unions that access. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000251\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003ESo where have these drivers come from? This is an ideological bombardment from the National Party, which is reverting to type. But I suggest that even some of its most strident supporters do not require some of this legislation. I ask National to look again at what it is doing with this erosion of workers\u2019 rights. It is destabilising industrial relations. It will only cause a swing back when Labour comes back into Government. When we do that\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000252\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022063a4f89d81e4af082028520d552584b\u0022\u003EHon Tau Henare\u003C/span\u003E: That ain\u2019t going to happen in a hurry.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000253\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d3fb30583f25414bb087ef8afc7c0810\u0022\u003EHon MARYAN STREET\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014next year, I say to Mr Henare\u2014the employers will not be grateful to National for having this flip-flop situation, which was characteristic of the 1970s, the 1980s, and the 1990s. We were growing out of that kind of childishness, and I wish National would grow out of it also. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000254\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EOur vision on this side of the Chamber is for a much more stable, a much more cooperative, and a much more respectful balance in industrial relations than this legislation provides. This legislation provokes unrest, it provokes industrial action, it provokes stoppages, it provokes downtime, it provokes a loss of income, and it provokes a diminishing of margins for employers. The National Government has only itself to blame if it thinks that some of the people it takes to be National supporters will thank the Government for this. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000255\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EThis is no way to run a country. This is no way to run the most important powerhouse of this country. In this legislation the Government is simply saying that cooperative, grown-up, respectful relationships between employers and unions, and between industry and peak bodies like the Council of Trade Unions, are not required, are not necessary, and are out of date. National will rue that day. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000256\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EThis bill will provoke unrest. It has already been seen to provoke unrest, and that is no way to run a country. If this Government had half a plan about the economic future of this country, this legislation would not be before us now, because it simply takes us backwards. It does not advance anybody. It certainly does not advance workers. It diminishes workers\u2019 rights and improves nobody.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022 data-id=\u00229e9ebcd34dc843e8b67acba3c10dff41\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000257\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229e9ebcd34dc843e8b67acba3c10dff41\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National):\u003C/span\u003E I would like to address the issue that was raised by the member Lynne Pillay in her last call in respect of clause 6, which inserts new section 20A of the Employment Relations Bill (No 2). Before I go to the details of this, I say there is a bit of a preamble to it. The bill as it was introduced prescribed what could have been a maximum time frame of up to 4 working days for a union to be given a reason for access to be denied. In the consideration of the bill, I believe it was the member Carol Beaumont who raised a concern about that being unduly prolonged. I supported that call. The officials, to their credit, realised that the initial policy intent was for that not to be the case but somewhere in the translation from policy to the bill the duration was doubled. They were very happy to recommend amendments that reduced the time frame for the whole thing to be wrapped up to within 2 working days. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000258\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003EIf we then step through the legislation as it stands, bearing in mind that the goal is for any decision and the reasons to be communicated within 2 working days or deemed acceptance in that time, we see that the obligation is on the employer to provide a response the working day after. If I as a union representative asked for access in writing on the Monday, the obligation is on the employer to have responded by the end of the working day following\u2014that is, the end of Tuesday. If the employer does not do that, then by the Wednesday access is deemed to have been granted. In terms of clause 6, it is necessary to keep section 20A(2)(c) referring to within 2 working days. In that scenario, the Wednesday is within 2 working days and works mathematically. If permission is specifically denied the working day following, then the obligation falls on the employer under 20A(3) \u201Cas soon as is reasonably practicable but no later than the working date after the date of the decision,\u201D to provide a reason why. That would also have been the Wednesday. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000259\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003ESo in that scenario everything is wrapped up on the Wednesday, but the clause that the member thought may have been out of whack with the rest of the legislation is quite consistent with the intention that the select committee wanted to recommend back to the House. I suggest that no change to the bill is necessary.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022 data-id=\u0022ddec68611f0143f3afc94702e4d93ef7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000260\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ddec68611f0143f3afc94702e4d93ef7\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I want to add one important point to my very good colleague Maryan Street\u2019s contribution to the Employment Relations Bill (No 2), which I thought was very powerful. I hope that the National Party was listening. The other fundamental thing about Part 1 of this bill that has not been referred to this morning is that we have talked about fairness, but with the 90-day trial period we are denying access to justice. With this bill we are saying that people will lose their economic livelihoods, without being told a reason why or being able to challenge that reason. That is a pretty fundamental thing in New Zealand. It is a fundamental legal understanding in New Zealand that if one is treated unfairly or something happens to one in other walks of life, one has the right to challenge it and access justice. I think that is one of the very strong oppositions that we have. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000261\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EI want to give an example that came out this week. I know there has been a bit of discussion about the sauce-and-aioli guy, but an example came out earlier this week of a farm worker. He took on a job milking cows, moved to a farm cottage, and took his wife and two children with him. He signed an employment agreement that had a 90-day trial provision in it. He thought at the time that there was not much to worry about. He noticed it and he signed the agreement, but he thought it would not apply to him. He took his children and his wife to live on this farm. The children settled in at the local school. They really loved it and thought it was fantastic. They were having a wonderful new life on the farm. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000262\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EA couple of months into his employment, he had a disagreement with his employer, the farmer. It was over the way the employer, the farmer, was talking to one of the farmhands, who was a migrant worker. He was very nasty to this guy, so the worker decided to stick up for this guy, which is what we expect people to do. If people are being bullied, it is a natural instinct to stick up for a workmate, a friend, or a neighbour, and that is what he did. He asked the employer: \u201CPlease do not talk to this guy like that.\u201D The next morning the farmer came round the milking shed and said: \u201CI\u2019m sorry, but I\u2019ll have to let you go.\u201D The worker asked for a reason, and the employer said he did not have to tell him because he is employed under the 90-day trial period. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000263\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EThe worker had done nothing wrong except stick up for his workmate\u2014he had done nothing wrong. There was nothing he could do about it, because he had signed the employment contract. Let us be clear about this: if employers get the paperwork right, there will be people who get fired like this. It did not apply to the sauce-and-aioli guy because the employer got the paperwork wrong, but employers will get it right and employees will be fired. I have heard from many, many workers in that situation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000264\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EThis poor guy had to pack up his family, leave his farm cottage where he was living, and tell his children that they would no longer be going to the local school and that they were leaving. He felt a real sense of shame for leaving a community where he was just starting to build relations in. He had to try and explain to his children why they had to leave. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000265\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226b5a827fe4b84cebb13b9b48c8007a43\u0022\u003ECarol Beaumont\u003C/span\u003E: Very disruptive for them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000266\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224c49a6b3070b49dba37429515dd339e4\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON\u003C/span\u003E: It disrupted their lives, their education, and this guy\u2019s economic livelihood. The upshot of the story is that he has gone to Australia. I know that members opposite will say that there are longer trial periods in Australia, but fundamentally for him it was an issue of fairness, of the impact on his children, of the impact on his livelihood, and of the impact on his career as a sharemilker in the future. There was an overwhelming sense of frustration and anger that we live in a country now where workplaces of fewer than 20 workers can be treated like that and we will be living in a country where every worker in the whole country can be treated in the same way. Yes, apparently it will not happen; we know that. But the fact is that there are employers out there\u2014and we heard it in the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee\u2014who want this extension not only in all workplaces but also for it to be the default provision. They want more; they always want more.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000267\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022433bfa6a7b4b42d8acf8d274b1a5aaaf\u0022\u003ESue Moroney\u003C/span\u003E: I think Kate Wilkinson does too.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000268\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c762ef58efb24ac6b55198cd9a19b237\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON\u003C/span\u003E: I think Kate Wilkinson does too. In fact, I heard from another group of workers where four of them were working for the same firm in Napier who have been fired under the 90-day trial provisions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f99bcf9e-1ad4-4ed4-9a97-1cccb5b1e11a\u0022 data-id=\u0022fb58b7fbe6ee4bac85299fad6bd3f0f0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000269\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f99bcf9e-1ad4-4ed4-9a97-1cccb5b1e11a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022fb58b7fbe6ee4bac85299fad6bd3f0f0\u0022\u003EDr JACKIE BLUE (National):\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=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022 data-id=\u002265c89e56ac3843eb934982005d7f9d96\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000270\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002265c89e56ac3843eb934982005d7f9d96\u0022\u003ECAROL BEAUMONT (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E In this debate in the Committee stage of the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2), I want to pick up a point about the 90-day trial period, and the very significant point made by my colleague Darien Fenton in relaying that example. The comment was made about Australia. Earlier, Dr Jackie Blue asserted, of course, that the 90-day provision is very reasonable, that everywhere around the world there are these no-rights provisions, and, in fact, the provision here is even quite moderate in being only 90 days. I have to say there were a number of submitters who quite clearly tried to get us to recognise that we need to compare apples with apples. Caritas, which I mentioned earlier in another regard, said: \u201CLook, we are not specialists in employment law, but we thought, given that the Government had asserted so strongly that the justification for the 90-day provision was that it applied everywhere else, that we should check it out.\u201D It made contact with the equivalent of Caritas in Australia, and it was particularly interested in looking at the situation of small employers. It checked with the Australian Catholic Church\u2019s Office for Employment Relations, and it was told that matters of natural justice and procedural fairness during probationary periods in Australia are covered by Australia\u2019s fair work and adverse action provisions. A complaint under the adverse action provisions can be taken by any worker\u2014including job applicants, so the provisions are quite broad\u2014who feels that he or she has been unfairly treated. Then a range of actions flow from that. Caritas was then referred to the Australian Government website to check that out a little more. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000271\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EOnce Caritas followed that through, it looked at the advice provided to employers and employees about the legal obligations around the termination of employment. It found that there is a provision applying to small businesses, the Small Business Fair Dismissal Code, which provides a whole lot of things and would stop the absolutely patently unfair examples like the one that my colleague Darien Fenton just gave\u2014a real life story involving somebody sacked not for their own action but for sticking up for somebody else. I reckon most New Zealanders would find that absolutely disgraceful, but they need to know that that is entirely possible under this legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000272\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EI will also talk a little bit about union access to workplaces. Some cute statements have been made across the Chamber about our position on union access to workplaces. The difference that this law will put in place is that it will give an employer the right to say no to access. We were given example after example in the select committee of how the current access provisions, which do not give the employer the right to just say yes or no but have a number of reasonableness provisions, are working effectively where there are relationships. People described for us the fact that the union official will generally make contact with the manager to discuss what a reasonable time for access might be and whether access should be provided in particular places or to some groups of workers at some times and others at other times. That is genuine and that is what happens at the moment. I know that from my own experience and from the experience of other officials. There is not a problem. That was made absolutely clear by officials, and it was made clear by Business New Zealand. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000273\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EThis new access provision is purely an ideological thing, but the worry is its effect. It may not be widely used, but it will be used by employers who do not want to see workers accessing information, workers accessing expert advice, and workers wanting to organise themselves to get a better deal. This is the last thing we should be doing if we are serious about closing the wage gap between Australia and New Zealand. The real way to close the wage gap is obviously to lift wages in this country. How do we go about that? We do not go about it individual by individual by individual. That is not the way to lift wages. The way to lift wages is to lift the wages of groups of workers through collective employment agreements. How do we do that? We do that by workers joining together in unions, by organising, and then by seeking to negotiate a collective employment agreement. If bad employers have the right to stop unions accessing workplaces, that will not happen.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u002206a5b19ee32940a7bd583e5d60836448\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000274\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002206a5b19ee32940a7bd583e5d60836448\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E At this stage I want to draw the Committee\u2019s attention to the set of amendments in my name that the Committee will work through, because we have not had very much reaction from the Government in respect of them. I turn in particular to those to do with union access and the suggestions that have been made there. One of them makes it clear that access cannot be denied if it is required for the conducting of a secret ballot. We have had some legislation that is working its way through the House in the name of Tau Henare\u2014unnecessary legislation, it is fair to say\u2014which has a possibility of being passed, that requires a secret ballot. The member knows that for the secret ballots that he is now requiring to be held\u2014which are mainly held anyway\u2014there is a need for union access in order to conduct those ballots. What we want to be careful of are employers who unreasonably deny access in order to avoid the ballot, in order to avoid a strike. I think what would probably happen in most workplaces would be that employees would walk off the job and have their ballot off the job if that occurred. I think what we need to make clear in the legislation is that people should act reasonably and work their way forward. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000275\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EThere is another amendment that goes to the question that was raised by my colleague Lynne Pillay. It is our suggestion that the reason for denying access must be given on the same day as access is denied. I do not think that is an unreasonable approach. If someone is saying \u201CNo, you can\u2019t come in.\u201D, then asking why at the same time is not unreasonable. Most employers are bright enough: if it is a genuine reason and if they genuinely hold a particular view as to why now is inappropriate for unions to come in, or even later in the day, then I think it behoves them to indicate the reason for that to the union officials concerned. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000276\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EThere are a series of other amendments here. One of them is around communication during collective bargaining. The suggestion here is that we effectively take out clause 9. One of the problems with the approach that this Government has taken under the very poor drafting leadership of the Attorney-General is the massive use of parts. In this case, there is one substantive part in what is effectively a consequential part, or a very small part. What would previously happen is that individual issues would be identified and one could vote against clauses. A bill as short as this would have, under quality drafting with someone with some integrity leading the drafting process, been drafted such that it was taken clause by clause, because although it is a bill of massive importance, it is not a bill of massive size or massive numbers of clauses, so it should have been taken clause by clause. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000277\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EThat would have been an opportunity for members to vote No just on clause 9. So the objective here is to take that clause out of the bill, and in that way maintain the status quo around collective bargaining. The change proposed in the bill appears to be driven by a misunderstanding of the current legal positions. Again, with the quality of legal drafting that we have from the Attorney-General, with his very poor leadership, I am not surprised that there is a misunderstanding in this area. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000278\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003ESome other amendments go to the non-denial of access on harassment or discrimination matters, and there could be a matter where a union official needs to get into a workplace immediately because there is a current case of discrimination or harassment. Just looking around, I see a couple of members opposite who have done constituency work in their time. Most people who have done constituency work know that every now and again one gets a case where one has some absolutely outrageous harassment of individuals. To be fair, it is generally in the case of small employers, and I want to say that it is too often the case that new New Zealanders are involved, either as the people being harassed or the people who are doing the harassing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000279\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EBut some things that occur within workplaces are just absolutely unacceptable in our society. Some of these reach court, but a lot do not, because quite often in sexual harassment cases the woman\u2014and it is just about always a woman\u2014who is harassed takes a decision that she does not want to put herself through what is effectively a second trial. The matters often do not go to the police. But the immediate solution, the way of protecting the woman concerned, is very often through the intervention of a union official, who comes in and supports and helps to isolate and get some barriers up, and makes it clear to the employer that harassment cannot continue. I ask why a woman who is being harassed, often sexually harassed, by an employer should have to wait until the day after tomorrow. If the employer does not agree, it could be 2 days before he gives a reason for not agreeing for someone to come in. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000280\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EIn modern society that situation is unacceptable. However, it is consistent with the lack of rights of, and respect for, individuals that come from this Government. I think it is fair to say that Jim Bolger was not the best Minister of Labour, but he believed in the dignity of work and the rights of workers, and in human rights generally. Now there is really no one in the Government who protects human rights. The New Zealand Bill of Rights Act more or less might as well be gone, given the approach that is taken. There is not a Minister who is prepared to, within Cabinet or within Parliament, stand up for the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act and for the rights of individual Kiwis. We have come to this, and it is so sad: the Attorney-General is the Minister in the chair as we legislate away the rights of someone who is being sexually abused and sexually harassed to call in a union official. The Attorney-General of New Zealand, who is meant to stand up for those rights, is sitting here absolutely numb in his mouth. It is an improvement on his general condition, but he is sitting there. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000281\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EI say to the ACT Party that it is about time it took a call on this matter too. That party has generally stood up for individual rights in New Zealand\u2014the individual right to make a phone call and ask someone to visit. What do we have here? We have the ACT Party sitting. There is not a mumble, not a murmur, not a word from the ACT Party about the individual rights of a worker to call on their representative. We do not agree on lots of things to do with industrial legislation, but I thought one of the things ACT would have the backbone to stand up for was the right of an individual to make a phone call and to have a meeting. What do we have? Not a word from ACT. It is sitting there, a supplicant to the National Party.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022 data-id=\u0022618b53f9d612451788031030f08b8383\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000282\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022618b53f9d612451788031030f08b8383\u0022\u003EDAVID BENNETT (National\u2014Hamilton East):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022f7ba3921ab2c44a298adad6e66215bab\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000283\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard to clause 6 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000284\u0022\u003Eto add to new section 20A(1) \u201Cunless the access is required for urgent health and safety matters\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022183625e36374450ea1822ee50a8800f4\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 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 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=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000285\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard to clause 6 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000286\u0022\u003Eto add to new section 20A(1) \u201Cunless the access is required for matters relating to harassment or discrimination of any employee\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022c683af25aa7f427d8d42ecaa43318fd1\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 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 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=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000287\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard to clause 6 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000288\u0022\u003Eto add to new section 20A(1) \u201Cunless the access is required for matters relating to redundancies or potential dismissals or where the union representative is seeking to represent a worker in an employment dispute\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022ab9bab83e968452f8ce8c90aa6e6b8ec\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 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 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=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000289\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard to clause 6 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000290\u0022\u003Eto add to new section 20A(1) \u201Cunless the access is required for the conducting of a secret ballot\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00222fa8e73b33d047b48e34cec8f42bb2ff\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 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 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=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000291\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard to clause 6 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000292\u0022\u003Eto omit from new section 20A(3) \u201C, as soon as is reasonably practicable but no later than the working day after the date of the decision\u201D and substitute \u201Con the same day as the decision is given\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002265c26e3602d940cca5239385e8f72a06\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 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 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=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000293\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard to clause 9 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000294\u0022\u003Eto omit this clause.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00227045dd7f134c44c18eefe1d647a0ef98\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 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 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=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000295\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard to Part 1 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000296\u0022\u003Eto insert the following clause after clause 12:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000297\u0022\u003E12A\tEffect of trial provision under section 67A\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000298\u0022\u003ESection 67B(5)(a) is repealed.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002279e4bc18bf7844bf80ef8b8628cff459\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 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 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=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000299\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard to clause 6 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000300\u0022\u003Eto omit from new section 20A(2)(a) \u201Cunreasonably\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022717586b351794f22a629875bdd1faf0d\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 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 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=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000301\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard to Part 1 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000302\u0022\u003Eto insert the following clause after clause 12:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000303\u0022\u003E12B\tEffect of trial provision under 67A\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000304\u0022\u003ESection 67B(5)(b) is repealed.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002266909a50cd9e4779a8053b892b5efe1c\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 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 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=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000305\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard to Part 1 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000306\u0022\u003Eto insert the following clause after clause 12:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000307\u0022\u003E12C\tEffect of trial provision under 67A\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000308\u0022\u003ESection 67B(5) is repealed.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002214289efc1660441fb701a87145085074\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 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 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=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000309\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard to Part 1 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000310\u0022\u003Eto insert the following clause after clause 12:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000311\u0022\u003E12D\tWhen employment agreement may contain provision for trial period for 90 days or less\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000312\u0022\u003E\tSection 67A is amended by adding the following subsection\u2014\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000313\u0022\u003E\u201C(6)\tA trial provision may not be included in any advertisement for a job as a pre-requisite for employment in that job.\u201D\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022fe3a1d9a71df4ab6a7591746f9007ad3\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 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 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=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000314\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard to Part 1 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000315\u0022\u003Eto insert the following clause after clause 12:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000316\u0022\u003E12E\tWhen employment agreement may contain provision for trial period for 90 days or less\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000317\u0022\u003ESection 67A(2)(c) is amended by adding \u201Cexcept where the employer has not acted in good faith\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022cadf26d01b5945fba7b2a9fcdd08a4d2\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 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 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=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000318\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard to Part 1 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000319\u0022\u003Eto insert the following clause after clause 12:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000320\u0022\u003E12F\tEffect of trial provision under section 67A\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000321\u0022\u003ESection 67B(2) is repealed.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00221f0790c74a1840b8926bc60add1d0c93\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 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 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=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000322\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard to Part 1 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000323\u0022\u003Eto insert the following clause after clause 12:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000324\u0022\u003E12G\tEffect of trial provision under section 67A\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000325\u0022\u003ESection 67B(5) is repealed and the following subsection substituted:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000326\u0022\u003E\u201C(5)\tIf the reason for dismissal provided by the employer is alleged to be frivolous, untrue or unfair, the employee retains the right to take a personal grievance or legal proceedings in relation to that dismissal.\u201D\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022aebc2a5646de4006a7323d90538c60f4\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 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 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=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000327\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard to clause 15 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000328\u0022\u003Eto add to section 125 the following new subsection:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000329\u0022\u003E\u201C(3)\tIf this section applies and the employee concerned is also a union delegate, health and safety representative or member of a party actively involved in bargaining, the Authority must, whether or not it provides for any of the other remedies provided for in section 123, provide, wherever practicable, for reinstatement as described in section 123(a).\u201D\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00220bcc15561c884e7387e89e347333320d\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 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 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=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000330\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Kate Wilkinson to clause 9A be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000331\u0022\u003Eto omit from subclause (2) \u201C63(2)(b)\u201D and substitute \u201C63A(2)(b)\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00227bbbca9894224ba4bf2b185bf1738472\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 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022ddf534950ac4482ca54ceb03f81ae7ec\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That Part 1 as amended be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 1 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000332\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002261f4167534034771bcc36e97833de655\u0022\u003EPart 2  Consequential amendments and transitional provision\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022 data-id=\u0022a9e65eb74e5e44a4996a2abe33288628\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000333\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a9e65eb74e5e44a4996a2abe33288628\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: The debate on this part includes schedule 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u002211f3f330b8314fdb81ab1d10f1047c09\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000334\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002211f3f330b8314fdb81ab1d10f1047c09\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I think members will agree that Part 2 is not quite as substantive as Part 1, which we have just debated. I ask my colleagues, especially those who are more involved in the law\u2014in particular, industrial law\u2014 to have a good look at Part 2. I specifically ask them to look at schedule 2, \u201CConsequential amendments to other enactments\u201D. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000335\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EThe question I ask members opposite, and through the Minister in the chair, the Hon Chris Finlayson, to the officials, is whether we can be absolutely sure that the right reference is cited in section 83(2)(a) in schedule 2. There is a reference there to section 223D of the Employment Relations Act. I just inform the Minister that there is no section 223D in the Employment Relations Act. I am using the statute from the lobby; the 1 April 2009 edition. It may be that changes have been made since that time. But I note there is a section 224 in that Act and that the reference to a demand notice appears to be correct. There is always a question in these things about whether one is working from the correct copy of the legislation. In the case of the next reference, it appears that section 83(2)(b) refers accurately to section 224. But in the case of section 83(2)(a), the reference there is not accurate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000336\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EIt might be that the reference should be to section 223(1)(c). That is a provision that ties the Employment Relations Act to the Holidays Act, and deals with the powers of labour inspectors in that particular area. It is not even section 223(1)(d), because that relates to the Minimum Wage Act but it is a matter that is meant to relate to holiday pay. That of course must refer to the Holidays Act and the proper references within this area. I say to the Hon John Carter, my old friend and colleague who is now in the chair, that occasionally there is a lot of politics in these things and occasionally there appears to be a minor error in the drafting. But when we have a mis-reference when relating something to an Act, it could well end up being an inaccurate reference. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000337\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EThe Minister, of course, has a group of officials who are working with him and for him, and if the Minister did indicate that the lobby copy of the legislation is out of date, and I am wrong, I would be happy to concede on this point. But if the lobby copy is accurate, it may be that the Minister would want to scribble an amendment in order to change the reference to the Act to read \u201Csection 223(1)(c)\u201D, which I think is the accurate reference. I am getting a bit of a nod. I want to plead guilty, because for at least half an hour I was a member of the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee during its deliberations on the bill and I missed this wrong reference on the way through. It does not happen very often, and I will apologise to the Committee for making an error if it is\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000338\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fa14000c11cd4dc2b9783d675aded5ec\u0022\u003EMichael Woodhouse\u003C/span\u003E: I could have saved you further embarrassment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000339\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b0816c134b094b108b501c251dcba5b9\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the member. If he wants to take a call to clarify this matter, I am happy to come back after that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022 data-id=\u0022a4fced20702e44c98b0dc7b831f7a835\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000340\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a4fced20702e44c98b0dc7b831f7a835\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National):\u003C/span\u003E In respect of the speech made by the previous speaker, Mr Mallard, I draw his attention to clause 36 in Part 1 of the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2), which inserts new sections 223A to 223G. So, in fact, he is quite right: there is no section 223D in the Employment Relations Act as it currently is in the lobby, because those new sections are being inserted by Part 1 of this bill. Therefore it is necessary to refer back to that section in schedule 2, and therefore there is no need for any change. I look forward to the call and the apology that he has offered.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022 data-id=\u002239ff25f0b0f64e5690ec539c74b584c0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000341\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002239ff25f0b0f64e5690ec539c74b584c0\u0022\u003ECAROL BEAUMONT (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I want to follow on with clause 40, \u201CTransitional provision\u201D, rather than clause 39, \u201CConsequential amendments to other enactments\u201D. The transitional provision clause is the reference to the individual employment agreement and the requirement under new section 10 that the employer must retain a copy of the individual employment agreement or individual terms and conditions of employment. Clause 40 clarifies the fact that that provision applies whether \u201Cindividual terms and conditions of employment were provided to, or agreed with, the employee before or after the commencement of this Act.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000342\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EThe transitional provision and the reference to the individual employment agreement is very important because in this area also there will be the question of whether a 90-day no-rights provision will apply. It will include the \u201Ctake it or leave it\u201D employment agreements that we have talked about previously. With regard to the individual employment agreement that is being referred to here, whether it be agreed before or after the commencement of this Act, whether it has any reference, and whether it was a genuine negotiation is, of course, irrelevant because \u201Ctake it or leave it\u201D provisions appear to be acceptable to this Government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000343\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EWe have heard members opposite arguing that that is a matter of choice. Those of us who know what people feel like when they are out of work and struggling to make ends meet know that \u201Ctake it or leave it\u201D employment offers, particularly in periods of high unemployment, are not at all a matter of choice. I think that we will find plenty of people in the Mana electorate in that particular situation: they do not have a job, they would like a job, and if they are offered a job with an individual employment agreement with a 90-day trial provision there will be no negotiation or choice associated with the matter. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000344\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EI think a number of other transitional arrangements really should be included in this part. We will be going from a situation where the 90-day no-rights provision applies to workplaces of fewer than 20 employees to a situation where they apply to all workplaces. The majority of New Zealand employees work in large workplaces; although the majority of workplaces are small workplaces, the majority of employees are employed in large workplaces. These changes bring those workplaces into the scope of the legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000345\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EI wonder whether some transitional arrangements are required around, for example, the ability of Work and Income to deal with these changes, because the provision does not require an employer to provide any reason for a dismissal. Not only does the worker not have the right of redress, but the worker does not actually have to be given a reason why they have been dismissed. Under our benefit system people can be stood down from their right to access a benefit if they have lost a job because it is their own fault. In a situation where they have no idea why they have lost their job, Work and Income have to intervene. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000346\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EWe sought advice from officials on this matter and we were provided with advice. In summary, the advice is that if the employer does not respond to a request from Work and Income to give a reason, then it will take whatever reason the employee gives them. But if when Work and Income contacts the employer they assert a reason, even if they have not told the employee why they have been dismissed\u2014they could make it up on the spot\u2014that reason will be accepted by Work and Income and there is no right to challenge it. Potentially the provision could deny somebody access to a benefit. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000347\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EWe are applying this provision to all workplaces, so the extent to which Work and Income will be required to make those sorts of judgments and to deal with those very complicated situations will increase. I wonder whether there is a need to look at or change the transitional provisions. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000348\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EI wonder also whether any thought has been given to the change in culture in our workplaces. It is quite hard to have transitional arrangements about change in culture, but the fact of the matter is that at the moment most employees are working in workplaces where they can challenge unjustified dismissal.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022 data-id=\u002211456429302f45e7b9a94026a38790c8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000349\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002211456429302f45e7b9a94026a38790c8\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I will continue, if I may, on the theme of the transitional provision in Part 2 of the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2). My colleague Carol Beaumont made some very good points about the questions that are still there about the 90-day provision, but I will be a little more positive for a moment about the reference in the transitional provision. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000350\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EClause 40, \u201CTransitional provision\u201D, refers back to new section 64, \u201CEmployer must retain copy of individual employment agreement or individual terms and conditions of employment\u201D. That is one provision in this bill that Labour supports, but we did not get to talk about it, because we did not have enough time in the debate on Part 1. We support that provision. We support workers having the right to their individual employment agreements in writing; they are supposed to have those anyway. We think that is an improvement on the current situation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000351\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EThere is another reason why we think it is an improvement, although I do not think it will help the hapless souls who are employed under the 90-day trial period provision\u2014all of those in every workplace in New Zealand who change jobs in the future. When we go back to the Department of Labour research on the existing arrangements in workplaces of 20 or fewer employees, it is very interesting to look at what was happening with individual employment agreements. One in four of the workers end up with no job. The 90-day trial period was supposed to create jobs for all of those people, in particular the so-called vulnerable workers\u2014migrant workers, M\u0101ori workers, and so on\u2014but there was no evidence to show that it contributed to increasing their employment in any way, shape, or form. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000352\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003ENot only that, but when we looked at the other parts of the evidence in that survey we saw that some of the employers did not even put the conditions in writing. There is a pretty widespread practice out there of having individual agreements that are not in writing even though it is a current requirement of the law. It is a current requirement of the law. Even when employers put the agreement in writing, of course, the conditions were non-negotiable. It is one thing to have a written individual employment agreement, and we support that; it is another thing to have a non-negotiable individual employment agreement. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000353\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EThat is the problem all the way through this bill. The whole 90-day trial provision is not voluntary, and it will not be subject to good faith. Good faith is meaningless in this situation. We have heard and relayed some of the stories about the impact of that provision. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000354\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EThe same report said that employers generally did not seek employees\u2019 acceptance of a trial period in an individual agreement; rather, it was stated in the employment agreement with other terms and conditions. For most workers applying for a job, the job is conditional on their accepting a trial period. So although we support this transitional provision and its reference back to new section 64, the Prime Minister\u2019s statement, and other Ministers who said that the 90-day trial period could be entered into only by agreement between the employer and the new worker at the beginning of the employment relationship, have been shown by their own department\u2019s research to be completely untrue, and to be utter rubbish. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000355\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EI noticed also during the consideration by the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee that it made a change to new section 64, which the transitional provision refers to, by inserting subsection 2A to make it clear that the employee may have access to a copy of the employment agreement retained by the employer. That is a good idea. I think that is a very good idea. Of course employees should have access to their individual employment agreement. But, you see, the reality is that in many workplaces they do not. That provision is good and will improve the situation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000356\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EHowever, many, many employers who will take advantage of and exploit the 90-day trial provision will ignore it anyway. It is meaningless for them. We have heard from many workers that they are told that employers are using the 90-day trial period so they do not have to give them an agreement; they do not even have to agree to it. We can write these things down, and they are improvements, but I have to say that I have no confidence that they will make a huge difference. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000357\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EJust picking up the point of my colleague Carol Beaumont about transitional provisions, and what could be considered, I wonder how on earth we are going to get an education programme going and what resources the Minister and others are planning to put into this. This is a huge change. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022 data-id=\u00226cd2a3f53b9e47cc876dab8ca053a567\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000358\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226cd2a3f53b9e47cc876dab8ca053a567\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I would like to comment, particularly in relation to the transitional provisions of the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2), on comments made by both Carol Beaumont and Darien Fenton. We are looking at individual employment agreements and how that provision will work. Although they must be in writing, we know that the Employers and Manufacturers Association will be busy pumping out those individual employment agreements to employers, as we saw in the 1990s. When redundancy had to be referred to, those agreements said quite clearly that no redundancy compensation would be paid. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000359\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EWe know that in terms of these individual agreements it will be very much, as my colleagues have said, a \u201Ctake it or leave it\u201D situation. That is what National members refer to as choice in this situation. National members say that of course there is a choice. We say that workers will have no choice as to whether they accept this Draconian provision that means they can get sacked within the first 90 days whether or not they are given a reason, and whether or not there is a good reason. When we say that employees have no choice, the Government\u2019s response is to say that of course they have a choice: they can either take the job or leave the job. We say that that is not a real choice. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000360\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003ECarol Beaumont touched on, again, a possibly unintended consequence, but one that from a transitional point of view will create a real problem in the future.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000361\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EThat would be along the lines of an employee getting a pumped out \u201Ctake it or leave it\u201D employment agreement handed to them, courtesy of the Employers and Manufacturers Association, for which the employer pays a fee. Employees know that they have no choice but to take the agreement, and they sign up. Things might go really well. They will work and try to do the best possible job they can. Then they make the fatal mistake of putting too much sauce on the fish, or whatever. They are called in and told that in the agreement that they have a copy of, they will see quite clearly that they can be sacked for any reason, and the reason they are being sacked is that\u2014well, they will not be told why; they are just let go. What a funny term \u201Clet go\u201D is. It sounds as if one is being really kind and nice, as if it is a nice thing to do. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000362\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EThe poor employee is let go. John Key has talked about job creation, so they are sure there will be a lot of jobs they can find out there. People search and search, but of course there is nothing, because this Government has not created any jobs. As previous speakers have said, most workers are staying in their jobs because they are too fearful to leave, and because if they go to a new job they will have these Draconian conditions imposed on them, particularly after this bill goes through. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000363\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EEventually people will have to make ends meet, so they will have to do something they did not want to do, which is go to Work and Income. Their case manager will ask why they are no longer employed. They will say they do not know, but that their employer has let them go. The case manager will ask whether it was their fault, and they will say that they do not know whether it was their fault, because the employer did not tell them anything. They will be told that they have to wait. Those poor people will be waiting to see whether they are eligible for a benefit\u2014a very small benefit, but something to put a bit of food on the table while they are searching for those non-existent jobs. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000364\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EI ask the Government to consider where the human rights are in that situation. We could have a situation in which a Work and Income case manager asks an employer whether the termination of a job was the employee\u2019s fault. The employer will say to Work and Income that it was the employee\u2019s fault and they will feel quite confident in telling Work and Income about the reasons, because they have nothing to lose. We will have the ludicrous situation in which that poor person will, for reasons completely unknown, lose his or her job, and will then be told by Work and Income\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022 data-id=\u00229b3557f13aa445948a07d5029f6805b4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000365\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229b3557f13aa445948a07d5029f6805b4\u0022\u003EKEITH LOCKE (Green):\u003C/span\u003E I see that Lynne Pillay wished to continue her speech; I apologise to her. But I will continue in the same vein. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000366\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EIt seems that it is a very good thing to have a written employment agreement constructed and kept by the employer as a reference point. On one hand, it means there is something to refer back to, to see whether the employer is matching the requirements in that agreement. On the other hand\u2014as the previous speaker pointed out\u2014employers\u2019 organisations will construct a standard agreement that contains the 90-day provision without any reason being required for dismissing a person within the first 90 days. That agreement will be sent out to every employer, and it will almost be a black mark against them if they do not use it. Employers are very organised in that respect, in making sure that all other employers keep in line. Supposedly, there is a choice in terms of whether people go into the 90-day arrangement; in fact, people will not be able to get a job anywhere else, because all contracts will have that 90-day provision in them. People will have the choice between having a job and not having a job.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000367\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EI agree with Lynne Pillay that there will be euphemisms such as letting people go instead of sacking them. They are all excuses. Another one that came up was that a person could be overqualified. Employers might say that a person is a very nice worker but is overqualified and that they will let that person go and get somebody else. Those are not real reasons, and reasons will not be required under the 90-day legislation, but we can see how things will operate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000368\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThe changes are all completely unnecessary, because, particularly in the labour market we have now, where there is a high level of unemployment, any reasonable employers will not be looking to recruit people for 90 days. They will be recruiting to get the best person on a permanent basis, providing the training from day one, and spending their money on that training. Having that 90-day provision has nothing to do with the quality of the employees being hired and has everything to do with being anti-union, as in the examples given before: sacking people if they show any sign of standing up for their rights, linking up with the union, or whatever. That will be the primary reason why people are sent down the road. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000369\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EWorkers who are pro-union and who will be sent down the road are, generally, the better workers. I have found that the more one stands up for other people\u2019s rights, the more confidence one has in one\u2019s own rights and skills. Those people tend to be the better workers; they will be the ones who are sacked. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000370\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EIn my experience it has been the most unionised workplaces that have put out the better product. I used to work at New Zealand Motor Corporation in P\u0113tone, producing Honda cars. We had a strong union there, and the quality of the Honda cars was great. My partner worked out at what was then Todd Motors, which then changed to Mitsubishi Motors New Zealand, where the union was much weaker. Quite a lot of people got annoyed with the conditions there, and there was a bit of sabotaging of cars, actually. The quality of the cars coming out was lower, because the union was less strong. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000371\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EIt is actually in the employer\u2019s interest to have a strong union in the workplace, but a lot of employers do not operate in that way; they just want to run the business their way. Trevor Mallard gave some examples of that, particularly of employers who have a small business, where the boss is more concerned with keeping control over everything than in having a collective workforce that works well together. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000372\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003ETo summarise, the existence of this written agreement has its positive sides. But in the hands of the employers\u2019 federation, it will probably lead to a universalisation of this offensive 90-day provision.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022 data-id=\u00223bf3e606d890429eb51c9ab0b8880197\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000373\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223bf3e606d890429eb51c9ab0b8880197\u0022\u003EHon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Labour\u2014New Lynn):\u003C/span\u003E It is a pleasure to take part in this debate on Part 2 of the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2), which contains the transitional provisions of such an innocuous-sounding bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000374\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003EThis bill is, of course, the fire-at-will bill. That is how it is known in the streets, factories, and workplaces of New Zealand, and quite rightly so. It is the legislation that generalises the so-called pilot, which allows workers to be sacked without cause or explanation in their first 90 days of employment, and extends that provision to every single workplace in New Zealand. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000375\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003EThe Labour Opposition, along with our colleagues in the Greens and others, is, of course, fighting this bill every step of the way. It is appropriate in the debate on the transitional provisions to ask what kinds of workplaces and what kind of country this bill is a transition to. I will ask some specific questions about that issue. Is the legislation a transition to an ethically based system of industrial and employment relations? What would an ethically based system look like? Arguably, an ethically based system would respect the rights of all members of a company, whether they were directors, management, or employees. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000376\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003EThis bill, quite simply, does the opposite. This bill commoditises human beings: it treats human beings as commodities, as a factor of production alongside timber, bolts, and oil. People are not commodities, and they should not be treated like commodities. The idea that a New Zealander can be sacked without so much as the dignity of an explanation as to why, when it will affect their entire future, is not an ethical basis for law. It will affect not only their current earnings and mortgage, but also their opportunity to get another job in another place, because they will have to explain why they lost their previous one. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000377\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c7d776b980614f8392e610221a8da894\u0022\u003EJo Goodhew\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I am just wondering about the relevance to the part under debate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000378\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227d0e030843444bfbb9aaca887703f597\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: I am listening, and it is just inside the scope, but I ask the member to bring it in, please. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000379\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022100ebc38a98a43fb836b151121393a54\u0022\u003EHon DAVID CUNLIFFE\u003C/span\u003E: Let us now consider the economics of this transitional provision. When this legislation comes in, will it be a transition to a more productive workplace? It will certainly be a less ethical workplace. Here history provides a guide. During the 1990s there was an Act called the Employment Contracts Act. It was, at the request of certain employer groups, designed to make labour markets more flexible. What could be wrong with that? Flexible meant easier to hire and to fire, and lower wage and labour costs. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000380\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003EThe economics of the Employment Contracts Act have been well documented. When the economy transitioned to that industrial law environment, labour productivity went down. Why did it go down? Because the cost of labour fell relative to the cost of capital: more workers and fewer tools equal less output per worker per hour. That is a key reason why in the 2000s the New Zealand economy has been much less productive than, for example, our Australian colleagues\u2019 economy. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000381\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003EMr English has, in question time, been debating with me, Mr Anderton, Mr Parker, and others whether we are catching up with Australia. I will provide some data, care of the Hon Jim Anderton, which is a combination of OECD, Australian Bureau of Statistics, and Statistics New Zealand numbers. It measures real GDP per capita at purchasing power parity, and it shows that in 1984 the gap between Australian and New Zealand workers was 13 percent. In 1990 it was 21 percent. In 1999, when Labour took office, it had grown to 34.2 percent, which is extraordinary. By 2005, under the previous Labour-led Government, it had dropped to 29.8 percent. It held steady at 29.8 percent to 2006, but here is the kicker: by 2009 it had increased to 36.1 percent, and in 2010 the gap between New Zealand and Australian incomes had risen to 37.4 percent. I ask how long it will be before it hits 40 percent. Nobody can argue that we are catching up with Australia. We are going in the opposite direction. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000382\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cc193357c0fa4e15972a28d78449794d\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: I caution the member that he is getting outside the scope of the debate, which is on either the consequential amendment or the transitional arrangements. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000383\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c321f8234d0d43629643b5c152c89c2b\u0022\u003EHon DAVID CUNLIFFE\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chairman. I appreciate your guidance on that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000384\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E I have been trying to ask in this debate on Part 2 of the innocuous-sounding Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2), the fire-at-will bill, what transition this bill implies for New Zealanders; for New Zealand workers, who will be treated as commodities; and for the New Zealand economy, which will have its labour productivity reduced as the incentive to use financial and technological capital goes down because commoditised workers will be cheapened. That is a nonsense economic strategy. We will never compete with the good old People\u2019s Republic of China on wage rates. They pay 50c or $1 an hour; we pay a minimum wage of $13 an hour or thereabouts, and, of course, we want to see that rise. We want to be a high-value, high-income economy, where people choose to migrate, to live, to give of their best brains and smarts, and to build a brighter future. We do not want a transition to a sweatshop or a banana republic. That is what this transition\u2014[Interruption]. The junior Government whip, soon to be the former member for Rangitata, might sneer, but everybody knows that this is a slippery, slippery slope.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000385\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003EIs it a transition to a productive industrial relations environment? That is the next question. I would have thought that even members opposite would acknowledge that New Zealand is, in fact, very fortunate to have a union movement that is responsible, is far-sighted, looks at the bigger picture, and looks for the win-win situations. Gone are the days\u2014although he had some redeeming virtues\u2014of Jim Knox and the head-butting style of engagement. The New Zealand union movement wants to be social partners for a better future. This Government is taking that opportunity and rubbing unions\u2019 noses in the dirt, and telling them to swallow this. It is saying: \u201CWe won. You lost. Your workers get it in the neck with the 90-day fire-at-will bill\u2014no ifs, no buts, no explanation. Down the road, bucko.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000386\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003EI just lament the stupidity of this move. I lament the lack of humanity of the move. I lament the lack of the most basic understanding of economics that is embedded in this move. I lament, frankly, the short-sighted greed of employers who have lobbied for it, and I lament the lack of spine of a Government that refused to stand up to those employers or, perhaps, believed it was the right thing to do. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000387\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003EDebate on transitional provisions is the time when we ask ourselves what future we are transitioning to. What kind of future do we want for New Zealand? People all around the Chamber and those at home should be asking themselves, because we are at a critical time in the economic and political cycle, what sort of future we want to transition to. Will it be an ecologically responsible, ethically based, technologically advanced, high-value economy, with people choosing to migrate to New Zealand, not away from it? Will it be a New Zealand where workers are paid good wages and salaries because we are innovative and smart, and make great products that people want to pay a premium for, with a reputation as a premium brand that leads the world in our chosen market niches? Is it that kind of future\u2014which is clean, green, clever, and wealthy\u2014or is it the opposite? Is it a slippery slope to a banana republic, where workers are paid pitifully by employers who cannot see beyond the end of their noses? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000388\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003EHere is the tragedy in this transition. I think most employers are actually better than that. I think most employers would regard this as kind of a sideshow and quite unnecessary. That is the tragedy of it. The Government has kowtowed to a few ideologues to pass a law that is bad for workers, bad for the country, and even\u2014in the end, actually\u2014bad for employers. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000389\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003ELabour laments this bill. Of all the legislation that has been considered by this Parliament so far in this term, this bill ranks right up there as one of the dumbest things\u2014except the lunacy of the tax cuts, but I will leave that aside\u2014that this dumb Government has done since New Zealanders were dumb enough to elect it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f99bcf9e-1ad4-4ed4-9a97-1cccb5b1e11a\u0022 data-id=\u0022667bea82a44e48bd991d4b0473e28ac5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000390\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f99bcf9e-1ad4-4ed4-9a97-1cccb5b1e11a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022667bea82a44e48bd991d4b0473e28ac5\u0022\u003EDr JACKIE BLUE (National):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00222bcfdf606df7435aa0aa962d8e5b236a\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 51\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000391\u0022\u003EThe result corrected after originally being announced as Ayes 69, Noes 59.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00222bc49afc66f6488bbf5843d4dc8c152d\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That Part 2 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 2 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000392\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00228257e7b7d9ec41a3a6cc5f7f6cbb6e13\u0022\u003ENew Part 3  Protections for employees covered by 90-day provisions\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u00220f68e7fe2cd94cb2bec497d85a3b9861\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000393\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220f68e7fe2cd94cb2bec497d85a3b9861\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E This is the beginning of a series of attempts on the part of the Opposition to ameliorate the approach that has been taken by the Government in these matters. In this particular part of the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2), we are looking at protections for employees who are covered by the 90-day provisions. We made some attempts to do that as we went through Part 1. We put forward some amendments to make some progress in that area. Unfortunately, they were not accepted by the Government, so we felt that we had no option but to put forward a new part that brought together some of those amendments\u2014and hardened them up, to be fair\u2014and some other amendments. I do not want in any way to pretend to the Committee that we would be prepared to support the bill even if these amendments were supported, but they are designed to ameliorate some of the harshest parts of this legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000394\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EAgain, I say some of the issues were pretty well traversed in the second reading debate, where we featured some of our very real concerns. One of them concerns information about a decision. I appeal again to the ACT Party. We are attempting here to get changes that all reasonable New Zealanders would agree with. The ACT Party is now allegedly a party of transparency. It used to be a party that was very much for transparency, but then the perk-buster was caught using perks. But even then, if we look at the views of Sir Roger Douglas and Heather Roy, and even of John Boscawen\u2014I am not sure about the new member\u2014we can see that they have commented long and hard in this House about the importance of transparency. I say to the new member that the idea of employees being provided with access to information about a decision to dismiss them is something that I cannot see any reasonable person objecting to. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000395\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EThis amendment indicates that any employer who proposes to dismiss an employee under the 90-day trial provisions must in good faith provide access to information about the decision to the affected employee before a final decision is reached. That does not say an employer cannot reach that decision. It does not say he or she has to have good faith. It does not say he or she has to act reasonably in making the decision. But it does say information has to be provided. That gives the employee the opportunity to comment. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000396\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003ESometimes people get stuff absolutely wrong. It might be that too much sauce has gone on at the request of a customer. If someone is being fired for putting too much sauce on a hamburger\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000397\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229bf2ce60ba7d4bfda09489a7e2088fbe\u0022\u003ECarol Beaumont\u003C/span\u003E: Some people like a lot of sauce.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000398\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002241c76f08bb8248cf94a35f923281ef44\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: Some people are saucy, and they need to keep their sauce levels up. I do not need a lot of extra sauce. In fact, I do not like tomato sauce much at all, but I like a reasonable amount of aioli or similar sauces. Quite often when I go to a decent hamburger joint, I make requests as to the sauce proportions. I ask why a worker should be fired for doing what a customer asks him or her to do, and the employer does not have to indicate the reasons for the firing to the worker. I can understand why an employer might have a general policy on the proportion of sauce. That might save on the use of sauce.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022 data-id=\u0022c9a51f2deb3442b0b4e0e71eefb847ae\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000399\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c9a51f2deb3442b0b4e0e71eefb847ae\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: I have to make a ruling. I apologise to the member in whose name the amendment to add a new Part 3 is, but I have now had time to fully consider the import of the amendment and also to take some advice. An amendment such as the amendment the member has tabled should be associated with Part 1. Therefore, it is out of order, as is his amendment to add a new Part 4. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u00225073ef9e046240ad93ae67e49655b181\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000400\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225073ef9e046240ad93ae67e49655b181\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. The member has made one of two points that I would have made. I would like to have an assurance from you that as part of the process you did not refer to the Minister in the chair, the Hon John Carter, on this matter. I saw you talking to the Minister in the chair, and the Minister in the chair is confirming from behind you that he did look at it and you were talking about it. This is quite a hard position for me to be in, but you know and I know that it is inappropriate for the Chair to discuss a matter to do with relevance with the Minister in the chair. I saw you discussing it with the Minister, and\u2014[Interruption]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000401\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002260c0b365e49b490bbdc33623087e9163\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: The member is raising a point of order and it will be heard in silence.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000402\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c5da1dc1993f41ccafab45c65a6d5a72\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014I do, of course, seek your assurance that that was not the case.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000403\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EBut as this appears to be a new ruling\u2014and I have been looking at Speakers\u2019 rulings in preparation for the possibility of this happening\u2014I would like an indication from you, maybe by a nod or a wink, that this is a new ruling and is not one based on a precedent currently within the Standing Orders or Speakers\u2019 rulings.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022 data-id=\u0022d80dcabda67a48e49636bf4f4e3462bd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000404\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d80dcabda67a48e49636bf4f4e3462bd\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: Let me respond to the points. I can understand the member\u2019s frustration, given that we have started the debate on new Part 3. Yes, dialogue has been going on around here. The member will have also noticed that a quite senior Clerk came in with some advice for us. I ignored all comments from any other section. I did confer with the Clerk at the Table, and then we sought advice by telephone and got a more comprehensive explanation, because this was new territory for me. I have not had to rule on anything as precise as this. I guess there are some points around whether it is in contradiction, or whatever, but the advice I have had, with which I concur, is that these elements that relate to Part 1 should have been dealt with at that time. I give the member an assurance that I am not influenced\u2014and I am a little bit hurt that he had to ask the question\u2014by the Minister in the chair; I might need counselling! But, in that regard, no, I sought advice from the highest authority available to me, and therefore I make the ruling.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u0022f030c4d40edf4e348c10e249f65267c5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000405\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f030c4d40edf4e348c10e249f65267c5\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. Of course, I take your word that you did not listen to what John Carter said. I move, That the Chairperson report progress to obtain the Speaker\u2019s ruling on the admissibility of a proposed amendment. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000406\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000407\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022d2727ac649814ac0b3ac28baf72dc54f\u0022\u003EHouse resumed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000408\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002259cc52ffeb1c437a89c0dfb8f1d5cab1\u0022\u003ESpeaker Recalled\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022 data-id=\u0022b93b2547c491477193a60bd45b1a86e5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000409\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b93b2547c491477193a60bd45b1a86e5\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Speaker, the Committee of the whole House has moved to recall you for a determination on a ruling I made in relation to two amendments in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard to insert new parts. Can I say I chose not to give the matter the appropriate amount of attention at the time, and for that I take some responsibility. The Committee at the time was debating Part 2, and I was trying to determine that it be a narrow debate on two clauses, and that affected my attention to relevance. It did distract me somewhat. We then commenced debating the new Part 3, and I gave the matter some further consideration. In that regard, I can understand that the member in whose name the amendments are is a bit perplexed as to why the debate began, then at the end of his first call I subsequently ruled it out of order. The issue in relation to the amendments is whether, in my rationale, they are contradicted by something that is in Part 1 or whether they should be associated with it. I did seek some advice and ruled subsequently, after the debate had begun, that they were out of order because the pertinence of what the amendments contained should be attached to Part 1, and should have been debated at the time of that debate. It is on that basis that I gave my ruling.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u002222ee5267772c4f3c9532ee7feb2f9b49\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000410\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002222ee5267772c4f3c9532ee7feb2f9b49\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I think there are two parts to it, and I thank Eric Roy for his summary. Other than the conclusions, I do not think there is any difference on the facts.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000411\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EThe first question is, the Committee having commenced debate on a particular part and a full speech on it having been accepted, whether it is within the realm of the Chair of the Committee at that stage to effectively rule himself out and say that other members do not have an opportunity to debate what had started. But that is probably the lesser of the two parts, although an appeal is going on on the other.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000412\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EThe substantive question is whether an additional part of a bill can be moved that puts conditions on what has been agreed to previously by the Committee. There is no doubt that after quite a lot of debate and suggested changes Part 1 was passed, and I think we agree that Part 2 was a fairly minor, consequential, transitional-type arrangement. Mr Speaker, both of us have been in the House during a period when there has been increasing use of a part by part approach, but I think it is fair to say not quite to the extreme we have in terms of this bill, where major legislation in two major areas\u2014to do with 90-day trial periods and to do with union access\u2014is wrapped up in one part. I think it is fair to say that in the time of Geoffrey Palmer as Attorney-General there would have been quite a few more parts, and even subsequently, in the time of the Bolger administration, we would have seen at least two parts, each one dealing with one of the substantive issues.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000413\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EBut the issue goes to whether a Committee is restricted from putting some conditions\u2014to protect workers, in this particular case\u2014on a part that has already been agreed to, saying essentially that Part 1 can work, but as it does work it should be limited. That is the central question. I have been looking, and I see that you are looking, at the Standing Orders and Speakers\u2019 rulings. I cannot see something that indicates that it cannot happen. My view is that it would be a very large restriction on the right of an Opposition party to move amendments that are not unreasonable. There are only two, and they both certainly go to issues that are pertinent and provide some protections that are pertinent. My appeal to you, Mr Speaker, is that it would be an unreasonable restriction on the rights of the House if Opposition members could not move amendments in this form, and were restricted to moving amendments that restrict the approach within one part of the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022 data-id=\u0022b864176ded0c4c8daca040a7030f8386\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000414\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b864176ded0c4c8daca040a7030f8386\u0022\u003EHon JOHN CARTER (Minister of Civil Defence):\u003C/span\u003E I shall respond to those comments by making these two points. One is that, obviously, I took advice on this issue, as well. I was told that the amendment interferes with the fundamental direction of the legislation, particularly in relation to Part 1 and previous Acts. As a consequence, the amendment proposed actually would amend Part 1 if it were passed and, of course, previous Acts as well. So that is an important point. The second point is that, in all the time I have been in the House, if there is to be an additional amendment, it is done during the debate on the part rather than as an addition to it later on. I suggest that if we were to allow this to happen, we would be opening up a whole new way in which we deal with legislation. We could pass one part, or two parts, or 10 parts, then somebody could come up with a new idea and add it in as an addendum. Quite honestly, I think we would be unwise to go down that path. If members have a view, they should express it at the time that the part is being deliberated on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u00227844192c422b4b3bb3836f487b43152c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000415\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227844192c422b4b3bb3836f487b43152c\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I shall speak very briefly; there is only one point I have. It was implicit in what the Hon John Carter said that these new parts would negate parts that have already been passed. That is certainly not the case. They are designed to restrict and to provide conditions on, but not to negate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022 data-id=\u002258f2edb86f074310b57e673565f67b38\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000416\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002258f2edb86f074310b57e673565f67b38\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I thank honourable members. It is an interesting issue that has arisen, and I myself will seek some further advice on the particular matters, because I do not want to make any errors.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000417\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002256a2d492208d432f98211e0bd0777911\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I actually wonder, given the time, whether we should seek leave for you to make a considered ruling and, without interrupting urgency, come back at 2 o\u2019clock to give it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000418\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c96a94ed13f14101880f6c5885793f22\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I think that is not necessary. I can quickly consider the information put before me by members. Obviously, the Chairperson is the sole judge of admissibility of an amendment. That is what Speakers\u2019 ruling 78/1 makes very clear. In respect of a new part, it must be considered in the context of the structure of the bill\u2014that is, as it is drafted and before the House. Part 1 deals with amendments to the principal Act, the Employment Relations Act. It deals with matters contained in the proposed new Part 3. It is argued that the proposed new part should have been proposed as amendments to Part 1. As I understand it, that is what the Chair of the Committee has ruled. I am somewhat persuaded by the argument put forward by the Hon John Carter that if we are to depart from that accepted understanding, the risk is that members can continually relitigate issues by introducing what are essentially new parts as the Committee considers the debate part by part. There are a couple of problems with that, because even if one argues that one is only constraining the measures contained in Part 1, that is still altering them as the Committee of the whole House has made its decisions on them. I rule in favour of the Chair\u2019s decision that the proposed amendments are out of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000419\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003ESitting suspended from 1 p.m. to 2 p.m.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000420\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022e3ebff2824be44c38412befb96215d91\u0022\u003EQuestions for Oral Answer\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000421\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00222383797b8269445996f23b3b3c1692bf\u0022\u003EQuestions to Ministers\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000422\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002227b95f212ac34b219a85014c83b166d2\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 1 to Minister\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022 data-id=\u0022a83a1ad3d8294445a6f31f67985b150d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000423\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a83a1ad3d8294445a6f31f67985b150d\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip\u2014Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I raise a point of order under Speakers\u2019 rulings 143, 144, and 145. The question lodged by the Hon Annette King was set down to the Prime Minister, asking him a specific question about a quote from one of his Ministers in respect of a particular portfolio, and seeking to explore with the Prime Minister whether the approach the Government was taking in one portfolio was true for the whole of the Government and whether this was a Government-wide policy. As the acting Leader of the Opposition she will want to ask the Prime Minister that question. The Government has chosen, rather than have the Prime Minister answer the question, to set it down to the Minister of Labour, whose portfolio was given as a particular example for the quote, for a whole-of-Government question. In doing so, the Government\u2019s transfer renders the question almost to the point of being meaningless, because we already know that the Government has asserted that that is its approach in that particular portfolio. There is no point asking a Minister something about a portfolio that has already been stated. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000424\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EI draw your attention particularly to Speakers\u2019 ruling 144/2, because the Opposition would assert that that is an abuse of the transfer of the question. Often there are very good reasons for Ministers to transfer a question to another Minister, but this is clearly a question about a whole-of-Government responsibility for which only the Prime Minister can have knowledge, as is set out in Speakers\u2019 rulings 144/4 and 144/5, and which is within the purview of the Prime Minister. I ask you to consider that and, if necessary, I will seek leave for the question to be transferred back to the Prime Minister so that the question about whole of Government can be answered, which the quote and the meaning of the text of the question clearly set out to do. [Interruption]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u002234a02b0ee8334bff9e239cd8e071d779\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000425\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002234a02b0ee8334bff9e239cd8e071d779\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E Well, the Leader of the House might well\u2014[Interruption]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000426\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229c87c51205884eceb9a3c54440ca1361\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No. I am hearing the member.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000427\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eb0ec129c6174294bd88ccfec6f3a99d\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: Two or three times in the time that we have been in the House, Speakers have taken it on themselves to insist that particular transfers not occur, and Speakers\u2019 ruling 144/2 has been referred to. Normally, this is a matter that is dealt with earlier by your office, and I understand there has been some discussion about it. But, if one looks at the question, one can see that it is impossible to find in it any ministerial responsibility for the Minister of Labour. Her case is the exception. Does it apply only to the labour portfolio? We know it applies to the labour portfolio; the question is about every other portfolio, not about the labour portfolio. My request to you, Mr Speaker, is that you consider that, and whether this Minister is capable of answering a question on behalf of the Minister of Transport, the Minister of Broadcasting, the Minister for Economic Development\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000428\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a0a0d8f4eb86427881118bb3ac7dceec\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The member has made his point sufficiently. I hear what members are saying. Certainly, Speakers\u2019 ruling 144/2 enables the Speaker to refuse the transfer of a question where there is, basically, no responsibility for the subject matter of the question. This particular question quotes, as I understand it, the Hon Tony Ryall when he was answering on behalf of the Minister of Labour. The question does not ask whether that statement applies to all other portfolios; it asks whether it applies only to the labour portfolio. The Hon Trevor Mallard\u2019s last point of order is not actually correct, because the question does not ask that; it asks whether it applies only to the labour portfolio. I expect Ministers to have some idea whether a particular statement applies only to their portfolio. They probably could not answer for all portfolios, but the question did not ask that. Again, it is a matter of the detail of questions, and I have to rule as I see the questions actually asked. It may be that members wish to put down a question that does address particularly the point that the member was getting to in his point of order. The matter of who is responsible or who will answer the question is primarily a matter for the Government, unless, under Speakers\u2019 ruling 144/2, there is absolutely no responsibility whatsoever.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u0022f76a4095a97a4d43b99c10ce15b0a94b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000429\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f76a4095a97a4d43b99c10ce15b0a94b\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Are you therefore ruling that if a question were to the Minister of Labour and asked whether x applied only to the labour portfolio, or whether it applied to the broadcasting portfolio, when it was already accepted that it applied to the labour one, that would be an appropriate question to put down to the Minister of Labour?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022 data-id=\u0022c19886e8eb7b41b0b968cde29692cc5d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000430\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c19886e8eb7b41b0b968cde29692cc5d\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The problem with the member\u2019s question is that it does not ask that. The member\u2019s question asks whether it applies only to the labour portfolio. I would expect Ministers under the collective responsibility of Cabinet to have some idea whether statements they are making apply only to their portfolio. Certainly they may not be able to answer across all portfolios, but the question does not ask that. If members want to pursue that type of point of order, a little more care needs to go into the wording of the question. I am aware that there was some exchange over the wording of this question, and the reason why there was some exchange over this was that there was concern that the quote was taken out of context. That is an issue that has arisen before today, and it is a serious issue. Members have the chance to get the wording consistent with the Standing Orders so that the quote was not taken out of context. This was the wording that I understand the member putting the question agreed to, but, unfortunately, it does not ask about all portfolios; it just asks whether that statement applies only to the labour portfolio.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022 data-id=\u00221efe3b4bd76a47c1a56ee888432286c7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000431\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221efe3b4bd76a47c1a56ee888432286c7\u0022\u003EHon RODNEY HIDE (Leader\u2014ACT):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I seek your guidance, and I think it will be your considered guidance, on questions for written answer. This is an interesting point of order. These are in the name of Hilary Calvert\u2014question Nos 35368 and 35366 to the Attorney-General, and the questions ask whether it is the Government\u2019s intention about something, and the answer from the Attorney-General is\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022 data-id=\u00229c6ecb6afdd24163afd5276b4f95edc2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000432\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229c6ecb6afdd24163afd5276b4f95edc2\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I do not want to take up the time of the House on questions for written answer. Members know that they are perfectly at liberty to write to the Speaker when they are concerned about questions for written answer. I give prompt attention to such communications from members, and it is well known that I often write to Ministers explaining to them their responsibilities to answer those questions in accordance with the Standing Orders. There is a proper process for dealing with those matters, and I do not believe it is appropriate to take up the time of the House on that. It would be more appropriate for the member to write to me on that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022 data-id=\u0022515e942de00443799b5cffad6e9193dd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000433\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022515e942de00443799b5cffad6e9193dd\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip\u2014Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Sorry to take your time on this. This is a very serious matter to the Opposition, because the member who put the question down was very specific about putting it down to the Prime Minister. The quote, as you rightly say, was the subject of some discussion. It was the Minister Mr Ryall answering on behalf of the Minister of Labour; he referred to the labour portfolio, and then the quote goes on. That quote was lifted out, a reference was made to the labour portfolio in order to ensure that it was not taken out of context, and then the Prime Minister was to be asked whether this applied just in this particular portfolio, for which the Prime Minister has responsibility. I think the alternative example you have given us makes sense if this question had been set down to the Minister of Labour, but we never set that down to the Minister of Labour; we set it down to the Prime Minister, and one of the portfolios that the Prime Minister allocates is the labour portfolio, which is why the question is worded in that way. I suspect if we worded it in the way you suggested, Mr Speaker, that would be right if it were set down to this Minister, but I suspect if we had used the wording you suggest, and continued to set it down to the Prime Minister, the Government would have moved to transfer it in any case. So it is a very serious matter because it is a question that the deputy leader of the Labour Party wishes to put to the Prime Minister about the whole of Government in respect of the quote about the labour portfolio.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u00229441318b28094c9baf3f4bcde6e3722e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000434\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229441318b28094c9baf3f4bcde6e3722e\u0022\u003EHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House):\u003C/span\u003E This is a very interesting exchange, but quite apart from the numerous Speakers\u2019 rulings that relate to the ability of the Government to make a choice about who is best to answer a question, there is also Speaker\u2019s ruling 144/4, which states: \u201CA member cannot insist on a particular Minister dealing with a question.\u201D We could spend the rest of the afternoon going over this. You have ruled on it, and, I think, appropriately.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000435\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022af182651794c497298631c4c2836def8\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Speaker\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000436\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228e3e6767dabe4735a753b6958d89ca56\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, I will not hear further on this. I have heard quite sufficient on it. The Leader of the House makes the point that Speakers\u2019 ruling 144/2 is not the only one on the matter. Speaker\u2019s ruling 144/3 points out specifically\u2014and this is a reasonably recent ruling by Speaker Hunt\u2014that Speakers\u2019 ruling 144/2, which the member specified in particular, recognises a longstop protection against abuse in transferring a question where only one Minister could be expected to have personal knowledge of the subject. In this case the Minister whom the Government has set down to answer the question should have knowledge of the issue. It may not be the preferred answerer on behalf of the Opposition, but it is the Government\u2019s responsibility to determine who will answer questions and, as the Leader of the House has pointed out, even more recently Speaker Wilson has made it clear under Speaker\u2019s ruling 144/4 that a member cannot insist on a particular Minister dealing with a question. Several recent rulings have made that clear. It is my judgment as Speaker that this is not an abuse. Because of the wording of the question it is reasonable to expect the Minister to have some knowledge of this issue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u002238a337e0d46744b0b9a4d6ccce458292\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000437\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002238a337e0d46744b0b9a4d6ccce458292\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000438\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ec655c39000e4dfc930372f538f8a07f\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The member will not question my ruling. I will listen to him. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000439\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e901da6bcc554cbaa8f388856f66298e\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: I am not questioning your ruling for this case but I want you to consider the facts of this matter\u2014that is, a question to the Prime Minister was lodged and accepted by your office. The Prime Minister insisted on the word \u201Clabour\u201D going in there, and that was accepted by your office. It was the insertion of that word \u201Clabour\u201D in there that meant that the Prime Minister could then give it to this Minister. Your office accepted it\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000440\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002262494c6466524fff927466e145a09e3c\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The member will resume his seat. He should be careful about alleging facts that he does not have knowledge of. The Speaker was not prepared to accept the question in its original form because the Speaker considered the quote was out of context. The Speaker was not prepared to accept it and that is why it was changed. It was not because of anything to do with the Prime Minister. The member should be careful what he alleges. That is the end of the matter. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022 data-id=\u00229eb558c120e3418f99ea908f476c28a1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000441\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229eb558c120e3418f99ea908f476c28a1\u0022\u003EHon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip\u2014Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. We have great respect for the work that you have done with question time but we do take this matter very seriously. The Opposition will be exercising its right under Speakers\u2019 ruling 145/3 and the member will not be asking the question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224f001e2b0f684175a997f95433bd04e9\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: That is perfectly acceptable.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000443\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EQuestion withdrawn.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000444\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022572d73e11d1642c48f3216503b88ce08\u0022\u003EEconomy\u2014Sustainable Growth\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022dc6c0f88-e781-476d-bca1-d1bf9b69302b\u0022 data-id=\u002220be3d76ed5943c289b56252e70bc9fd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000445\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dc6c0f88-e781-476d-bca1-d1bf9b69302b\u0022\u003E2. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002220be3d76ed5943c289b56252e70bc9fd\u0022\u003EAMY ADAMS (National\u2014Selwyn)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Finance: How is the Government ensuring the economy recovers in a sustainable way that delivers more jobs and builds faster growth?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022 data-id=\u00229c43bb758257453c884eeb180259ea2e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000446\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229c43bb758257453c884eeb180259ea2e\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance):\u003C/span\u003E We have put in place a comprehensive economic plan designed to guide the economy through a period of recession. Since 2009 we have now had five consecutive quarters of growth. We have focused on building faster and sustainable economic growth over the medium and long term\u2014growth based on savings, investment, and exports, rather than the unsustainable growth based on borrowing, consumption, and Government spending that were the features of previous years.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000447\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dc6c0f88-e781-476d-bca1-d1bf9b69302b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002246eb111931cf413c8016db38964ed8e0\u0022\u003EAmy Adams\u003C/span\u003E: What are the main policy drivers of the Government\u2019s economic plan?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000448\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c87ad96c4588463589897493e91b2cdb\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: Yesterday I mentioned three of them in the House: strengthening the tax system, investing in productive infrastructure, and supporting business innovation and trade. There are three others that we are focusing on: lifting productivity and improving public services, removing red tape and improving regulation, and improving education and lifting skills. All of these things are helping to tilt the economy towards saving, exports, and productive investment, and better equipping New Zealand business to make investment decisions and New Zealanders to take the jobs that will be provided in a growing economy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000449\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dc6c0f88-e781-476d-bca1-d1bf9b69302b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022616dfcb17fb44cbb968f1cb856593045\u0022\u003EAmy Adams\u003C/span\u003E: Within this programme, what steps has the Government taken to lift the performance of the public sector?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000450\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fbf91e7247fd494f9d9fc974cb78c7b3\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: The public sector has needed a lot of effort to lift its performance, after a number of years where it grew fast, both in terms of funding and numbers. We have reviewed the performance of all major Government departments and agencies. We have capped the bureaucracy, and we have moved nearly $4 billion of spending from back-office into front-line public services, such as health, education, and law and order. I might say that the leadership of the Public Service is now looking ahead to how it will manage through very limited new funding, and there will be significant change in the public sector over the next few years.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000451\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dc6c0f88-e781-476d-bca1-d1bf9b69302b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e8b70c426f35437cb6e3eb0ca0316ab4\u0022\u003EAmy Adams\u003C/span\u003E: What steps has the Government taken to remove red tape, as well as to improve education and lift skills?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000452\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fad4019f055a4e90b7bebf93f4cdb34b\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: We have moved to simplify the Resource Management Act. We have simplified regulation in respect of water infrastructure and urban design. We are also progressing reforms in aquaculture, the construction industry, the food industry, and the financial sector. In respect of education and skills, we have introduced national standards in literacy and numeracy, the Youth Guarantee, and Trades in Schools, and we have significantly improved the quality and relevance of tertiary qualifications\u2014an area where the previous Government wasted hundreds of millions of dollars.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000453\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022cf90f50784b14fccae2d1858935feb31\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 1 to Minister\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u00225ab71f581a014f1aa7c6a7cad748a603\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000454\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225ab71f581a014f1aa7c6a7cad748a603\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I wish to correct what I said earlier, when I indicated that the Prime Minister\u2019s office had intervened. It intervened at 10.50; according to the Clerk\u2019s Office your intervention was at 11.30. Both of you intervened.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000455\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228c1f1848c880483390484bdaaaba95ae\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I do not see how that is a point of order, but I can assure the honourable member that, when I saw the question, if the quote had been included in the question correctly, it would have been a much fuller quote than that, and I am concerned about quotes taken out of context. Question No. 3, the Hon David Cunliffe. [Interruption] No, no. Let us just move on to question No. 3. It is time to settle down.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000456\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a35c35f7a041492594e17aa970542c77\u0022\u003EGST\u2014Papers Released by Savings Working Group\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022 data-id=\u0022bad012302c6c4a3f8f4f0eb1c832d404\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000457\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E3. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bad012302c6c4a3f8f4f0eb1c832d404\u0022\u003EHon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Labour\u2014New Lynn)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Finance: Has he seen the papers released by the Savings Working Group relating to GST; if so, does he have any intention of increasing GST further?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022 data-id=\u00221e499b2c7ad34e4682b13caa79c8c0f1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000458\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221e499b2c7ad34e4682b13caa79c8c0f1\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance):\u003C/span\u003E Yes, I have seen the papers; and no.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000459\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002262c2365aa70c4b98b8635a8b9ec97170\u0022\u003EHon David Cunliffe\u003C/span\u003E: How can New Zealanders trust his word when, before the Tax Working Group report, he had promised not to raise GST, only to change his mind as soon as he got the report?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000460\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002273debf9570af440183a1f15717ad4efa\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: The member is misrepresenting that, as we have discussed in this House many times. If the member really believed that the increase in GST was a bad idea, he would be campaigning in Mana to cut GST and take back the income tax cuts. Neither the member nor his party have done that. Instead, they are\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000461\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226679f3438bf74d63ade07e205584f506\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The Minister has no responsibility for Labour Party policy. Firstly, a large chunk of his answer cannot be to accuse a member of misrepresenting something; secondly, he cannot go on to tell the member what his party\u2019s policy should be. Ministers are responsible in question time for the policies of the executive of the day, not yesterday.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000462\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225e31edcc21ec4ee59e3b5fd66ef95644\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: A point of order is being considered and there will not be interjection on it. I have to confess to the honourable member that I was distracted at the time and did not hear the detail of the question asked. If there is concern about it, I will let the member repeat his question and I will listen to it very carefully. If the question contains any political overtone, the member can expect the kind of answer he received.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000463\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fa564fccb821422b90617febe5b47521\u0022\u003EHon David Cunliffe\u003C/span\u003E: How can New Zealanders trust his word when, before the Tax Working Group report, he was promising not to raise GST, only to change his mind as soon as he got the report?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000464\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022da87be344a1f485f9d04bb583e807760\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I do not think the House needs further answer. I blame myself for allowing that situation to develop, but the Opposition should not have been surprised that a question that asked how the public could trust someone\u2019s word got an answer that whacks the questioner around the ears a bit, because it was a highly political question. I gave the member the chance to repeat his question, and having listened to it very carefully I am not surprised by the answer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000465\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022038f622e92a34d22b81866b22e9395c7\u0022\u003EHon David Cunliffe\u003C/span\u003E: Is the Minister committed to no further increases to GST, and is that commitment stronger than his promise in December 2008 not to raise GST, which was subsequently broken?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000466\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e353a6142eae4063a2e216d2708cfe36\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: Again, the member continues to misrepresent the issue around GST; in respect of GST, the Government is committed to not increasing it, and the member\u2014[Interruption] Well, the member has not campaigned on it in Mana; instead, his leader has been following the Prime Minister around to try to get in his photos. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000467\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222fd357c10d864d91a9982762065c0519\u0022\u003EHon David Cunliffe\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. As you will have noted, this was the second reply to a supplementary question in which the Minister began his answer by accusing the questioner of misrepresentation. I would ask the Minister to clarify whether it was\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d999560169aa46ad8b7c2c223ad394c2\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No. The member will resume his seat. The member knows he cannot do that. If the member does not want the kind of answer he got, he must be mindful about taking supposed quotations out of context. Ministers are perfectly at liberty to challenge the way\u2014if the member had stopped his question halfway through, it would have been a much more precise question, but he included in it an issue that I think he should have known, having heard plenty of answers on the issue, the Minister would challenge the context of that part of the question. And the Minister did. I cannot as Speaker stop that. The solution lies in the member\u2019s own hands. Keep the question brief, without the political content, and the member, I can assure him, will get answers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000469\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fbe3f87c-849c-4eee-84cc-119edeb1a681\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e877c2c922104227b456b2da4229156e\u0022\u003EAaron Gilmore\u003C/span\u003E: What other papers has he seen from the Savings Working Group?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000470\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a758cb2b51db4ed7a1d3250c1160674a\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: The Savings Working Group is following the same practice as the Tax Working Group did\u2014that is, it is publishing its working papers as it goes. In fact, there has not been a more transparent policy-making process carried out by a Government. To date the group has received and published a range of submissions, and has published about a dozen background papers. I have to say I am impressed with the depth and breadth of its coverage of the complex issue of how to increase New Zealand\u2019s savings, and the considerable benefits that would arise from an increase in national savings.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000471\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002293ae38a395b0440287cdda9b5b0f8286\u0022\u003EHon David Cunliffe\u003C/span\u003E: Rephrasing the previous supplementary question, did the Minister or his Government promise in December 2008 not to raise GST? Mr Speaker, you will observe that I cannot make\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000472\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224f8c99732f5e4811a49db200343dacf1\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Order!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000473\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cb1a8c9445f24cdeb33fbd24d3e9aae1\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: As has been discussed in the House before, when the Prime Minister was asked whether he would raise GST in order to close the deficit, he answered no, and that is exactly what has happened. We have increased GST in the context of a tax package that has seen significant across-the-board income tax cuts, $25 more per week for a family after the increase in GST, and $15 more per week for individuals. The member has had the opportunity to raise this issue in the Mana by-election, and has\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000474\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022227c8d0a9733445fad2dbbc08504ca3c\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The question asked was a fair question, and the Minister answered it very well. It did not need that last bit. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000475\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002248065e7915e3429aa8bf7744d7c04f76\u0022\u003EHon David Cunliffe\u003C/span\u003E: Again\u2014very straight and simple\u2014is there currently a fiscal deficit; if so, of what magnitude in the last financial year, and has it increased or decreased as a result of Budget 2010?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000476\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221f30572e306e4db18eebd40a1e52da89\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: The deficit in the last financial year would not have been impacted at all by Budget 2010. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000477\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f1296068313845f2b7c7d6de5eff1227\u0022\u003EHon David Cunliffe\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Although admittedly there were several sub-questions, they were absolutely factual and straight. By your ruling, the Minister, at best, has the option to choose one of the two questions and answer it, but he actually answered none of them. For the sake of completeness, the first one was\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000478\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002252c2cdbe59044cc09eae65181eafc90d\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, the member will resume his seat. I will invite the member to repeat his question because it did not contain any political statements. I will invite him to repeat his question, but he will not make that kind of comment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000479\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a567f61d09ca477c883199cc5b7c3bd9\u0022\u003EHon David Cunliffe\u003C/span\u003E: Was there a fiscal deficit in the last financial year, and of what magnitude; and would that deficit be increased or decreased as a result of Budget 2010?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000480\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cef64b5f6aab4d3a94f87bf33073db1c\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: There was a fiscal deficit in the 2009-10 year. I cannot give the member the exact figure. It has increased in this Budget because of falling revenue while the Government is maintaining and increasing expenditure on public services. We have a plan to reduce that deficit from next year through to 2016.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000481\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222f397bc35996466f97c35cb5a188de27\u0022\u003EHon David Cunliffe\u003C/span\u003E: Having established that there was a fiscal deficit in the last financial year\u2014although the Minister does not know the magnitude of it\u2014which he has just admitted to the House is growing, why should the public not therefore conclude that the Government broke its promise not to raise GST when there was a deficit?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000482\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222ac38f8b441c4c30ba1db3d588380874\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: It is a somewhat confusing question, but the answer is pretty straightforward. [Interruption] The Government has put together a tax package designed to help rebalance this economy away from excessive consumption and housing speculation funded by debt. That tax package has included an increase in GST\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000483\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002242e964149ff648a0938415bcbb4c75bd\u0022\u003EHon David Cunliffe\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The question quite clearly did not ask the Minister\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000484\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223af1e7793f724af2ad7751849a02ea47\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The member will resume his seat. I have listened to the Minister very carefully; I believe he is actually trying to give the House an answer. The member asked a serious question; I think his colleagues should show the courtesy of listening to the Minister\u2019s answer. The Minister, I believe, was giving a pretty good answer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000485\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002230ef0265f38e44feaae13061b48d5d2b\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: The GST increase is part of a package of tax reform that is pushing New Zealanders in the direction they are already going, and that is to reduce excessive consumption and housing speculation funded by excessive debt. We have put up taxes on property and on consumption, and reduced the tax on savings, investment, work, and companies so that we can encourage investment, savings, and new jobs and exports.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022169f88a3d367496bba5031d12d69afaf\u0022\u003EHon David Cunliffe\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I listened carefully to the Minister\u2019s reply, as I know you will have done. The question did not ask why the Government increased the deficit in the last Budget; the question asked why the public should conclude other than that the Government broke its promise, when, first, as the Minister has told the House, the Prime Minister said they would not\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000487\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022214b93937d944a1d97ec5266f62523ac\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I have heard sufficient.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000488\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eaf1e178bb6848dabde65d9f7c898f95\u0022\u003EHon David Cunliffe\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014raise GST to fund the deficit, and he has then told us that there was one and the Government has increased it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000489\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a479131ad06b467aa74244111c67c97f\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I do not know what to say to the honourable member. I am a bit long-sighted and I have trouble reading, but I can see the honourable member pretty well and I am sure he could see that I was on my feet. He should have stopped.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000490\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EI would like him to reflect on his question. It was asking an opinion about something for which there is no precise answer. He should think about the question he put to the Minister, which asked why the public should believe something. There is no precise answer to that question. The Minister did his best to give a serious answer around the issue of the deficit. That is not a bad attempt to at least address a question to which there is no precise answer. Members need to think a little more about the questions they ask. For some questions there is no precise answer, and the best the Speaker can do, therefore, is make sure the Minister addresses it. I believe that the Minister did address it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000491\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022acefa9ffa7ca47dbab26ea12fd5639ed\u0022\u003EHon David Cunliffe\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. In fact, I am speaking to the previous point of order. Although I totally accept your guidance, Mr Speaker, that questions should be straightforward, and I think you would accept that I have done my best to do that, the question was, in fact, axiomatic\u2014if we replay a couple of supplementary questions\u2014and therefore a matter of logic, not a matter of opinion, as you have suggested, I say respectfully. The Minister said that the Government did not\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000492\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dae465c35e3140aebfe7ad5df891a853\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Order!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000493\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d0dfa73a2459473c9c443bda9f4b223d\u0022\u003EHon David Cunliffe\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014break its promise not to raise GST, because it was not on account of a deficit.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000494\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228edde3e5c9a644a89fb4bf7d05993279\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I am not going to listen to more argument on this matter. Where a member asks how the public is going to believe something, there is no precise answer to that question. The member should just think about that. I have dealt with the issue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000495\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fbe3f87c-849c-4eee-84cc-119edeb1a681\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220ceeafae2adb4e4da7d37d87ecc87937\u0022\u003EAaron Gilmore\u003C/span\u003E: Why did the Government establish the Savings Working Group?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000496\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225b7854f7d93143109e573a02806c8f65\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: I think it has been understood for some time that New Zealand saves insufficiently to fund our national investment needs. We have had balance of payment deficits each year since 1973, and that has resulted in high external liabilities\u2014that is, debt to the rest of the world\u2014rising to almost 90 percent of GDP. A number of the solutions tried so far have had some impact over the years, but not sufficient impact to resolve the issue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000497\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022b1c9eeb172aa49b595df4fdd2e5a69ab\u0022\u003ETelevision New Zealand Amendment Bill\u2014M\u0101ori Representation in Broadcasting\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022 data-id=\u00227031d1e6336948d8b35ed22d403d95bb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000498\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003E4. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227031d1e6336948d8b35ed22d403d95bb\u0022\u003ERAHUI KATENE (M\u0101ori Party\u2014Te Tai Tonga)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Broadcasting: How will the Television New Zealand Amendment Bill provide appropriate assurance to ensure the participation of M\u0101ori and the presence of a significant M\u0101ori voice in its programmes and programme planning?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022603ae58e-47c4-46f9-bfc8-8355a48988ad\u0022 data-id=\u002257bd027c11824a7d9b49591faa8963c9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000499\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022603ae58e-47c4-46f9-bfc8-8355a48988ad\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002257bd027c11824a7d9b49591faa8963c9\u0022\u003EHon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN (Minister of Broadcasting):\u003C/span\u003E The Television New Zealand Amendment Bill replaces the Television New Zealand (TVNZ) charter with a new set of statutory functions, which state, amongst other things, that TVNZ must provide high-quality content that reflects M\u0101ori perspectives. I also note that out of the total public broadcasting budget of $231 million, $81 million is reserved specifically for M\u0101ori broadcasting, ensuring the participation of M\u0101ori and the presence of a significant M\u0101ori voice in programmes and programme planning in State-funded broadcasting.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000500\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221c7b053467f44662adb780691a3c443e\u0022\u003ERahui Katene\u003C/span\u003E: How does the Government plan to give effect to binding decisions of the Court of Appeal and the Privy Council in relation to the broadcasting of M\u0101ori language and content on mainstream television in prime time; and what feedback has he received from M\u0101ori about the risk of diluting the M\u0101ori content in TVNZ transmissions by his proposal to remove the charter and replace it with a very broad statement of function?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000501\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022603ae58e-47c4-46f9-bfc8-8355a48988ad\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022febf2e319d4e44f4a6cd3f939e6addb6\u0022\u003EHon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN\u003C/span\u003E: Answering the second part of the question first, I have had one letter, which was sent to the Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs and subsequently forwarded to my office. In regard to the first part, the Government gives effect to those decisions through New Zealand on Air and Te M\u0101ngai P\u0101ho. Te M\u0101ngai P\u0101ho directly funds the M\u0101ori Television Service and also makes available contestable funding to other broadcasters, including TVNZ. TVNZ will continue to be eligible to apply for this funding. One of New Zealand On Air\u2019s statutory requirements is to promote M\u0101ori language and culture.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000502\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022be31a153328a4a97a845783a8a67e717\u0022\u003ERahui Katene\u003C/span\u003E: In what ways will the Government measure the success of TVNZ as a public broadcaster in terms other than ratings and revenue, and how will it measure non-commercial success?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022603ae58e-47c4-46f9-bfc8-8355a48988ad\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002293f2f1f1426542fdabb4730abc4282d5\u0022\u003EHon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN\u003C/span\u003E: TVNZ is required to produce a statement of intent each year, which outlines its plans for the forthcoming year. It then reports against these aims in its annual report. Shareholding Ministers also write to TVNZ at the start of each financial year, outlining specific expectations of the company. Those expectations are discussed periodically throughout the year with TVNZ.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000504\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e0ef0c681a8548a7ba6d42f2aa65419e\u0022\u003EBrendon Burns\u003C/span\u003E: Why did the Minister tell last Friday\u2019s Screen Production and Development Association conference that his Television New Zealand Amendment Bill \u201Cleaves TVNZ free to determine its own priorities.\u201D, when in fact the bill tells TVNZ that its only task is to maximise revenues, with no specific requirement for any New Zealand content, be it for M\u0101ori audiences or anyone else?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000505\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022603ae58e-47c4-46f9-bfc8-8355a48988ad\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022180e38885d7c46ccb55676139ec01644\u0022\u003EHon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN\u003C/span\u003E: That is not correct. The charter has been replaced with a set of statutory functions, which are laid out in the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000506\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022b9e1137a22b049efb109f1731d460bf7\u0022\u003EEducation, National Standards\u2014Report from Education Review Office\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022 data-id=\u0022a696cc50604d4b5b9683cdb81b6b83be\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000507\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003E5. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a696cc50604d4b5b9683cdb81b6b83be\u0022\u003EJO GOODHEW (National\u2014Rangitata)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister responsible for the Education Review Office: What recent reports has she received from the Education Review Office regarding the implementation of national standards in schools?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022 data-id=\u0022fbbc4c1035af4816a63da2db9e03489b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000508\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022fbbc4c1035af4816a63da2db9e03489b\u0022\u003EHon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister responsible for the Education Review Office):\u003C/span\u003E I am very pleased to say that the Education Review Office has just released a report that shows that 93 percent of schools are well prepared or have preparation under way to work with national standards. That number is up from 80 percent at the end of term 2. Schools that are considered to be well prepared make up 34 percent, and 59 percent of schools have preparation under way.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000509\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f64806d5511e4b698e37553b2d31985a\u0022\u003EJo Goodhew\u003C/span\u003E: How has this changed from the last Education Review Office report, in August 2010?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000510\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221d552cb4f3f54cc9bfe979e58927f2ec\u0022\u003EHon ANNE TOLLEY\u003C/span\u003E: This is the first year of a 3-year implementation programme. Schools have done a fantastic job this year. The number of schools that are well prepared has risen from 19 percent to 34 percent. The number of schools that are considered to be not yet prepared for national standards has dropped from 20 percent to 7 percent. That is really encouraging progress.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000511\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224500dcd1fd214b1fa4511fc53182df1d\u0022\u003EJo Goodhew\u003C/span\u003E: What common themes were noted by the Education Review Office in the well-prepared schools?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000512\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b5c14350a44043639a4ec428b152bc87\u0022\u003EHon ANNE TOLLEY\u003C/span\u003E: The Education Review Office noted that there were some common themes amongst those schools that are well prepared, and these include strong professional leadership, robust and purposeful self-review plans, a school culture encouraging teachers to discuss student achievement data, and good systems and processes. Children and their parents are already seeing the benefits of national standards and plain-language reporting. I acknowledge the professionalism and the dedication of principals and teachers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000513\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022afc92d44ea6a4e55b7b98384369d2458\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: How can she be proud of a report that shows that 66 percent of schools are still not well prepared to implement the standards?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000514\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bad218b3c75743428248e79fbd495962\u0022\u003EHon ANNE TOLLEY\u003C/span\u003E: This is the first year of a 3-year implementation. As I have said, schools have done a fantastic job. The fact that we are now looking at the majority of schools heading into the second year well prepared to work with national standards is something to be very pleased about.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000515\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222c16bddc3475468c8cd7d6aee361b09a\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: In the report that she now has, what proportion of schools have not yet considered how to moderate teacher judgments?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000516\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002221aa329f1d79449d9647c0a08ffc0716\u0022\u003EHon ANNE TOLLEY\u003C/span\u003E: I do not have the report in front of me so I cannot give the exact number. As part of the 3-year implementation programme, the moderation is actually a focus for the second year. The Education Review Office will be probing to ensure that the evidence that the schools are using to base that moderation on is valid. From memory, about one-third of schools are well prepared with their moderation processes. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000517\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226b844cb70ee045469928b9bd6829beca\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: How can she tell parents that the reports they are getting at the end of the year are national standards, when two-thirds of schools are not well prepared to implement them and two-thirds of schools are not moderating?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000518\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228c67ce0e0e884bf1a3aa6aa62abdaa83\u0022\u003EHon ANNE TOLLEY\u003C/span\u003E: Actually, I am not giving those reports to parents; schools are. I know that many schools are saying to parents that this year is their first year as part of a 3-year implementation. I know they are talking this through in some detail with parents. I have to say that parents are absolutely loving it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000519\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022e1d3ee68b0c4479581cd65590600012b\u0022\u003EWomen\u2019s Affairs, Acting Minister\u2014Priorities\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022 data-id=\u002263c9422416264ebeb922e348a5bfa021\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000520\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E6. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002263c9422416264ebeb922e348a5bfa021\u0022\u003ESUE MORONEY (Labour)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Women\u2019s Affairs: What are her priorities in the women\u2019s affairs portfolio?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022 data-id=\u0022e6b91a83759a4e31a5bc8a82352f973c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000521\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e6b91a83759a4e31a5bc8a82352f973c\u0022\u003EHon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU (Acting Minister of Women\u2019s Affairs):\u003C/span\u003E The priorities of the Government are set out in the Ministry of Women\u2019s Affairs statement of intent 2010-13. Obviously, they are my priorities as well. The three key priorities are, first, women participating in leadership; second, reducing the impact of violence against women; and, third, all women being fully engaged in the economy. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000522\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022031f07ea16b648e48af19eb68d7991cc\u0022\u003ESue Moroney\u003C/span\u003E: Does she stand by her statement of 14 August 2003 that the Ministry of Women\u2019s Affairs is a \u201Chistoric, sexist relic and should have been scrapped\u201D?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000523\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ca748d19bcc9486cb33e86d0bc8c4069\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Ministers are not accountable as Minister for anything they might have said previously. That is a longstanding tradition. What I will do in fairness, because I do not want to deprive the member of her supplementary question, is to invite the member to reword the question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000524\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002260f0d1a59e89496f8eb3e1036b90b34e\u0022\u003ESue Moroney\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. Does she agree with National Party MP Georgina te Heuheu when she said, on 14 August 2003, that the Ministry of Women\u2019s Affairs is a \u201Chistoric, sexist relic and should have been scrapped\u201D?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000525\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221c24e38c0efb4062a9483b3e0782c855\u0022\u003EHon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU\u003C/span\u003E: In all fairness, Mr Speaker, I do not remember saying that. [Interruption] I do not.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000526\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221a2c65d4e1454d0896a3a28879fa4b23\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The member was not being asked whether she, Georgina te Heuheu, could remember. She was being asked whether she as Minister agrees with what was being quoted. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000527\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002244d767f356cd4571b0837bcb615e3522\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The Minister, I think, is at liberty to question the alleged quote, because with supplementary questions there is no validation process. Members are at liberty to ask about a supposed quotation, but it is not unreasonable that a Minister might dispute it. This is not the last day of Parliament\u2019s sitting; there are various opportunities to pursue things further.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000528\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002225555f1e047d4b569a1e76a5853a9ebd\u0022\u003ESue Moroney\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Would it assist the House if I tabled the document showing the quote that I just used?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000529\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223286ac3f23f1478b8fc6cba93f377f4e\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Is the member seeking leave to table a document?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000530\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d7467e3f4889437d8cdf4415661e8bbc\u0022\u003ESue Moroney\u003C/span\u003E: Yes. I seek leave.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000531\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dfa65aca150c4ea5b85d0ff904faf20a\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: What is the document?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000532\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002280950779c08e4e2eb689d727355534ae\u0022\u003ESue Moroney\u003C/span\u003E: The document is entitled \u201CSexist relic should be scrapped\u2014\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000533\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224c54b5cc153742498dbd11dce9a32023\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: That is not the document. I am asking what the document is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000534\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002235e4fb4978d949de96ef24daed6998f8\u0022\u003ESue Moroney\u003C/span\u003E: The document is an article from the New Zealand Herald, dated 14 August\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000535\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226f1515a23cff461cacc2fe34aaa7af7a\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, we are not going to table articles from the New Zealand Herald.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000536\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221e4c2b88dd174523a79388975944b783\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Your ruling on the tabling of newspapers has been observed because your motivation for it was that they are freely available to members. In this case there are two points that might make you consider that differently. One is that the newspaper is from 2003, and even a disorganised member will have thrown out his or her newspapers from that year. The second is that the newspaper validates the quote my colleague is using in respect of the member who, quite genuinely by the look of the Minister, is perplexed about whether she said that. Tabling the article will be of assistance to this House in this particular case.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000537\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c82ba071a87e47229dd0f292ed24fc28\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The member makes a perfectly reasonable point of order. I accept that it is a reasonably old newspaper article, but it does not assist this particular line of questioning, because the Minister has had no opportunity to check whether what is alleged in that newspaper article is what the member might have said or anything like that. I believe the more reasonable approach is not to try to score points of order through tabling press statements. But there is another question time tomorrow, and questions on the Order Paper can be validated. There are ways to pursue things that are much more reasonable and appropriate than trying to score points of order by way of tabling press articles.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000538\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f757c178575d41d6a4f02c38f9a541ea\u0022\u003ESue Moroney\u003C/span\u003E: Does she think that the Ministry of Women\u2019s Affairs is a historic, sexist relic and should be scrapped?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000539\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227a2ee001c01049c186e7767098651279\u0022\u003EHon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Speaker\u2014[Interruption] \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000540\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022efc52e97100f415d85e55b2dc3b2f395\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I want to be able to hear the Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000541\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223f3376db43154ef096d23f5e7261005c\u0022\u003EHon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU\u003C/span\u003E: Wherever that quote comes from, I say the ministry may have been a relic back then in 2003, when Labour was in Government, but it is certainly not a relic now. It is an action-packed ministry. [Interruption] \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000542\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f7b852f4550746b18bd3759bc7138046\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Who will be the first Government member to leave the Chamber? Who will volunteer? It was obvious that I was on my feet while all that interjection was going on. Opinion questions are allowed. The question asked whether the Minister agreed with a statement. Under the circumstances I think I have been pretty fair in how I have handled this question, but to answer the question like that is not reasonable. The question asked whether the Minister agreed with the statement. The Minister is perfectly at liberty to answer a little closer than that to the question that was asked. Under the circumstances, because I think there was a lot of transgression there and the Government benches ignored the fact that I was on my feet, I invite Sue Moroney to repeat her question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000543\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222faff2ec90fc483d9cf8da3ae0330f08\u0022\u003ESue Moroney\u003C/span\u003E: Does she\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000544\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221ec9c4d97c39498b959171ec897ccef4\u0022\u003EHon Gerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. With all due respect, when the Minister answered that question she said that notwithstanding the statement and where it might have come from, that could have been the case back then but is not now. That is not an unreasonable answer. It is actually an answer. There might have been some extraneous matter there that she will be pulled up on, but essentially that question was answered.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000545\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a33e4bb2d9cc48609ad016809938f449\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: If I misheard, I accept that I could be wrong. I accept that if that was the answer, it was a fair answer. If the Minister is indicating to me that she gave that answer, I accept that it is indeed an answer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000546\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002280dcdb64bc744a6681f276f21357aef1\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The extraneous matter that the Leader of the House referred to in his recounting to you of the Acting Minister\u2019s answer was the insult to Labour, which you ruled\u2014[Interruption] \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000547\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c7152edb01e249a186353b643afe5458\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: A point of order is being heard and it is reasonable.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000548\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d261d17968884dd990ab7cd58296abeb\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: The quote has been contested, and my colleague has modified the quote to make it more acceptable to the Minister. Rather than get up and giving us her opinion, or saying yes, she agreed, or no, she did not agree, she used it as a launching pad to attack the Opposition. She did not make a defence or rejection of her comments\u2014whatever it might be. I think that was the critical point that was not relayed to you by Mr Brownlee when he attempted to present the answer that Mrs te Heuheu had given.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000549\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c0c088f73e0346939d5b0b83692ce98f\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I accept the member\u2019s point of order, and let me say that as Speaker I have not handled this well. Let me take the blame for that and let things lie there. I suspect the member has further supplementary questions should she wish to ask them, and I will listen very carefully to questions and answers. I apologise to the House. I do not believe that I handled that situation as well as I should have, and I apologise for that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000550\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227207fb2bc67c45178ce025300f9da031\u0022\u003ESue Moroney\u003C/span\u003E: Has she been told by the Prime Minister that she will retain the portfolio only until she succeeds in disbanding the ministry, so that it will become the latest casualty in the Government\u2019s Public Service cuts?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000551\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b3813840472442d4888af1db6f5b4a47\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: We have a very unusual situation here. If I heard the question correctly, the member asked whether the Minister agreed with the Prime Minister. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000552\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d179a55bed6e43049368140c182ea8b4\u0022\u003EHon Members\u003C/span\u003E: \u201CHas she been told \u2026\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000553\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002258b1a2966bca48e5b1e24de526888187\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: \u201CHas she been told by the Prime Minister \u2026?\u201D. There should not be outrageous allegations in a question; the Standing Orders are very clear on that. This is not very tidy. I ask the member to please rephrase the question, without making an allegation in the question that has no substance to it. This is not just a matter of the Speakers\u2019 rulings; this is a matter of the Standing Orders. If members are not clear on the Standing Orders, they should refer to Standing Order 371 on page 113. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000554\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223f38cfc70f7a41eb9874789f205e20a2\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Obviously, I would accept your ruling if this was an outrageous allegation. But this allegation\u2014and I know that we have not tabled it, but we have now had time to look at it\u2014emanates from a point of view expressed by\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000555\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229ad36529095d4188a3bddf3c7bd403fe\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, no. The member is now debating the issue. I just ask the member to repeat the question in a less provocative way.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000556\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229516a0c8cc0c44b3a472e064ba1782d2\u0022\u003ESue Moroney\u003C/span\u003E: Has she been advised that she will retain the portfolio only until she succeeds in disbanding the ministry, so that it will become the latest casualty in the Government\u2019s Public Service cuts?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000557\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226cef0317f0694819bcde1fe8344080e3\u0022\u003EHon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU\u003C/span\u003E: No.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000558\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022b0ce987101234264b7390e460b69bd6e\u0022\u003EForeshore and Seabed\u2014Land Occupations\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022 data-id=\u00228656f23d232b4f5abc5b39f579f75ed8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000559\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E7. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228656f23d232b4f5abc5b39f579f75ed8\u0022\u003EHon RODNEY HIDE (Leader\u2014ACT)\u003C/span\u003E to the Attorney-General: Does he stand by his statements that Ng\u0101ti Kahu protesters at Taip\u0101 Bay can \u201Cgo to hell\u201D and \u201CI think they\u2019re stupid\u201D, and can he assure New Zealanders that such protests are not a foretaste of things to come under his Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022 data-id=\u002288240a2279b44f6fa5af5a36e4d4ca2e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000560\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002288240a2279b44f6fa5af5a36e4d4ca2e\u0022\u003EHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Attorney-General):\u003C/span\u003E I did not make those comments as Attorney-General. They do not relate to my Attorney-General portfolio. They were made by me as Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations in the context of an issue related to Treaty settlements. As to the second part of the question, I cannot see the connection between the bill and the protest. Just because a piece of land is in sight of the water, that does not make it a part of the foreshore. The occupation of the land in question was an occupation of dry land. The bill relates to the area below mean high-water springs\u2014that is, the wet part of the beach, not dry, privately owned land.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000561\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002280268e9c010e4a04a2d5e7a52b848751\u0022\u003EHon Rodney Hide\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. We have seen the Government shift questions around to the appropriate Minister. We submitted that question to the House. It was accepted for the Attorney-General. The Attorney-General has refused to answer it, saying that he never made those statements as Attorney-General, and therefore he has not answered the question. The question was accepted as legitimate, so it must have been authenticated. Indeed, if the Attorney-General did not want to answer the question as Attorney-General, he could have sent it to himself as Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000562\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fc912b85c7484c0184d53f38f3c8c5a0\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I think I have heard the member at reasonable length on the issue. The Minister was purely pointing out that he made those statements as Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations. He did not deny making the statements. But the substance of his answer was that the issue of the occupation this question seems to relate to is not a matter to do with the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill\u2014they are not occupying the foreshore or seabed. I think the Minister\u2019s answer was perfectly reasonable. The member asked whether he can assure New Zealanders that such protests are not a foretaste; the Attorney-General argued that this protest does not relate to that legislation, in his view, because it is not foreshore and seabed that they are occupying. That is what I heard him say. I cannot judge the quality of the Minister\u2019s answer; I believe that he made a perfectly reasonable attempt to answer that question. I think it is unreasonable to expect me, as Speaker, to adjudicate on the quality of the answer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000563\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002233e6337ea36c412cab6e602a2b4cba48\u0022\u003EHon Rodney Hide\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The primary question asked whether he stood by his statements. The Attorney-General never addressed that. He said that he made those statements as Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations, so he has not addressed that question. I accept your point that you cannot force him to answer it, but we lodged that question, it was authenticated\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000564\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220aac380cfa33475796b9664e02d25ac4\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I think the member is, forgive me, being a bit pernickety over it. The Minister has not denied making those statements; he was just helpful to the House in pointing out that he made them in his capacity as Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations. I did not see any resiling from them whatsoever. I presume he still stands by them as Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations. He was merely pointing out that he did not make them as the Attorney-General. It is perfectly reasonable to explain to the House the basis of the statements. He went on to answer the second part of the question in what I believe was a perfectly reasonable answer. I am afraid that I have judged that and there is nothing further I can do about that. The member has a further supplementary question. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000565\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002202ed980b6f034201bd706fea37f343b6\u0022\u003EHon Rodney Hide\u003C/span\u003E: Will he assure all Kiwi mums and dads and their children that for as long as he is Attorney-General they will continue to enjoy their traditional access to New Zealand\u2019s beaches and coast to swim, surf, picnic, and fish as they have done in years past? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000566\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222c3c8b06e0d64b79ab7e29e4fb174824\u0022\u003EHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, and also to make sandcastles. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000567\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224b036068a1c245f99a37cbd655b8fa86\u0022\u003EHon Rodney Hide\u003C/span\u003E: Will he, then, immediately resign if M\u0101ori groups, on gaining customary title, block Kiwis from their traditional use of the foreshore or seabed; if not, why not?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000568\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002281b72ee4e1fb4b7383b0b5691a239438\u0022\u003EHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON\u003C/span\u003E: No; it will not be necessary, because that sort of thing will not happen. In all the discussions I have had with iwi and hap\u016B groups, that has not been an issue, notwithstanding the scaremongering of groups such as the Coastal Coalition. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000569\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022dc7ede512f364f8ea559c05aa07aa75e\u0022\u003ETreaty of Waitangi Settlements, Muriwhenua\u2014Taip\u0101 Point Land Occupation\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022 data-id=\u0022564e1726e2d941cf886fc9fc3e465ef0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022\u003E8. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022564e1726e2d941cf886fc9fc3e465ef0\u0022\u003EHon SHANE JONES (Labour)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations: Have recent events at Taip\u0101 had an impact on the progress of the Muriwhenua Treaty of Waitangi land claims settlements?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022 data-id=\u0022dc9bbe126f5a46349463d7b53423f994\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000571\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022dc9bbe126f5a46349463d7b53423f994\u0022\u003EHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations):\u003C/span\u003E No, and I certainly hope that they will not have any impact. As the member knows, the iwi of the Muriwhenua have been seeking settlements for some time. Huge issues need to be dealt with. An agreement in principle was signed at \u0100hipara on 15 January, and great progress has been made towards a deed of settlement with those iwi. I certainly hope that the unfortunate events of recent days will not get in the way of just and durable settlements for those people up there. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000572\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221e02d8b8350644cf84ec074647ddc87c\u0022\u003EHon Shane Jones\u003C/span\u003E: Is there a precedent for local government and the Crown collaborating to effect the return of reserve lands to tangata whenua, and is he willing to explore such an option as it pertains to the Taip\u0101 reserve lands? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000573\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223fd17d87c95b4ae1b2aa924b2c0c7db2\u0022\u003EHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON\u003C/span\u003E: There are precedents for that kind of innovation. There is no reason why people cannot approach the Crown on those issues, but there are ways of doing things and ways of not doing things. Illegal occupation of that land is not an appropriate way of dealing with matters. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000574\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022db8c4cbf57e34d1cb720d15edfb2fb34\u0022\u003EHon Shane Jones\u003C/span\u003E: What does the Minister say to the far north community that has watched the abandonment of the local sailing club regatta and the cancellation of annual fishing competitions because of fear associated with this land occupation, connected with obviously troubled Treaty negotiations? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000575\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c17e2db8cfc44ab7a2dc2017ef8aa778\u0022\u003EHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON\u003C/span\u003E: In answer to the last point I say that the negotiations are not troubled; very good progress has been made. I say to those people that they have every right to be upset and disappointed. The selfish actions of a few have harmed the legitimate activities of the entire community, and those groups have every right to feel frustrated and disappointed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000576\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022da73f974b55e4b6bad5447bda7457f7b\u0022\u003EHon Shane Jones\u003C/span\u003E: When he told the Taip\u0101 protesters, who are nephews to Hone Harawira, to go to hell, what directions did he have in mind and whom did he think they might meet there? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000577\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223126bb160fb0463688b68552780201fa\u0022\u003EHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, Trevor Mallard is not dead yet.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000578\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022beb6ba7e0fae496b8a7e7c2af82c8936\u0022\u003EHon Shane Jones\u003C/span\u003E: Based on that answer, are we now to consider this Minister to be the \u201CBlack Prince\u201D amongst M\u0101ori Treaty negotiations?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000579\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002240cf42555e664d119065d0f2e92b4540\u0022\u003EHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON\u003C/span\u003E: I certainly hope not. The phrase is a figurative phrase. It expressed my frustration that after all the good work that had been done by the negotiators of Ng\u0101i Takoto, Ng\u0101ti Kur\u012B, Te Rarawa, and Te Aup\u014Duri, we have had what Harold Macmillan would have called a little local difficulty, which is getting in the way of deeds of settlement being signed so that just and durable settlements can finally be entered into\u2014a hope of the late Mat Rata from over 20 years ago.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000580\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00225b01c5fb72a4470c99db0b55b50d7f95\u0022\u003ERoading, Auckland\u2014P\u016Bhoi to Wellsford Route\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022 data-id=\u0022fdc97abc32bd4956b87bc01b008f1145\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000581\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003E9. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022fdc97abc32bd4956b87bc01b008f1145\u0022\u003EDAVID BENNETT (National\u2014Hamilton East)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Transport: What progress has been made on the P\u016Bhoi to Wellsford road of national significance?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224a244152-977c-48d2-bf53-4f3a369a27a9\u0022 data-id=\u00229445c2a5c2a540788dc1ce87f87b47c8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000582\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a244152-977c-48d2-bf53-4f3a369a27a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229445c2a5c2a540788dc1ce87f87b47c8\u0022\u003EHon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister of Transport):\u003C/span\u003E Today the New Zealand Transport Agency announced the next stage of route development for the road of national significance between P\u016Bhoi and Wellsford. The first stage will take traffic from the top of the new Northern Gateway Toll Road\u2014[Interruption] \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000583\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229cc3cee7a0b84feba6b1f0484ac9dfca\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I apologise to the Minister. The Speaker is terribly concerned that he cannot hear the answer, and the Speaker is very interested in hearing the answer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000584\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a244152-977c-48d2-bf53-4f3a369a27a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e22268283a2247488cc6cd6c3a75347b\u0022\u003EHon STEVEN JOYCE\u003C/span\u003E: I appreciate that this matter may be of interest to the Speaker. The first stage will take traffic from the top of the new Northern Gateway Toll Road to Warkworth, and will eventually stretch all the way to Wellsford. Very little design work had been done on this project prior to the start of last year, so the progress so far has been commendable.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220b77aeaf02254668ad405c5c6944d61e\u0022\u003EDavid Bennett\u003C/span\u003E: What economic benefits will the road bring to Northland and Auckland?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000586\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a244152-977c-48d2-bf53-4f3a369a27a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ac93094f4ada45108dd3f0a9a30fc898\u0022\u003EHon STEVEN JOYCE\u003C/span\u003E: Once finished, the new road will improve economic growth in Northland, Rodney, and Auckland. By improving the movement of freight and people between our largest city and the districts to the north of it\u2014the key growth areas in Rodney, for example\u2014economic linkages become more efficient, reliable, and secure. I know that not all members in the House agree with me, but the residents of Northland have just as much right to benefit economically from improved transport linkages as central Aucklanders.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000587\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b9916fd2767e47ce9c2cc19f869bc3bf\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: Has the Minister given serious consideration to the Operation Lifesaver proposal of the Campaign for Better Transport, which offers two safety options for Dome Valley and Schedewys Hill that could be delivered in a faster time frame and at a much cheaper cost; if so, what is his view on those proposals?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000588\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a244152-977c-48d2-bf53-4f3a369a27a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dbc43fe24d004fdb8a1b9da1767b966c\u0022\u003EHon STEVEN JOYCE\u003C/span\u003E: I have two views. Firstly, I have seen some of the numbers, and the numbers I have seen so far seem incorrect and out of date. The second issue is that the volumes specification of the existing road is nowhere near the capacity required for that highway, which carries something like 24,000 people per day, plus very, very significant freight.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000589\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220e740085b0ce49859b99ff1559897c5e\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: On holidays.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a244152-977c-48d2-bf53-4f3a369a27a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222a182da15106464c9df88a6d5a8311df\u0022\u003EHon STEVEN JOYCE\u003C/span\u003E: No, that is every day. I think you are being a bit condescending to the people of Northland and northern Auckland.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000591\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bc4325cd1dc54ad8a9d98cbeed6ea7fd\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I think it is outrageous, on a pork-barrel project like this, that you be accused of being condescending, as the Minister of Transport has just done. He is an expert on that matter.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000592\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fc3716935af8415abeec874b94187282\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I will take all this in the humour in which I think it is intended.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000593\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022928ff97c874a48648449bd736a11225b\u0022\u003EDavid Bennett\u003C/span\u003E: What other progress has been made on roads of national significance in Auckland?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000594\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a244152-977c-48d2-bf53-4f3a369a27a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a0c1eda23f1f4c8081f0b8d963d16eb2\u0022\u003EHon STEVEN JOYCE\u003C/span\u003E: Yesterday the New Zealand Transport Agency announced a short list of two consortia for the construction of the Waterview Connection, which is a key part of the western ring route road of national significance. Both short-listed parties have plans to deliver a fully operational road on time, which means that after decades of debate and congestion Aucklanders and the economy will finally feel the benefits of a motorway network that should have been completed decades ago.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000595\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a56c8e5ef4514ec49054eb20362c9f6d\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: Does this project still have a benefit-cost ratio of less than one?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000596\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a244152-977c-48d2-bf53-4f3a369a27a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e98098230b1a4f76b44bde2e408deaae\u0022\u003EHon STEVEN JOYCE\u003C/span\u003E: I am not sure which project the member refers to, but I can\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000597\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225956fc934b064d80b7b6d4f44eb62144\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I am referring to the project in the primary question, which is the P\u016Bhoi to Wellsford road of national significance.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000598\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224bc1ff09701e4216873ed151d0d9ef86\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I accept that. The question refers to the primary question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000599\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a244152-977c-48d2-bf53-4f3a369a27a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e9f19f92f03b4f0e88749f8587873058\u0022\u003EHon STEVEN JOYCE\u003C/span\u003E: No, the P\u016Bhoi to Wellsford national road\u2014or road of national significance\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000600\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d3e30458dc3943cb98b57f053a20935a\u0022\u003EHon Annette King\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, the \u201CNational road\u201D\u2014that\u2019s it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000601\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a244152-977c-48d2-bf53-4f3a369a27a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e209df4fb33e47feafa866be5a3494a2\u0022\u003EHon STEVEN JOYCE\u003C/span\u003E: That road of national significance has a benefit-cost ratio of greater than one, with wider economic benefits included.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000602\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022b2f1cd50e23641cbaca86924bfa4f82a\u0022\u003EIncome Gap, Parity with Australia\u2014Proposed Changes to Holidays Act 2003\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022 data-id=\u00227cd7946f04c5418e8797e620540c39f8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000603\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E10. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227cd7946f04c5418e8797e620540c39f8\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON (Labour)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Labour: Are the proposed changes to the Holidays Act 2003 being progressed under urgency this week part of the Government\u2019s plans to close the wage gap with Australia and reduce the number of Kiwi workers moving to Australia?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022 data-id=\u0022be62223a2c6a4a5e94e35b1d5daa93c2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000604\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022be62223a2c6a4a5e94e35b1d5daa93c2\u0022\u003EHon KATE WILKINSON (Minister of Labour):\u003C/span\u003E Part of the Government\u2019s plan to grow the economy is to reduce red tape and increase choices and opportunities. The Holidays Amendment Bill is part of that plan.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000605\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002240c8867176ee4a62accc1d5976cb0b40\u0022\u003EDarien Fenton\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The question asked was on notice. It was a pretty straightforward question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000606\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c222443d9d1447a48d7f15696eef4bd3\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The question was on notice. Although it was a question that sought an opinion, it asked: \u201CAre the proposed changes to the Holidays Act 2003 being progressed under urgency this week part of the Government\u2019s plans to close the wage gap with Australia and reduce the number of Kiwi workers moving to Australia?\u201D. I think I heard the Minister answer that they were part of the Government\u2019s plans for economic growth, but the question did not actually ask that. Maybe the Minister could give an answer with a greater relation to the primary question. I accept that there is no precise answer to it, but I would ask the Minister to relate her answer a little more to the primary question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000607\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226790d6f228ad42f19501e1fae8e49663\u0022\u003EHon KATE WILKINSON\u003C/span\u003E: Obviously, part of our plan is to grow the economy so that we do not lose so many workers to Australia. We do have some workers coming back from Australia, and we want to have economic conditions here that are conducive to that, and a Government that actually likes workers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000608\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e780ad7b934645ee98f2ab04f2a881f2\u0022\u003EDarien Fenton\u003C/span\u003E: How is allowing the fourth week of annual leave to be traded for cash part of the Government\u2019s plan, given that it will see Australian workers enjoying more holidays than us, and it still will not bring the earnings of Kiwi workers, whose average wage is just 60 percent of the Australian average wage, anywhere near the earnings of their Australian counterparts?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000609\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022495b9825657b41509caa002af267ee62\u0022\u003EHon KATE WILKINSON\u003C/span\u003E: I think the member misunderstands the popular policy of workers having the ability to ask to transfer that fourth week for cash, which even her own leader thinks is quite a good idea. But it is voluntary; the employee does not have to ask for it. It is part of the increased choices and opportunities for workers in New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000610\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c425dc4a3bf343c5969f765233e8f4bb\u0022\u003EDarien Fenton\u003C/span\u003E: Was the Prime Minister correct when he said: \u201CWe also have more public holidays than Australia.\u201D, or is it the truth that with a maximum of 11 public holidays legislated for, and as few as nine public holidays in 2010 and 2011, New Zealand actually has fewer public holidays than every state in Australia, and that her proposal to give employers the ability to decide when alternative days for public holidays must be taken by employees will only put Kiwi workers\u2019 holiday entitlements even further behind Australia\u2019s?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000611\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223a2655745e334e119a427ec87ef436d3\u0022\u003EHon KATE WILKINSON\u003C/span\u003E: I always agree with the Prime Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000612\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227e4ca0fd3e63486c9b71d0701ba62b8c\u0022\u003EDarien Fenton\u003C/span\u003E: Not good enough, not good enough. All right. Well, he is wrong.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000613\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022815130311d174724a494f5df833c2231\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The member should just ask her question. She asked whether the Minister agreed with the Prime Minister, and the Minister said she did, so the member will now ask the next supplementary question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000614\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002240a28b1eff894727afaa68bf55e5e228\u0022\u003EDarien Fenton\u003C/span\u003E: If the Government is serious about wanting to stop Kiwi workers from moving to Australia for better wages and conditions, will she consider compensating workers for the public holidays they will miss out on next year, when Easter Monday and Anzac Day coincide, as all Australian states have agreed to do; if not, why not?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000615\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022943542f030ce4e8d956e8a8e4b722bc2\u0022\u003EHon KATE WILKINSON\u003C/span\u003E: I understand that next year is particularly challenging in the sense that Easter Monday is also Anzac Day, so two public holidays fall on 1 day. It is not part of our consideration to Mondayise Anzac Day, because Anzac Day is a really special day in New Zealand\u2019s history, not just a public holiday, and I think it should be revered.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000616\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002290189518752140c1810b7b77610bfe99\u0022\u003EDarien Fenton\u003C/span\u003E: To the Minister\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000617\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002264dcf0f4ad9b499a93cdafe9c243dd02\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I want to hear Darien Fenton, please.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000618\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b5f8b399665945308ef294f6a6343dfb\u0022\u003EDarien Fenton\u003C/span\u003E: Does she agree with John Key\u2019s statement: \u201CLong hours at work, both parents in employment, childcare shortages, growing interest rates and rising bills can create a far from ideal environment for good parenting and healthy family relationships.\u201D; if so, why is her Government advocating for longer hours at work by allowing the cashing in of annual leave, by forcing both parents into work through its Future Focus reforms, and by causing rising bills through its increase in GST?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000619\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228760a5487e9a481a951acd80f6186a46\u0022\u003EHon KATE WILKINSON\u003C/span\u003E: The member is under a misapprehension. We are not advocating longer hours of work; in fact, what we are doing is giving more choice to workers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000620\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c8820330ed8d4622a9c2c81aa74ead80\u0022\u003EDarien Fenton\u003C/span\u003E: Will requiring a medical certificate for 1 day\u2019s illness, under her Holidays Amendment Bill, make any difference to the cost to New Zealand of ill health, which is estimated by Treasury to be at least $5 billion a year, with the biggest cost coming from those who drag themselves off to work in spite of sickness; and how will her changes improve productivity and help close the gap with Australia?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000621\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b3ba343b1e31488fbe31f5a5e5a1fe17\u0022\u003EHon KATE WILKINSON\u003C/span\u003E: I understand that the Treasury report that the member is referring to does not actually investigate whether people take sickies, so it does not have any implications for the proposed changes to the holidays legislation. The changes regarding proof of sickness are very minor and very sensible. Most employees will experience no change from the current regime. But unjustified sickies clearly reduce productivity and put pressure on the other members of staff who do turn up to work.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000622\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022f5e7c9fecc5642f8bf161555cba74fde\u0022\u003EYouth Opportunities Programme\u2014Job Ops and Community Max\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226e1ead03-bf7f-496a-a02f-ce52859c58c1\u0022 data-id=\u0022d82aca45544d4c22829c596971b1af62\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000623\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ead03-bf7f-496a-a02f-ce52859c58c1\u0022\u003E11. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d82aca45544d4c22829c596971b1af62\u0022\u003EHEKIA PARATA (National)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: What progress has been made on the Government\u2019s Youth Opportunities programme?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022 data-id=\u0022084292784e3b464eb536e277d5155618\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000624\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022084292784e3b464eb536e277d5155618\u0022\u003EHon JUDITH COLLINS (Acting Minister for Social Development and Employment):\u003C/span\u003E The Government\u2019s Youth Opportunities programme has been a huge success. Over 12,500 young people have been on a Job Ops or Community Max placement, thanks to the many businesses and community groups that have given those young people employment opportunities.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000625\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ead03-bf7f-496a-a02f-ce52859c58c1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222c0add69abde464cae52d1cd516b550d\u0022\u003EHekia Parata\u003C/span\u003E: How many young people who have been on Job Ops or Community Max have not gone on to a benefit?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002203137152efda4cf9a39546e99f7ad330\u0022\u003EHon JUDITH COLLINS\u003C/span\u003E: We are continuing to see positive results as those young people finish their placements. Of those who have completed their Job Ops placement, 91 percent have not gone on to a benefit. For Community Max, over 70 percent have not gone on to a benefit.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000627\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c88e985b3f5e446894be79b70f1167c9\u0022\u003EJacinda Ardern\u003C/span\u003E: How many young people have remained in employment for longer than the Government-subsidised 6 months through its Youth Opportunities package, and is that sufficient for this policy to be labelled a key part of the Government\u2019s package to tackle unemployment in the recession?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000628\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221c6782d9cbe74bc195788077959d213d\u0022\u003EHon JUDITH COLLINS\u003C/span\u003E: The figures I have relate to those who have not gone on to benefits, and I have already given them: 91 percent of Job Ops placements have not gone on to a benefit, and 70 percent of Community Max participants have not gone on to a benefit.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000629\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222f0e31dd0ffe47599daf914334a66368\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I ask members to be a little more reasonable with the level of interjection; I am struggling to hear.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a841b7302d1e48a6afaa517faa07489e\u0022\u003EJacinda Ardern\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. My question was very specific. It related to the number of young people who, as part of the Job Ops package, have remained in employment longer than the Government-subsidised 6 months. It was a very specific question and did not relate to benefit numbers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000631\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e7a68906e6dd4400b566cb17118176aa\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I presume from the Minister\u2019s answer that she did not have that particular information on her and gave the best proxy she could to indicate the level of success. Presumably, people who have stayed in employment have not gone on to the unemployment benefit. Given the circumstances of the primary question, I think one could not necessarily expect the Minister to have that particular information. I think she gave the best proxy she could for it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000632\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b7cb00304ed04e4fa820c504454e25b2\u0022\u003EJacinda Ardern\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Minister accept the New Zealand Institute\u2019s findings that the impact of the Youth Opportunities package has affected, at most, 12 percent of the young unemployed; if not, what approximate percentage has it assisted?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000633\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dffcd6014a47460db97aaed8a7bd870d\u0022\u003EHon JUDITH COLLINS\u003C/span\u003E: Well, actually, it has assisted 12,500 young people, and I would have thought that was a very, very good result.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000634\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227cfcb43dfb0f42f5b15f3c19cc745541\u0022\u003EJacinda Ardern\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. My question related specifically to the percentage of young people who have been assisted by this package in relation to the total number of 64,000 young unemployed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000635\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224748fa23c0a64b63bf141b07e969ba0e\u0022\u003EHon JUDITH COLLINS\u003C/span\u003E: The member actually asked did I agree with the institute\u2014no.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000636\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c5db8fe94d3e408e921aea4389bb8701\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I think what the member has experienced with that exchange is that if there are two parts to a question, the Minister is at liberty to answer one of them. If members want absolutely precise answers, the question needs to be, first, very closely related to the primary question, and, then, a very short question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000637\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e6c5a32999d74ed08ecbcb7b6d2ddc98\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. That would have been fine if the Hon Judith Collins had given the answer to one of the parts of the question that she gave in replying to the point of order. She did not do that when she was answering the question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000638\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f8fdeaf1c4114c238197e7e4640aa535\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Is the member doing anything other than disputing my ruling? I do not think that is particularly helpful. I think the Minister\u2019s answer to the question was reasonable.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000639\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002223660c5a95614a528a117d2a841645ef\u0022\u003EJacinda Ardern\u003C/span\u003E: What percentage of the total young unemployed has the Government\u2019s Youth Opportunities package assisted?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000640\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222f307d0dd501410795befb8c2b817efa\u0022\u003EHon JUDITH COLLINS\u003C/span\u003E: Well, it is about 12,500 people. As to those who are unemployed, the member should consider that the figure according to the household labour force survey is significantly different from the number of people on the unemployment benefit, because, as that member should know, the household labour force survey asks anybody, and counts as unemployed anyone who says they are available for 1 hour\u2019s work a week. That is hardly, in most people\u2019s calculations, considered to be wanting a job.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000641\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00225aab05952ffe42fc9064c61b1eb52581\u0022\u003EMarine Reserve, Akaroa Harbour\u2014Rejection of Proposal\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022 data-id=\u00220bf57052352642e5b49a43d26bff0332\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000642\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003E12. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220bf57052352642e5b49a43d26bff0332\u0022\u003EGARETH HUGHES (Green)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Conservation: Why did she decline the proposed Dan Rogers Marine Reserve in Akaroa Harbour on the grounds that it would adversely affect recreational fishing?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022 data-id=\u00228c02f267b8af48d6a765a34d36dbf059\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000643\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228c02f267b8af48d6a765a34d36dbf059\u0022\u003EHon KATE WILKINSON (Minister of Conservation):\u003C/span\u003E I am required by law to uphold an objection if I consider that establishing a marine reserve would unduly interfere or adversely affect existing recreational purposes or is contrary to the public interest. I considered that it did, and the decision was made public in August. Further to that, I feel I should alert the member that I have been informed through the media that Brian and Kathleen Reid, who disagree with this decision, intend to challenge it through a judicial review. I therefore do not consider it prudent to comment any further on the matter.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000644\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002253729890fe944a728fde34947eb9573d\u0022\u003EGareth Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I refer you to Standing Order 112(1)(b), whereby a judicial order prohibition on the Minister answering the question comes into effect \u201Cfrom the time when proceedings have been initiated by the filing of the appropriate document in the registry or office of the court.\u201D, not by virtue of seeing it in the media.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000645\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c06d500361514131b91a27f456428eee\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The member makes a valid point in terms of the prohibition of reference to matters awaiting judicial decision. The member is at liberty to ask his questions, but the Minister may well invoke the issue of public interest in the way she answers them. I have not ruled out the member asking any further supplementary questions, but I think we have to accept that the Minister may invoke the public interest issue in the way she answers them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000646\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002269f0a254f3994077870f7b14ce9dc16d\u0022\u003EGareth Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: Why does she think a marine reserve would be bad for recreational fishing when according to the Department of Conservation, fish size in the area are so depleted it is hard to catch a legally sized blue cod, which is the fishers\u2019 main target in the Akaroa area?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000647\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223956d7290096496898996e2fb71f8a4b\u0022\u003EHon KATE WILKINSON\u003C/span\u003E: I am aware of all of the advice, and I refer the member to my previous answer. It would be irresponsible for me to comment publicly about an issue when I have been informed that it is intended\u2014and, indeed, the proceedings may have been filed\u2014to be heard in court.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000648\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022df0fa2c15b514df18947365fd0e8ac68\u0022\u003EGareth Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: In general, what would the benefits be to recreational fishers in the remaining 88 percent of the Akaroa Harbour if the Dan Rogers Marine Reserve had proceeded?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000649\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c62ae1146f9749a094d87e5a51c2fe8a\u0022\u003EHon KATE WILKINSON\u003C/span\u003E: That is a bit of a hypothetical question, and, again, it would be irresponsible of me to comment when it may prejudice or jeopardise judicial review proceedings.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000650\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022abe18f9ffba64f599313478ed67cfb00\u0022\u003EGareth Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: What proportion of New Zealand\u2019s waters are protected today, given our commitment to have 10 percent of our waters in a marine protected area by 2010?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000651\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ae1e2294f9d5493f907cbc87d1a54b9d\u0022\u003EHon KATE WILKINSON\u003C/span\u003E: It is 7.1 percent.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000652\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222e2ca3c6ff6543608ef52916cfd8fbe8\u0022\u003EGareth Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: It was a specific question. The question was not in regard to the territorial sea, which is what the Minister has answered, it was in regard to New Zealand waters, which are the exclusive economic zone and the territorial sea.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000653\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fb5df8ce5a594cdd9cb18968f30c8b2c\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The member has a further supplementary question if he feels the answer was not adequate. The Minister gave an answer\u2014there is no question about that. If it is not the answer the member was seeking, he does have further supplementary questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000654\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225909cd8dc9964e2fb14252dbba16fde9\u0022\u003EGareth Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: Given that only 0.77 percent of our marine area is currently protected, what are New Zealand\u2019s chances of reaching the 10 percent target in the next 3 months, given that her Government has a moratorium on marine reserves in the exclusive economic zone, has instructed the Department of Conservation to not apply for the marine reserves, and has declined the Akaroa marine reserve application?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000655\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222d05b0af21a64141aa0928048353fddc\u0022\u003EHon KATE WILKINSON\u003C/span\u003E: The member is making some accusations and allegations that are just plainly incorrect. The Government is committed to progressing the amount of our marine environment that is protected. Currently there are two proposals to be considered by me and the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture. They feature significant areas on the West Coast and in the Subantarctic Islands.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000656\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220ee8e3b40b6c4b4fbf67bb0bdb000dee\u0022\u003EGareth Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: Will her decision to uphold the absolute right of recreational fishers potentially create a precedent and a disincentive to any future marine reserve applications?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000657\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ab540c321528446e9cded6894b067771\u0022\u003EHon KATE WILKINSON\u003C/span\u003E: Marine reserve applications are, and will be, considered on a case by case basis.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000658\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002255bb390e-f6c3-498c-bbf6-ea1a8fc993c7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d9a7d544b6d34977badfb15d89d6fe36\u0022\u003EGareth Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: If the local r\u016Bnanga in Akaroa had supported the marine reserve, would she have approved it?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000659\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c6a8790a28604097be8223c924762956\u0022\u003EHon KATE WILKINSON\u003C/span\u003E: That is a hypothetical question. The r\u016Bnanga, as the member well knows, did not support the proposal; the Reids did. I heard both parties, and I came to a decision using the legislative process under the Act.\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=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000660\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002231964e0ff3c84d08909e3791cfd8fa8f\u0022\u003EEmployment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000661\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002283ef20fa6fc84305904c15c2da48361f\u0022\u003EInstruction to Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u00220691fa01d52a4252bd0d99c492571079\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000662\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220691fa01d52a4252bd0d99c492571079\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That it be an instruction to the Committee of the whole House on the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) that it have the power to consider and, if it thinks fit, adopt an amendment not proposed in the correct place.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u00223ab4249da97c4ea79ddbd0f6813ad9c0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000663\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223ab4249da97c4ea79ddbd0f6813ad9c0\u0022\u003EHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I think there will need to be a ruling made here that does not see any gap in procedural matters in our Standing Orders, in fact, unduly impede the progress of the bill. The Committee has clearly made a determination by way of a majority on how it should proceed. If this motion is debated now and it is a long debate, at that point a decision will be made by the Committee that it has already made. The absurdity here is that the Standing Orders and the procedures of the House make it clear that new parts that bring in matters that have previously been dealt with cannot stand, but we can then have a debate about whether the House can instruct itself to either accept or not accept those parts. That seems to me to be a complete mockery of the way in which the procedure of the House should progress.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u00226d3496e199b54c50aff9332021804b11\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000664\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226d3496e199b54c50aff9332021804b11\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I can accept that the Leader of the House has identified a problem, but the ability of the House to instruct the Committee is one that has been used on a number of occasions. It is a way of bringing things into scope that would otherwise be out of scope. The Speaker has ruled, without undue protest from this side of the House, that these amendments are out of scope for the Committee. The remedy that members have is a motion. The Leader of the House and the other National members have the ability to vote against the motion if they so wish, and it is their right to do so, but it is also the right of members to move such motions. It has happened at least two or three times in this Parliament while the House was considering a matter and before it was referred to the Committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u0022eed8e459269d44d885fe3a6cb1205a6c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000665\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022eed8e459269d44d885fe3a6cb1205a6c\u0022\u003EHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House):\u003C/span\u003E Another opportunity for members is to seek leave of the Committee to see those parts brought into the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2). I think we are seeing a situation where the Committee has said no, it does not accept those amendments as being within its scope and it is not going to have them progress because it has dealt with those matters before, but now the House is being asked to debate whether it should give the Committee a further opportunity to do exactly the same thing. If the Standing Orders allow this sort of thing to happen, then we have a perpetual loop, if you like, that could go on and on. I would assert that once this instruction has been given to the Committee there will be another one, and another one. That does not make for good order in the House, at all.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022 data-id=\u00221d1d9b8a45544e27baab13a615b5715a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000666\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221d1d9b8a45544e27baab13a615b5715a\u0022\u003EHon DAVID PARKER (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I have a very narrow point in respect of the Leader of the House\u2019s contribution, in which he said the Committee had already resolved that this matter was beyond the scope of the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2). I say no, that was not what happened; it was that the Speaker had determined that the Committee could not consider it, which is a different matter from whether this motion should succeed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000667\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002208e0d74ca9ea4efd8bb134a5ca252602\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: This is a serious issue; I fully accept that. Members are right to share their thoughts on it with the Speaker. I do not believe the Speaker has to automatically accept this motion, because the Speaker must not allow the House to go down a path that is not consistent with the Standing Orders. The particular issue, as I understand it, is that the member is trying here to enable the House to instruct itself that the Committee go back and reconsider something that the Committee has already decided on. The Committee has dealt with Part 1 of the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2). I was recalled to the Chamber and I have already ruled as Speaker that the member\u2019s amendments were properly dealt with as part of Part 1, and therefore could not be dealt with by way of separate parts. That is the issue. The Committee of the whole House has already moved past the time when those amendments could be made at the Committee stage.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000668\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EIt would seem to me that if there is an issue here, the more appropriate way would be to look at it by recommittal at the third reading, for example; then the House could consider the matter in a more consistent way as part of the third reading. It does not seem to me to be appropriate, given that the Committee of the whole House has passed this point of the bill, to allow a debate on that matter, because I would be allowing something that the Speaker has already ruled against. That does not seem to me to be appropriate. It is my ruling that the motion is out of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u0022dad0049e842a4429bc3d2a48786927a5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000669\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022dad0049e842a4429bc3d2a48786927a5\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Clearly it is, in the nicest possible way, challenging the ruling you have made. It is my understanding that in these matters the House is the master of its own destiny and that the House can, and often does\u2014just about always on the motion of a Minister\u2014make decisions for the Committee to consider a matter that it could not otherwise consider. You have ruled\u2014and I am not saying improperly\u2014that the Chairperson was right when he ruled this out. I just put in brackets that there is a matter of timing that you have not dealt with in your ruling as to whether once a debate has started there can be a retrospective ruling out. I put that to one side. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000670\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EThe point is that the House has always been the master of its own procedures. Ministers have always had the ability to move that matters that are well outside the purview of a Committee be considered. It happens on regular occasions, and I think we will see it happening later in the day from a Minister. The fact that it is not currently within the scope of the bill, as a result of reason a rather than reason b, is not, I think, a valid reason for you to rule out a motion. In my opinion it is the role of the House. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000671\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EThe Leader of the House has brought up the question of a perpetual loop. That cannot be right, because once a matter has been dealt with by the House it cannot be dealt with again. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000672\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002289c9e25ad51044df83e760c9a8eea6ab\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I think we have got ourselves into a little difficulty here. The member should recollect that the Speaker was recalled to rule on this matter. My ruling did not relate to scope; it related to the fact that the Committee had dealt with Part 1 and the issues and amendments related to Part 1. The Committee had the power to consider the matter at the appropriate time. The advice I have received is that an instruction must be moved immediately after the order of the day is called. That is not exactly the right time, but I do not want to be too pedantic. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000673\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EThe Committee had already voted on Part 1. The member, quite properly, raised his concern about the Chairperson ruling his amendments out. The Speaker was recalled and dealt, as Speaker, not on the issue of scope but on the issue that the Committee had dealt with Part 1. I believe that that has dealt with that matter. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000674\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EIn respect of the point, which the member quite rightly raises, that I did not deal with the fact that he had already made a contribution, it is my view that the member is not harmed by that, because at least the member has on the record the points he wanted to make. Even though, as Speaker, I supported the Chairperson when he ruled out the member\u2019s amendments, the member has not been totally disadvantaged because he managed to get his points across in that he got a speech in before the Chairperson ruled the matter out, so I do not see that as being much of a disadvantage. Had the Chairperson ruled it out immediately, the member would not have been able to make his points. So I do not see that as disadvantaging the member hugely. It is my view that this motion is not appropriate right now and I cannot accept the motion. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000675\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022af7537cdf3c747b1a7bc2040fb387ab0\u0022\u003EIn Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000676\u0022\u003EDebate resumed.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000677\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022167cfa802f9d4879b06aa210d84039a6\u0022\u003ESchedule 1\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022c1cf4e59818b4c09a30fa56f370be248\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That schedule 1 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 57\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1; Independent: Carter.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESchedule 1 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000678\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022655a3898c2f7495e82b072495146b7e1\u0022\u003ESchedule 2\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022 data-id=\u00229f8dc0e40f1349708f85b4129d8bf26d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000679\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229f8dc0e40f1349708f85b4129d8bf26d\u0022\u003EHon STEVE CHADWICK (Junior Whip\u2014Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. We had a member on her feet trying to take a call before the vote was put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000680\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002216713cfe9c0e49499b53a884a3223f67\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: I understand that the debate on Part 2 included clauses 39 and 40 and schedules 1 and 2. They are not separate debates. Therefore, we will now have the vote on each provision.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u00228a1c738c1031425d89cb33694569f133\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000681\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228a1c738c1031425d89cb33694569f133\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I think we have a bugger\u2019s muddle here. We went on to a debate on Part 3. How could we possibly be in this situation? I think we might have to be in a recommittal phase fairly soon, if we have not worked our way through this one properly. How could we possibly have started a debate on Part 3 without finishing? We cannot then go back. I accept we had closures. It might have been that you have missed the vote, but if the votes have been missed and we are going to go back and reopen issues, including schedule 2\u2014and I accept that there has been some debate on schedule 2\u2014and if votes were not taken, in error, then I think we are in a position where we have to recommit that question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000682\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002299978a7d5ac34704b1af920eae9bb04f\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the member. I will just take some advice from the Clerk. I say to the member that my advice is that the Part 3 debate the member refers to was ruled out of order. There is no Part 3 in the bill. My advice from the Clerk is that we started having votes on Part 2. The vote on the substance of Part 2 has ended, and we are now having the votes on the schedules attached to Part 2. Once that is completed, we will then go on to the next part, and the next question before the Committee will be clauses 1 to 3.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u00225443579c246440e291794c55b41cba3c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000683\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225443579c246440e291794c55b41cba3c\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I think the problem that we have is that there has been a clear error here because a debate was accepted on new Part 3. That has been well-established here and in the House. It was wrongly accepted, I think both sides now accept. But what happened was that some votes were not taken. New Part 3 was called by the Chair and you are absolutely right as to the sequence. But the question is whether a closure can apply over a period when another debate has been called. I do not want to be too critical of the Chair at the time, and it was now quite a few hours ago, but it is my very firm view that a closure does not apply if there has been an interruption and we have moved to a subsequent debate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000684\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003ETherefore, although it is a relatively narrow debate, and I discovered it was narrow because I started debating it myself earlier on, quite incorrectly as Mr Woodhouse pointed out, we have to find a way of sorting this out. But the closure cannot just apply 6 hours after it actually occurred. If the closure was to occur properly, then the Speaker would have put us back into Committee, notwithstanding the fact that we had reached 1 o\u2019clock, and we would have had the vote. If the closure applied, then we just keep on having the votes and have our lunchtime at the end of those votes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000685\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022af5e109072184749bafefab252c8b5a8\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: I have heard enough. I have had several pieces of advice. The member\u2019s referring to Part 3 is irrelevant. Part 3 is ruled out of order. It is as though it never existed. It has gone. It is not a matter before this Committee. The second point is that my advice from the Clerk is that there was no closure motion. The closure motion does not apply. The issue the member is raising about a closure is a complete red herring. It is irrelevant. It is here to confuse and cause distraction. There is no closure; we are not dealing with that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000686\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003ELet us come back to the fact. The fact is that a vote was started. It was incomplete at the time the Committee rose for luncheon. There is no problem with that. Votes were before the Committee before it rose for lunch, and now the Committee has resumed and we are completing the votes. We are completing the votes on the schedules. There is no debate on the schedules. They are included in the original motion. The confusion of members is entirely of their own making. Without further ado I am now going to put the vote on schedule 2 and once that is completed I will then call for clauses 1 to 3. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002281c18970f32e42e1acb5ea13a8d2e00d\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That schedule 2 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESchedule 2 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000687\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002272d715aa89fa4aaa8cc4d1454dfdc39b\u0022\u003EClauses 1 to 3\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u002232cba51d063547a68e79f60b5f027ebe\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000688\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002232cba51d063547a68e79f60b5f027ebe\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E Thank you for the call on this particular matter, and I must say that it is good to see the Minister in charge of the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2), Kate Wilkinson, in the Chamber. It is good to see her here, preparing to defend for the first time in the Committee stage what is an outrageous piece of legislation that is being pushed through under urgency and that had a shortened select committee process, which was very, very badly run. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000689\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EThere are two elements to this bill, and together they make April Fool\u2019s Day, the implementation date for all but section 10, an appropriate date for the bill to be enacted. Legislation is coming into force on April Fool\u2019s Day from a Government that has worked really hard to fool the public of New Zealand. This is the nasty, vindictive part of National coming out. It is the part that hates wage and salary earners and hates people who earn low incomes, and that is determined to drive their conditions down, to stop their representatives from meeting them, and to ensure they have no job security. This is the sort of legislation that National Party people go to their branch meetings for. This is the sort of horrible stuff that the people who really like ACT\u2014the far right of National\u2014are promoting. I say that it is the ugly side of National\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000690\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002234e022e9f7e24761ab7593805302820c\u0022\u003ECarmel Sepuloni\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s the only side.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000691\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b6a3397a1b2a4e4399502c8a037585c5\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: No, I disagree with my colleague. She said it is the only side. I think that over the years there have been some more reasonable, more centrist approaches to legislation. I know that Jim Bolger, as Minister of Labour, would never bring legislation into force on April Fool\u2019s Day. We used to disagree with him quite a lot, but I do not think he was seen as the devil incarnate in the way that this Minister is in the way that she acts. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000692\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EClause 1 states that the title of the Act is the Employment Relations Amendment Act (No 2), and I wonder whether that is an appropriate title, or whether there could be some other titles. It could be the \u201CStop the Sexually Harassed Worker Getting Her Representative into the Workplace Act\u201D or the \u201CFire the Low-income Worker (Without Giving Reasons) Act\u201D. Would they be more appropriate titles for the bill? This legislation is designed to drive down the working conditions of ordinary Kiwis. I am certain there is a better and more appropriate title for this legislation than the one that currently exists. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000693\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EClause 2 provides a commencement date of 1 July 2011 for part of this bill, and the rest will come into force on 1 April 2011. Clause 3 states the bill amends the Employment Relations Act 2000. The one bit I cannot disagree with is clause 3. I do not disagree with the fact that the bill does amend the Employment Relations Act. I will not vote for it, because I do not think the bill should be amended in this way, but it is factually accurate and probably appropriate given the content of the bill. Although the content is inappropriate, it does go to the Employment Relations Act 2000. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000694\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EMr Chair, I am sure that over a period of time we will have a number of amendments come to you on this particular issue, and some of them will go, I hope, to the title. I am sure some of my colleagues have views on alternative commencement dates, and they might currently be having amendments drafted in order to defer the implementation, so that whether or not union officials should have access to workplaces when people are being sexually harassed is deferred until after the next general election in order to have an approach that is fair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022 data-id=\u002297b13550a1994cb184e5287dde75a542\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000695\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002297b13550a1994cb184e5287dde75a542\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I am delighted to see the Minister in the chair, the Minister of Labour, this afternoon, and I am delighted\u2014a little bit\u2014to take a call on clauses 1 to 3 of the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2). As my colleague Trevor Mallard has outlined, there are only three little parts to this bill. I will concentrate on clause 3, \u201CPrincipal Act amended\u201D. I have to agree with Mr Mallard that that clause tells the truth. It is very sinister though. It has half a dozen words: \u201CThis Act amends the Employment Relations Act 2000.\u201D They are words that I hoped, as a member of Parliament, I would never ever hear from a National Government, because they are filled with foreboding\u2014they amend the Employment Relations Act 2000. This amendment bill is beyond our worst nightmares. I want to take the opportunity to talk about what amending the principal Act will mean for people who are already operating under the Minister\u2019s previous amendment to the Employment Relations Act 2000\u2014that is, those who are in workplaces with fewer than 20 staff. I want to talk about what it will mean for every worker in the country who will be affected by this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000696\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EIn talking about amending the Act, I will put on record some stories that have come through, and there are many. I will not talk about the sauce and aioli story; I will talk about the stationery store worker who was fired on the 85th day of her 90-day trial period. She only worked Saturdays. She was never told there was any dissatisfaction.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000697\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EThere was the case of an experienced hairdresser, who had never been dismissed before over many years of working for several employers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000698\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EThere was the case of a recent university graduate employed by an accounting firm. Near the end of his 90-day trial period, the employer said that he had done well and would be offered a new agreement. But when he received a new agreement, he saw that it was unlawful. It contained the 90-day trial period provision, which he pointed out was unlawful, and the boss told him not to come in on Monday.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000699\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EThere was the case of the farm worker, who, during his first week on the farm, picked up an infection related to his job. He was in hospital for a week, then returned to the farm, and was sacked under the 90-day trial period provision. Amending the principal Act will produce that consequence for thousands and thousands of workers\u2014400,000 workers who change their jobs every year will risk this sort of treatment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000700\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EAnother young woman told me that she started work in a heating firm, and, despite bringing in sales, she was sacked after just 8 days with no reason given. She wrote to the company to ask for a reason but she has never received a reply, because under this Act the company does not have to give an answer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000701\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EOne woman moved from the North Island to the South Island to be close to her elderly parents, and took up a job with a local firm. She had positive feedback on her performance and even suggested some training on her own behalf in order to further improve. She was dismissed with no reason given. With an unsold home in the North Island, she is now living in a caravan. Those cases are the consequences of clause 3 and the amendments in Part 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000702\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EOne woman who had a hearing impairment was employed by a call centre. The employer knew about her impairment when he took the woman on. She required some special equipment, but instead of providing it, the employer changed his mind and simply fired her under the 90-day trial period provisions. He told her not to come in on Monday.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000703\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EA worker in a communications company turned up for work to find the office being renovated. Unable to find alternative facilities, the company simply fired that worker. The company said that it did not have to give any reason, and that it could fire her under the 90-day trial period provisions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000704\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EMembers will be familiar with the Act, but we are now talking about what this amendment bill will mean. It will have consequences for thousands and thousands of workers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000705\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EAnother example was of an early childhood teacher, with 11 years of teaching and nannying experience, who took a job at an early childhood education centre over another offer. Six weeks into her new job, she was told there was a complaint against her, and she was fired the next day. No previous concerns had been raised about her performance, and she was given no chance to read the complaint or respond to it. She was an early childhood education teacher. I thought we were short of them. Mind you, there will be surplus, will there not? There will be no positions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000706\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002218e79c0bd1d341d1bf42f115edc3e76c\u0022\u003ECarmel Sepuloni\u003C/span\u003E: There will be no positions for them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000707\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229650a95726ff4ee8bc22d445489c184f\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON\u003C/span\u003E: That is right, because the Government is cutting back on early childhood education. Despite all of the investment we have put into that person and her training to make sure that she is able to provide a proper education to our children, she has gone. She will find it really hard to get another job, and she is devastated by that. The consequences of this amendment are severe.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022 data-id=\u002268204e8a00774dfca5703275c16f63d0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000708\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002268204e8a00774dfca5703275c16f63d0\u0022\u003EKEITH LOCKE (Green):\u003C/span\u003E It is a pleasure to speak on the title and commencement date clauses of the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2). I think the commencement date should be changed. Instead of being 1 April 2011, it should probably be 1 April 1911. I do not know whether we can have retrospective dates like that, but it is appropriate to that period in our history when our employment legislation was very weak and employees were at a serious disadvantage. This bill would fit in that period more.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000709\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EIn terms of the title, rather than the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2), it might be better to call it the \u201CEmployees\u2019 Submission Amendment Bill\u201D, because that is what the bill is about, the submission of employees in the workplace, particularly to their employers. I think clause 3, \u201CPrincipal Act amended\u201D, rather than amending the Employment Relations Act 2000 might be better to amend the Corrections Act. This bill is, in some ways, imprisoning workers, or at least taking away the freedoms of workers in the workplace. It is relevant to the Corrections Act, because under that Act I think there is now an allowance for home detention. This bill does not have home detention; it is sort of work detention. So that clause relates, perhaps, more to the Corrections Act than the Employment Relations Act, which, as has been pointed out, was passed in 2000 to improve relations between employers and employees, to create a fairer relationship, and to allow for fair bargaining between the two parties.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000710\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThe Green Party was supportive both of Trevor Mallard\u2019s amendments to Part 1 and of the prospective Parts 3 and 4. I think that if the Government was serious, it would have accepted amendments that allowed for the union to be given access to workplaces as normal, without all this hold-up, where urgent matters are concerned. Certainly health and safety and sexual harassment are urgent matters, and if someone is dismissed, the union cannot wait for a few days before it comes in to defend them, work out whether they should be in the job, negotiate redundancy payments, and all the rest of the issues. These are matters that require the urgent attention of union officials, and I think it is a pity that those amendments to Part 1 were not passed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000711\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EIn the prospective amendments there is the secret ballot issue, too. There is a funny contradiction in the legislation before the House at the present time. On the one hand, there is this requirement in Tau Henare\u2019s bill, which the Green Party opposed, to provide a secret ballot before any action is taken by unions, but, on the other hand, in this different bill\u2014the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2)\u2014the unions cannot even get access to hold their secret ballot, or the employer can stop them and put barriers in their way. The two measures are in contradiction. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000712\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThe other amendment that was put forward by Trevor Mallard met with the approval of the Green Party, too, which was that the primary remedy of reinstatement should particularly apply to those who are involved in union bargaining, and health and safety issues, etc. Otherwise an employer could kick an on-the-job union representative down the road, and that has happened many times in New Zealand\u2019s employment history. I think there was opposition to that interpretation by the National Government. If the National Government does not think there will be a picking off of union officials, etc. by disallowing reinstatement as the primary remedy, then it should have supported that amendment. The other points raised in the debate have been very relevant, too, particularly the one relating to access to welfare benefits if someone is dismissed under the 90-day provision.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022 data-id=\u0022240210957744428b94304635b3a45363\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000713\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022240210957744428b94304635b3a45363\u0022\u003ESTUART NASH (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E Let us be very, very clear. We are debating the differing philosophies of the National Party and the Labour Party. That is fundamentally what this debate is all about. Perhaps the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) should be called the \u201CTory View on Employment Relations Bill\u201D. When I talk about the different philosophies, I mean that the party opposite is for the few; this party represents the many. That party stands up for the enfranchised; this party stands for those who are disenfranchised and often have no voice. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000714\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EI want to say three words: equality, respect, and dignity. To talk about the word \u201Cequality\u201D, I say that I was at a conference yesterday that discussed equality in New Zealand and how important it was. Learned professors took this bill and said that it stripped away equality and that the gap of inequality grew. It is the greatest impediment to economic and social growth in this country. It is the right of every person to representation, and that is what unions do. Unions stand up for those who cannot stand up for themselves. They are a voice when silence reigns. They provide a voice for those who have not a voice for themselves. Perhaps this bill should be called the \u201CStripping Away Equality in Employment Relations Bill\u201D. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000715\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EThe second word is \u201Crespect\u201D. At the conference yesterday learned professors said that the one major variable to inequality is a lack of respect. After nearly every single crime that is committed, certainly violent crime, the perpetrator stands up and says: \u201CHe dissed me. There was no respect. I felt disenfranchised.\u201D This bill does not allow workers to be treated with respect. So perhaps this bill should be called the \u201CStripping Away Respect in Employment Relations Bill\u201D. That is what this bill does. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000716\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EThe third word is \u201Cdignity\u201D. People in this country must be treated with dignity. The fact that they can be let go without being given any reason at all, having their dignity stripped away and not being told why, is an absolute travesty. Perhaps this bill should be called the \u201CStripping Away Dignity in Employment Relations Bill\u201D. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000717\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EThis bill is a travesty because it creates inequality for all workers by not allowing them the right to representation when they are unable to represent themselves. Taking away the rights of workers\u2019 representatives to go on site is a great travesty to many workers in this country. The Hon Trevor Mallard asked what sort of country we want to live in. What sort of country do we want to bring our children up in? This bill does not allow for a country built on equality, which is something we very much pride ourselves on. This bill strips away the respect of workers and it strips away the dignity of workers. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000718\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bbded2ec-ac25-4a73-a380-3f4d87693084\u0022\u003EWhen I heard Keith Locke say that the commencement date should be taken back 100 years, I thought to myself, as a student of history, that that was a very good point. This bill does not drive innovation and it does not drive the workforce. It is a backward-looking step. It takes employment relations back to the time when there were no rights. This bill strips away the rights of workers. Perhaps we should call it the \u201CStripping Away the Rights of Employees in Employment Relations Bill\u201D, or perhaps the \u201CStripping Away the Rights of New Zealanders (When Seeking a Job) Bill\u201D. That is what this bill does.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022 data-id=\u0022cf8c4e6605b943f5bb12cb8d0fb72982\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000719\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022cf8c4e6605b943f5bb12cb8d0fb72982\u0022\u003ECAROL BEAUMONT (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I have a slightly different view from my colleagues Trevor Mallard and Darien Fenton, which may be because I am a newer MP and just do not understand the issue. Clause 3, \u201CPrincipal Act amended\u201D, of course amends the Employment Relations Act, so I guess it is right. To me, the changes in the bill are so fundamental, in several respects, that I think it undermines the Employment Relations Act. I do not think the bill amends the Act; \u201Camend\u201D sounds quite normal and quite moderate. The bill fundamentally undermines a number of the key objectives of the Employment Relations Act. That Act was designed to build productive employment relationships. The fundamental objective of the Employment Relations Act is to build productive employment relationships through the promotion of good faith in all aspects of the employment environment and the employment relationship. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000720\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EThere are a number of elements in this amendment bill that fundamentally alter the balance of power in the employment relationship. As my colleague Stuart Nash said, the bill does not deal with things like dignity and respect. When employers can dismiss employees for any reason they can come up with and employees have no right even to know why they were dismissed, let alone challenge the dismissal if it is not fair\u2014no right of redress\u2014then I do not think that is about a relationship. That provision fundamentally alters the Employment Relations Act. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EThe objects of the Act talk about good-faith behaviour, as I have said, but also explicitly acknowledge and address the inherent inequality of power in employment relationships. I think that point has been completely ignored by the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2). Members opposite seem to think there is no inequality in the employment relationship. Many of the people who will immediately be hit by the 90-day trial period extension to all workplaces will be young people entering a job for the first time, assuming of course they can get one, which in the current environment is very difficult. But let us say they do get a job; they are then immediately placed in the situation of having no rights at work. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000722\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003ENo one can tell me that in a situation of high unemployment those employees who do not know their rights, and are not union members, will be able to get advice on whether they should accept this 90-day trial, which has no rights. In fact, it would seem that the intention of members opposite is that the normal course of events will be \u201Ctake it or leave it\u201D employment agreements whereby it will be perfectly legitimate to advertise a job as having a 90-day rights-free period and present the person with the option of either accepting the employment agreement, which has no rights for the first 90 days of employment, or not accepting it, which means not having a job. That is not a free choice, and it is not an equal power relationship. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000723\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EAs I say, I am a little concerned about the amendment to the principal Act. It worries me because I think it is more than a minor amendment to the Employment Relations Act; I think it is a fundamental undermining of it. I could understand it more if it were the Employment Contracts Act being amended. Then we might say that OK, the principal Act, the Employment Contracts Act\u2014if it had not been repealed, and that repeal was a very good thing, I might add\u2014is being amended by things like the change to the access provisions, which would be not as bad as what was in the Employment Contracts Act. We could say that that was an amendment. But I tell members that the 90-day issue is way worse than what existed under the Employment Contracts Act, under the previous National Government. Under that Act, workers had rights to challenge unfair dismissals within the first 90 days of employment, but under this amending legislation they will not. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000724\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EIt worries me, as Mr Nash said at the end of his contribution, that we are not building the productive employment relationships that are envisaged by, and are the fundamental objective of, the Employment Relations Act. Productive employment relationships are what we need. We need those productive employment relationships to change the nature of work, to lift workplace productivity, and to achieve the economic growth that this country needs. That outcome will rest on a well-informed workforce, a workforce treated with respect, and a workforce that has a collective voice. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022 data-id=\u00220564419f418d4098a901da4ff0b042af\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000725\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220564419f418d4098a901da4ff0b042af\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I have some suggestions for alternative titles for this awful legislation that we are debating here in urgency today. The first alternative title we could call it is the \u201CEmployment Relations (Broken Promise) Amendment Bill\u201D, because members may remember that, back in the election campaign in order to make the 90-day trial period for small businesses appear not so Draconian, much was made of the fact that it would apply only to businesses with fewer than 20 employees. Much was made of that. National MPs went to extraordinary lengths to make it clear that this would not apply across the entire workforce, only to small businesses. So here we have another broken\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000726\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022095619900d274fada91aa50ea6943e8f\u0022\u003EHon Tau Henare\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s the wrong bill. It\u2019s a new year.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000727\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224feed735296a4ff787f0d79f83489c02\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY\u003C/span\u003E: There is Tau Henare. Mr Henare knows I like to say that he is the worst union organiser in the history of the universe. I actually think Mr Henare is a Trojan Horse designed to try to bring down the union movement from within. That is the only way that I can work out how he managed to get that job. But coming back to this bill, it is a broken promise, because the Government promised that it would not extend the 90-day trial period to businesses with more than 20 employees. Remember that Government members were at pains to say that it would not apply to teachers. It would not apply to teachers, even if they were in a small school, because they were employed by the ministry. Now, it applies to everyone. It is another broken promise in what is proving to be a long list of broken promises from this National-led Government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000728\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EAnother alternative title could be the \u201CEmployment Relations (Legalised Discrimination) Amendment Bill\u201D, because that is essentially what this bill does. We already had trial periods under New Zealand employment law. It was nothing new to have a trial period. Labour is not opposed to trial periods at all. The only change National made when it came into Government was to the ability of an employee to challenge a dismissal if it was unfair. I want to know why National members think that it is unreasonable for employees to be told why they are being fired. Why is it unreasonable for employees to be told why they are being fired or why they are having their livelihood taken away from them? How can they improve themselves, and how can we increase productivity through employees being able to improve their work, if they are not told what is wrong with their performance? There is no requirement to tell them. They can just be told \u201CDon\u2019t come Monday.\u201D, and no reason given. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000729\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EThis is where we come to the legalised discrimination. If, for example, a woman is employed and within the first 90 days she becomes pregnant and the boss does not want to have to deal with a woman who will go on maternity leave, he or she could just say \u201CDon\u2019t come Monday.\u201D That could happen even if all of her performance reviews up to that point had been exemplary, and she had had wonderful feedback from the boss saying that the firm was so happy to have her, was so lucky to have her, and she was fantastic, and then suddenly she announces she is pregnant and the next day she is fired. Under this legislation that the National Government has passed and is extending to the rest of the workforce she would have no ability to challenge that, even though it is clear that she is being fired for being pregnant. As long as the boss says that her job is not working out, or she does not fit in there, or if the boss finds out that someone is gay, or if they join a union and the boss does not want to have to deal with that, or finds out that they are a member of the Labour Party and the boss does not agree with their political affiliations, then that will be OK. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u0022b07a2c58cf2e4ceea5d1be3c68bd597d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000730\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b07a2c58cf2e4ceea5d1be3c68bd597d\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\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=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022 data-id=\u002214eaa7682d454d5fb7aa5746c6c88739\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000731\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002214eaa7682d454d5fb7aa5746c6c88739\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National):\u003C/span\u003E I am very pleased to take a call on the title and commencement clauses of the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2), and I refer back to the speech made by Mr Locke, and in particular to the comment about the dark ages and the suggestion that the commencement date could be put back to 1911. That would be a very interesting development, because it would give us the opportunity to put certain members of this Chamber under a 90-day probation period. I am sure we sure that members on this side would be quite keen to put Mr Mallard under a 90-day probation period. Although there is some merit in the backdating I do not think I could support it, tempting though it might be. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000732\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003EI am really concerned at the suggestion by members on the other side of the Chamber that this legislation could somehow undermine people\u2019s human rights. The member who has just resumed her seat, Ms Mackey, mentioned that a person who became pregnant would somehow be fired under a 90-day trial period provision. I would be very happy for a member on the other side of the Chamber to take a call to challenge this, but I am almost certain that the Employment Relations Act would absolutely rule that out as a possibility, because the provisions of the legislation\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000733\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002212962e915d1a4f22b3a65cf18e8a87ba\u0022\u003EHon Steve Chadwick\u003C/span\u003E: Didn\u2019t the member listen to examples being cited?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000734\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022011f783fd81749549f018b111b102249\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE\u003C/span\u003E: It was really hard to listen because it was about as underwhelming a speech as we could get. I am particularly interested in the issue of pregnancy. As far as I am aware, firing a person for becoming pregnant would be absolutely forbidden under the provisions in this bill. [Interruption] Here we go again! According to Labour members, it does not matter what the law says; employers will act so badly that they will simply ignore it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000735\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002293fcf0ea3044497e8cdc6a2062373a7a\u0022\u003EDarien Fenton\u003C/span\u003E: And they are.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000736\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002210a6f066f09945e48d7aa084c127bf09\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE\u003C/span\u003E: Then the employee is absolutely free to seek the remedies that are available. If an employee believes she has been wrongly dismissed because she became pregnant in the first 90 days of her employment, she is absolutely justified in using the grievance processes available under the Act as it is now, and that will not be changed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000737\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227565aa31f67c42d9ba17e90b621372eb\u0022\u003EHon Steve Chadwick\u003C/span\u003E: All powers are being stripped away.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000738\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221b4427de96694095b5a82f1107b6f6ca\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE\u003C/span\u003E: Not all powers\u2014that is the point I am trying to make. We can debate the merits of the powers as they have been diminished, but does not help when members throw around Chicken Little examples of what might happen when this bill is passed. They absolutely will not be the case. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000739\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022314826d597f04b4aadf109f44eb967fa\u0022\u003EHon Steve Chadwick\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s happening.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000740\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b9e9e6bcc64a463eb3940896d18023f0\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE\u003C/span\u003E: If it is happening, then a personal grievance can be taken. This is the point. Members opposite are saying that the poor old employees are completely disempowered and absolutely cannot do anything, certainly not without the unions. I absolutely reject the notion that this bill\u2019s title needs to be changed to reflect those things. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000741\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003EThis bill contains very moderate and very reasonable changes that will add flexibility to our employment relations legislation and will not lead to the sky falling in, as my friends on the side of the Chamber would have us believe. I simply reject those notions. Here is one suggestion for a new title: the \u201CWe Actually Trust Employees To Do and Think For Themselves, and To Make Choices for Themselves Bill\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000742\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225fe2aae089cf4543b7ff7f7366bcfe4e\u0022\u003ELynne Pillay\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s why you\u2019re dumping them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000743\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220f66215f75504653a37a97fe2a25d422\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE\u003C/span\u003E: There they go again! Those members are saying that the 90-day probation period is terrible, that it will undermine workers\u2019 rights, and that it will give nobody the sorts of opportunities we believe are possible. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000744\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003ELet us look at an example of that choice. An employee may be marginalised, may be a new immigrant, may be a new graduate, or may be a youth. That employee is trying to get back into the workforce, and the employer, quite often\u2014and we certainly saw this with small and medium sized businesses\u2014is not sure about whether to give them a chance. This provision would certainly do that, so I think there is every opportunity to put the word \u201Cfairness\u201D in the title. But, clearly, this bill is the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2), and I think that title should stay.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022 data-id=\u002200f24171de774e488ace115582721fb9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000745\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002200f24171de774e488ace115582721fb9\u0022\u003EJACINDA ARDERN (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E This is my first call on the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2). I am grateful to take a call on the commencement and the title clauses of this bill, in particular. I feel that in all of this debate we have left out one crucial point, and perhaps the title of the bill should be changed to reflect the fact that in none of this debate have we ever discussed the perception that seems to exist amongst employers that employing people should be something to be feared. That is essentially what Government members have told us through all of this debate. They have said that some particular groups in our society are less likely to be given a chance by an employer because employers fear those groups. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000746\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003EIf that is the case, I ask why, in this debate and generally, have we never ever addressed the question of why employers fear employing new staff, regardless of the age of individuals, regardless of their background, and regardless of how long they have or have not been in the workforce. I think this bill should be renamed the \u201CMissing the Point or Avoiding the Real Issue Bill\u201D, because nowhere have we discussed why that fear exists or the best solution for it. I believe that the Government is currently absolutely copping out, by bowing to a perception that our employment laws are something to be feared. It is simply stripping those laws away for the first 90 days. That is its solution. It bows to the perception and strips away the laws, rather than asking whether that fear is based on perception or reality. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000747\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003EWhy do I come back to this question, and why do I therefore think this bill should be renamed the \u201CMissing the Point or Dodging the Real Issue Bill\u201D? I spent several years working in the UK in an organisation called the Better Regulation Executive, and this issue was one we tackled. I would love to talk to the member Tau Henare about this, but I see he is currently engaged on his cellphone in the Chamber. I believe that that may be against the Standing Orders. He is not engaged in the debate, which is a disappointment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000748\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022aff8edb305ad4b96af8f392cc51ea58d\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. My friend and colleague Tau Henare appears to be taking a phone call on his cellphone in the Chamber. That has been ruled out of order on a number of occasions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000749\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226b302d4b66d343dcba2d25fda90d9be0\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: If that member is on a call, I ask him to go into the lobby.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000750\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ffaea316a54740f8a0c67e8389c4de09\u0022\u003EJACINDA ARDERN\u003C/span\u003E: I was loath to point that out, because I would like Mr Henare to hear what I have to say on this issue. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000751\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003EI spent some time working in the UK in the Cabinet Office there, where we began looking at this very issue. We detected that there may have been a perception amongst employers that employment law was difficult to deal with, and perhaps if that perception pervaded too deeply then it may have impacted on an employer\u2019s desire to employ people. We spent some time looking at the issue and found that, actually, a lot was based on perception and misinformation. I would have liked to see the Government spend more time looking at that issue. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000752\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003EAgain, I come back to the fact that I do not believe that the title truly and adequately reflects what the Government has done here. The way New Zealand is ranked within the OECD is probably the best indicator of whether this is simply a perception issue. New Zealand is currently ranked third in the world for ease of doing business. Amongst that mix is employment flexibility, where we are ranked on whether there is flexibility in our employment market, and we come out third in the world. I would like to point out that that is a slippage of one place since the Labour Government was in power, when we were second in the world for ease of doing business. I am afraid that in producing this bill this Government has simply bowed to perception and has not scratched beneath the surface of why employers have this perception. If this perception holds true, why has the Government gone for just the first 90 days? Why is this Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) not scrapping workers\u2019 rights entirely? If that perception pervades generally, then why has that principle not held true throughout our employment legislation? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000753\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022aa2209f1-1889-4c24-b51d-cb2aedc7aa93\u0022\u003EI think this bill should be renamed the \u201CEmployment Relations Cop-out Bill\u201D, because the Government has avoided the real issue here. Instead, it has simply turned to a legislative solution for an issue for which it has not dug beneath the surface. That is incredibly disappointing, because as a consequence it leaves workers unnecessarily without rights for the first 90 days of employment. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002267431f57-e958-4c83-b438-7da8061d479e\u0022 data-id=\u0022d81a778cbc7a408fab236da62ccbfa58\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000754\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267431f57-e958-4c83-b438-7da8061d479e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d81a778cbc7a408fab236da62ccbfa58\u0022\u003EPAUL QUINN (National):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00220ca5157750ab4360885fda6ca8a793e8\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000755\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard to clause 1 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000756\u0022\u003Eto omit \u201CEmployment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2)\u201D and substitute \u201CEmployment Relations (Trial Periods and Union Access) Amendment Bill\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000757\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question that the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022 data-id=\u0022f72a1c0447204b41a781eb6ba80f06ca\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000758\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f72a1c0447204b41a781eb6ba80f06ca\u0022\u003EJO GOODHEW (National\u2014Rangitata):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I seek your assistance, given that I believe we are probably looking at the same tabled document. The document I am looking at is entitled \u201CAmendments to the Employment Relations Bill (No 2)\u201D. We are currently debating and voting on the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2). Therefore, I ask whether the document with suggested amendments is out of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u0022f57ae00484e54eb08f614d2492cb7d15\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000759\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f57ae00484e54eb08f614d2492cb7d15\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E Mr Chairperson, I think you are aware that there is no requirement to put a title at the top of an amendment when an amendment is tabled.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000760\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fe295b1f8b9b47fd9ffa9bc997ddc590\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: The member is right. Although the heading may be incorrect, the vote is not on the heading. The vote is on the proposed amendment to the clause, and that is the question I have put. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00228863d1e5f89f4af0a3847d457a12f64a\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 51\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 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=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000761\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard to clause 1 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000762\u0022\u003Eto omit \u201CEmployment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2)\u201D and substitute \u201CEmployment Relations (Trial Periods, Union Access and Consequential Amendments) Amendment Bill\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022e311fb5e264340b9b74c25939d6c4fb8\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 51\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 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=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000763\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f5bff467108843ec90bf41049db15969\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: The next six amendments to clause 1, \u201CTitle\u201D, in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard are substantially the same as amendments that have already been decided by the Committee. Therefore, they are not in order. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000764\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard to clause 1 be agreed to: \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000765\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003Eto omit \u201CEmployment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2)\u201D and substitute \u201CEmployment Relations (Personal Grievance Claim Changes) Amendment Bill\u201D. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022884b5f37a80647c0b1d08899c7d331ad\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 51\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 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=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000766\u0022\u003EThe result corrected after originally being announced as Ayes 56, Noes 64.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000767\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard to clause 1 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000768\u0022\u003Eto omit \u201CEmployment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2)\u201D and substitute \u201CEmployment Relations (Flexibility for Employers) Amendment Bill\u201D. \u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002216d1d0b10a544b76af7bbdc6483ab4b3\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 51\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 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\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022ec266512-9fe8-47da-883e-48f046ee5059\u0022 data-id=\u00222610d76960f94a349dc64eca91767dbc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000769\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ec266512-9fe8-47da-883e-48f046ee5059\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222610d76960f94a349dc64eca91767dbc\u0022\u003ETE URUROA FLAVELL (Whip\u2014M\u0101ori Party):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I seek leave to adjust our vote, not on the amendment we have just voted on but on the one before that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000770\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bafa5b6c805947fba5412b02775fef2a\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought to change the vote on that amendment. I ask what the member is changing his party\u2019s vote to. He gave five votes in favour. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000771\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ec266512-9fe8-47da-883e-48f046ee5059\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022821a7f25b1974d05a41f80066a8e9591\u0022\u003ETE URUROA FLAVELL\u003C/span\u003E: Obviously, it should be five votes opposed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000772\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221e1f3fdab9b443e4b4232c5eb2956e97\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: The member has sought to change that vote. The corrected vote is Ayes 51, Noes 69. The amendment is not agreed to. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022ae1038656bad476c995fe25b0df4dca4\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That clause 1 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 1 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u0022aa3e7e89f32646dcb2abf8910c8a39af\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000773\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022aa3e7e89f32646dcb2abf8910c8a39af\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I ask, with your leave, to withdraw one of the amendments in my name to clause 2. I am afraid that I forgot that only 30 days hath November, and I have an amendment to change the commencement date to 31 November. It is the first amendment on one of the sheets. I apologise to the Committee, because of course that amendment would have been facetious as the date does not exist. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e4b7444d9758412680af47eff4084008\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is no objection. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000775\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard to clause 2 be agreed to: \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000776\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003Eto omit from subclause (1) \u201C1 July 2011\u201D and substitute \u201C31 December 2011\u201D. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002225b03bf1bc6b41f89436d06443ff7bb6\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 51\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 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=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000777\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002209d3bf75b2384135be8f6b7f0030fa59\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: The remaining amendments to the commencement date in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard and Carol Beaumont are ruled out of order, as they are inconsistent with the decision of the Committee. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u00224ebf8b3199ce4860bea28b956fc329b3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000778\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224ebf8b3199ce4860bea28b956fc329b3\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I think that if you look carefully, you will see there are two sets of dates for which there are amendments, not just one. Although a decision has been made not to amend one of the dates, there has not yet been a decision not to amend the other. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000779\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225a9a97b6f80c4832a9e29eeb42569064\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: It does not matter that the member has asked for leave to withdraw one of the amendments. All the amendments are to commencement dates, and I have ruled that they are out of order, as the decision of the Committee has already been made on the commencement date. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u002271d67313365c4f9b94cd4d8666b0324f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000780\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002271d67313365c4f9b94cd4d8666b0324f\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I do not wish to get into an intense argument on this matter, but the bill has two commencement dates. Part of it is brought into force on one date, and part of it is brought into force on another date. I think that any reasonable person would think that one could amend either of them. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000781\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f15fe614579147f4a4c9fec949f8d042\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the member for that point. All of the amendments that have been lodged are to amend the commencement date in clause 2(1), which is 1 July 2011. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000782\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022af72bb76f94e49aba64c0e500dcd1a3e\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I think you have lost one, Mr Chairperson. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000783\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226686adf44e294490a4f516ed5d904036\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I have them here. The member has signed them. Henceforth, I am ruling them all out of order. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022a1e8330bb5664ff68ce7562251b3abdb\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That clause 2 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 2 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022436a43609b50494aa2f121421a489069\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That clause 3 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 3 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000784\u0022\u003EHouse resumed.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000785\u0022\u003EBill reported with amendment.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022 data-id=\u00225cf9b98670884273858c4088185d4562\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000786\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225cf9b98670884273858c4088185d4562\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, That the report be adopted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022f17aa84f18d14607ac845d051391e734\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 report be adopted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 51\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EReport adopted.\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=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000787\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022192db8cf5e2543fe8b124129b659d6af\u0022\u003EHolidays Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000788\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022dfbded70fb6d4343b42bb91b186ce0bc\u0022\u003ESecond Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022 data-id=\u002255c3bafd4a1e40f29843c6ad8fdab960\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000789\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002255c3bafd4a1e40f29843c6ad8fdab960\u0022\u003EHon KATE WILKINSON (Minister of Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the Holidays Amendment Bill be now read a second time. I thank the members of the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee and its chair, David Bennett, for dealing with this bill so efficiently and effectively. The select committee reported back to the House on 2 November 2010 and recommended that the bill proceed with some amendments. I approve of the amendments proposed by the select committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000790\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022\u003EThis bill follows the review of the Holidays Act by a ministerial advisory group of employer and union representatives that was set up last year. It forms part of our plank of employment law reforms that will improve our employment framework. The Holidays Act affects all employers and employees. It is a significant piece of legislation. However, parts of the Holidays Act have been criticised as being unclear, overly complex, and lacking choice for both employers and employees. A lack of clarity in holiday provisions has a negative impact on employment relationships and productivity, because employers and employees have to spend time and resources trying to establish their rights and obligations.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000791\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022\u003EThis Government is focused on what works. Prescriptive laws cannot account for the variable hours and jobs we work or the multicultural workplaces in this country. There has to be flexibility and there has to be greater choice. That is what we intend to deliver. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000792\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022\u003EThe changes contained in this bill have been widely debated. Allowing employees the option of trading their fourth week of leave for cash is an incredibly popular policy, and it has widespread support. The bill delivers on a promise made prior to this Government\u2019s election to office in 2008. I am confident that the changes will improve the overall operation and efficiency of the Holidays Act. It will improve the balance of fairness and provide greater choice to employees and employers. The changes will make it easier for employers and employees to understand and comply with holiday legislation. The main changes proposed addressed the application and calculation of payment for public holidays, alternative holidays, sick leave, and bereavement leave, and they give employees the ability to exchange up to 1 week\u2019s annual holiday a year for pay, should they wish to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000793\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022\u003EThe issue of relevant daily pay has proved to be the most difficult and frustrating part of the Holidays Act. The bill will address this issue, and I know the select committee has worked hard to ensure that the new formula for average daily pay will improve the current situation. This change will make the Holidays Act easier to understand for those who work variable hours. When relevant daily pay is neither possible nor practical to calculate, the employer may use average daily pay. This payment for leave is based on past identifiable earnings over the previous 52 weeks or whatever period the employee has been employed, thereby addressing the issue of potential fluctuations in pay. Both employees and employers will have greater certainty as to what leave payments will be.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000794\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022\u003EThe select committee has thoroughly reviewed all the issues that have been raised by submitters and has recommended some sensible amendments to the bill. The committee has recommended clarifying the definition of discretionary payments. I understand that some submitters were concerned that the proposed definition for discretionary payments would increase confusion and uncertainty. The committee has recommended clarifying that a discretionary payment does not include a payment where the amount to be paid is variable but the payment itself is provided for in the employment agreement. This recommendation ensures that a discretionary payment is a payment that an employer may choose to pay an employee but is not bound to pay under the employer\u2019s employment agreement. This ensures that the definition will be applied correctly, and that discretionary payments will be excluded from gross earnings.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000795\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022\u003EThe committee has also recommended deleting the terms \u201Cinformed\u201D and \u201Cvoluntary\u201D from the bill. I understand that some submitters were concerned that the term \u201Cinformed\u201D could create unnecessary confusion and increase litigation. Specifying that a request to cash up annual holidays or an agreement to transfer a public holiday must be informed and voluntary may bring into question whether all other requests and agreements under the Holidays Act and other employment legislation have a lesser requirement. That is not the intention of the bill. Further, the terms raise questions as to the extent of a party\u2019s obligation to inform the other or ensure that the other is informed before a request is made or an agreement entered into.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022\u003EThe change recognises that this may create a greater duty in relation to cashing up and transferring holidays than other terms and conditions of employment. It provides certainty and clarifies parties\u2019 obligations in these circumstances. It remains clear that only an employee can initiate a discussion regarding cashing up annual holidays and the transfer of public holidays. It is the employees\u2019 decision to make, and this is a provision that they have welcomed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000797\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022\u003EThe committee has also recommended a small change relating to proof of sickness or injury. The change aligns the reference to \u201Cmedical practitioner\u201D in the Holidays Act 2003 with the definition of \u201Cmedical practitioner\u201D in the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act 2003. Currently, the Holidays Act refers to a medical practitioner within the meaning of the Medical Practitioners Act 1995, but that 1995 Act has been replaced by the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act 2003.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000798\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022\u003EThese are all sensible changes and I thank the committee for the thorough consideration it has given to the bill. I would also like to thank the hundreds of submitters who took the time to make a submission on the Holidays Amendment Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000799\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022\u003EThe bill retains the overall integrity of the Holidays Act 2003, and maintains employees\u2019 holiday and leave entitlements. The bill clarifies areas of uncertainty and addresses concerns about how certain aspects of the Holidays Act are causing unnecessary costs and confusion. It gives greater choice to employees who may want more flexibility over how they take their annual holidays and public holidays. I commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u00226bc5ca769a594e8abca86900c2a9e77d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000800\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226bc5ca769a594e8abca86900c2a9e77d\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E The Labour Party will be opposing the Holidays Amendment Bill, which is consistent with the swing to the right and the anti - wage earner and salary earner swings of the National Government. Although I will make some original comments later, I would like to quote back to the Minister of Labour from her regulatory impact statement on this legislation. It starts by stating: \u201CThe analysis of the policy options under consideration is constrained by the limited availability of objective evidence of problems with the current holidays legislation,\u201D. Her department, which has a lot of experience in this area, could not find a problem, yet we have this legislation. Treasury and the Ministry of Economic Development, which I know from experience have never been right at the front of the vanguard for wage earners and salary earners, state that these changes \u201Cmay not improve the functioning of the legislation.\u201D They note: \u201CThe balance of costs and benefits of the package of proposed changes is not clear. At a minimum, the amendments are likely to impose transitional costs on both employers and employees and the extent of other potential costs is unclear.\u201D We have the agencies that are meant to be looking after the economy stating that this legislation is not a good thing and that it moves us backwards. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000801\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EThe regulatory impact statement also hints at undue pressure being placed on employees. It states: \u201CThere is also a risk that this proposal could create new employment tensions between employers and employees.\u201D I ask whether that is what we want as a Parliament. I ask whether that is what the Minister wants, because her own agency in her own report, and the report of the Minister of Finance and the Minister for Economic Development, states that this bill will be bad, not good, for the economy. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000802\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EOn the question of sick leave, the regulatory impact statement is very frank. It found no justification for changing it, and states \u201CThe Minister of Labour determined [this] proposal\u201D. Well, if we are to work on an evidence base on legislation that people have worked through and know will work, then we have to do better than saying that Minister Kate Wilkinson thought it was a good idea. Frankly, Kate Wilkinson\u2019s thinking something is a good idea against the evidence of Treasury, the Ministry of Economic Development, and the Department of Labour is an indication that it is poor. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000803\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EA number of other issues are also identified in the regulatory impact statement. I might say that it is pretty unusual to have a regulatory impact statement that ends up being the core of an Opposition speech on a bill, but it does state that it will reduce opportunities for rest and recreation away from work. This bill, according to Kate Wilkinson and the regulatory impact statement that she has published, will reduce opportunities for rest and recreation away from work. The regulatory impact statement also states that the bill may increase working hours overall and decrease time for community and family activities. Again, that comes as no great surprise. In the early childhood education area and parental leave area\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000804\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220fa6987a8eae44f9ae63b551233abb2d\u0022\u003EHon Steve Chadwick\u003C/span\u003E: Anti-family party.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000805\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228ffa3dd9952c4d40a168a4280a70941d\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: National has been an anti-family party for a long period of time, but it is good to see that Kate Wilkinson is coming clean and admitting it. She admits, as part of the regulatory impact statement that she tabled with this legislation, that there may be an increase in working hours overall and a decrease in time for community and family activities. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000806\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EShe also said that it \u201Cmay negatively impact\u201D on health and safety, including an increased risk of fatigue and stress-related illness, which could increase sick leave. Both employer and employees have a responsibility to ensure staff are fit for work and not at risk from long-term fatigue. Again, she admits that this is likely to cause long-term fatigue, and health and safety issues for employees. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000807\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EThis is not the Unite union\u2019s approach on this legislation; it is the approach of the Minister of Labour, in the statement that she tabled in the House. She states\u2014and again, this is no surprise\u2014that it will disproportionately negatively impact on groups of workers who are already disadvantaged in the labour market\u2014for example, women, the low paid, youth, M\u0101ori, and Pacific peoples. Are they not the groups that National hates? National does not like women workers. It does not like low-paid workers. It does not like youth. It does not like M\u0101ori and Pacific peoples. The Minister of Labour tabled in this House a statement that these people will be disadvantaged by this legislation. Again, it is not the Labour Party, not Keith Locke, not the Unite union, and not the Council of Trade Unions, but it is the Minister of Labour, Kate Wilkinson. Minister Kate Wilkinson is the person who stated that these people are to be disadvantaged. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000808\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EThe regulatory impact statement states that it may increase the gap in income between genders. Well, again, that is nothing that National cares about. Even Pansy Wong did not care about that before she added to the gender income gap over the last week or so. The regulatory impact statement states that over time, entitlements will be reduced. Workers may feel pressure to cash up holidays to meet financial commitments if they do not receive pay increases. That again is something that Kate Wilkinson says will be a consequence of this legislation. I ask her how, in all good conscience, she can support all these negative consequences of the legislation, which she admits and has pleaded guilty to. She said that this will be the effect, yet still she is proceeding with it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000809\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EShe said that the net payment received may be less than expected if cashing up a week\u2019s annual holiday moves an employee to a higher income tax bracket. It may reduce social assistance received\u2014for example, Working for Families payments. Did she tell the House in her second reading speech that this measure is likely to reduce Working for Families payments? Did she say as she introduced this bill that people\u2019s benefits will be taken away or their tax brackets might go up as a result of this legislation? Did she say as she spoke\u2014as opposed to what she wrote and tabled\u2014that it would decrease motivation and productivity if workers do not have adequate breaks away from work? What she said in the document that she tabled was that that is the case, and I ask why she is not prepared to stand up in the House and read out her own regulatory impact statement. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000810\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EIt states that it may impact on workplaces\u2019 budgeting financial management if they have not planned for the additional payment. It also states that it may increase disputes between employers and employees\u2014for example, around the payment received for cashed up holidays\u2014where the grievance is genuine and if an employee believes their request has been unfairly declined. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000811\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EI reiterate that all of those statements are from the regulatory impact statement tabled in this House by the Minister of Labour. They are her statements on this legislation\u2019s effect, and I think it is absolutely shocking\u2014absolutely shocking\u2014that we have a Minister in the House who would bring legislation to this House that will so badly affect the way of life for ordinary Kiwis in the way that it happens here. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000812\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EI ask Chris Tremain, who is so much for voluntary work, for coaching, and for people having time in their communities, how he can support the legislation from the Minister of Labour, when she says that it will reduce the time available for that. I ask how Chris Tremain can hold his head up at the Hawke\u2019s Bay Rugby Union when coaches will be pushed into working longer, as Kate Wilkinson\u2019s legislation indicates. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000813\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EThe last point I will make is that in real terms this legislation will reduce the wages and conditions of ordinary Kiwi workers. This legislation will open up the gap between workers in Australia and workers in New Zealand. It is designed to drive down conditions to make it cheaper for wage earners and salary earners in New Zealand, and that is a clear breach of the undertakings given by this Prime Minister. This is bad legislation. The core of this legislation will be repealed. I accept that there are about three clauses in it that we do not object to; in fact, a couple of them are quite good. But the core of this legislation, which is the selling of annual holidays, will be removed next year or earlier the following year by the new Labour-led Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022 data-id=\u0022dcb4cac2c96d434a889be8f448546423\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000814\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022dcb4cac2c96d434a889be8f448546423\u0022\u003EDAVID BENNETT (National\u2014Hamilton East):\u003C/span\u003E The Holidays Amendment Bill, which we are discussing, is aligned with the bill we have just passed through its Committee stage, the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2). Both bills went through the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee at the same time. I thank the Minister of Labour, her staff, and the officials for the way that they have worked to make this bill possible. Well done. We welcomed the contributions made by the committee members from both sides of the House, who were diligent in their appreciation of the arguments for and against this bill. We welcomed also the many submitters who came along. Submissions were heard primarily in conjunction with the Employment Relations Amendment Bill No 2, but we had a large number of informed submissions and also a number of people were heard in person in regards to this bill. So I thank all of those people. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000815\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003EThe bill contains some main provisions, which the Minister has gone through. She has given people a bit of a heads-up as to what is the heart of this bill. Labour Opposition members across the way are not discussing the bill, at all. They are just trying to see it as part of a right-wing agenda rather than looking at how it is constructive and in the best interests of New Zealand workers, because it gives them choice. The Labour Party will fight choice in the work environment to its dying day. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000816\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003EThe whole point of the Labour Party is to avoid choice in the workplace and to have control in the workplace through the union movement. Anything that looks like choice in the workplace is seen as abhorrent to the Labour Party. Its members will fight it; it is the reason that they are there. The Labour Party is there to control people, to not give people the ability to think for themselves. It is there to dictate to people what should or should not happen, and it does that under the guise of looking after the vulnerable, looking after the young, and looking after the elderly. The reality is that Labour is the party that takes advantage of vulnerable people, because it uses fear and all those other emotional traits in an attempt to hijack the true intention of New Zealand workers. It is a shame when legislation like this comes before the House, which is in the best interests of New Zealand workers, and the Labour Party tries to hijack it with its fear tactics. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000817\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003EThe heart of the legislation is where it gives employees that choice on their fourth week of annual holidays, which a lot of employees will want to take advantage of. It will be in the best interests of them and their families, especially in these very tough times. Also there are clarifications on Christmas, New Year, and public holiday rules and a number of other things such as the calculation of average daily pay, the transfer of public holidays, the penalties for employers, and the proof of sickness or injury. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000818\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003EAll those issues were considered by the select committee, and its members came to conclusions that I think they are very comfortable with. The House may visit again the average daily pay calculation at some time in the future. Some submissions set up some possibilities in regards to what could happen in the area of daily pay calculations, and that may well over time be considered in a different bill in order to take into account the difficulty of those calculations. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000819\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003EOverall, this legislation is in the best interest of workers. The Labour Party is against it because it is about choice. The National Party supports this bill and looks forward to its passage through the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022 data-id=\u00228c3cd415731144058507376d99b94a68\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000820\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228c3cd415731144058507376d99b94a68\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I am a bit unhappy about having to address another bill attacking workers\u2019 rights, the Holidays Amendment Bill, on the same day. However, that is the agenda of this Government. Labour understands that that is what the Government is doing. It has made its intentions very clear, and I think this is just the beginning of what we will see from the Minister of Labour. She has not been able to deny a whole lot of things, including undermining or changing the Minimum Wage Act, so I think we can look forward to a whole lot more. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000821\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003ETo everybody listening out there, I say that I hope they understand that today we debated the Employment Relations Amendment Bill, which still has its third reading to go. It does away with workers\u2019 rights in their first 90 days of employment and restricts access to advice from union representatives in the workplace. That was the first bill. In the second bill, we are now debating the issues of the selling off of the fourth week of annual leave, making it possible for employers to decide when alternative holidays may be taken, and the possibility of employers making workers get a sick note after 1 day\u2019s sickness. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000822\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EI will address the matter of choice, which the previous speaker, David Bennett, went into. Let us be clear about the choice that is being offered with the fourth week of annual leave. I am absolutely, totally opposed to the provision, and I will get into that a little bit more. The only choice that is given to workers under the Holidays Amendment Bill is the choice to ask\u2014to go down on their knees and ask\u2014permission from their employer to cash up their annual leave. Who gets to decide if they get the cash? The employer does. That is not a choice. What is the choice? Where is the choice in that? The Minister said that everyone is incredibly happy about it. Well, I must say that I think workers will take up this provision only because they have not had a pay rise. Once workers understand that the choice is all on the employers\u2019 side and that they have been conned, I do not think they will be as happy as that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000823\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EThe other choice in the bill is for the employers to decide when workers take their public holiday. A worker works on a public holiday, when everybody else has the day off with their families, and becomes entitled to an alternative day off. Under current law, workers get to decide when they would like to take that alternative day. They get a period of time\u2014I think it is a year\u2014and then if they cannot reach agreement, the employer decides. Under this bill, the employer gets to decide almost immediately. The difficulty with that is that workers who have to work on Christmas Day, for example, will not really get any say or any choice about when they have the alternative day off. Many workers will be enjoying their Christmas Day the following Thursday or Friday when their husband or their partner is back at work and their kids have gone off on holiday to the beach somewhere. So there is no choice in that issue, either. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000824\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EThe last matter of choice I address is the choice that this bill gives employers to demand a sick note for illness on the first day of a worker\u2019s absence due to sickness.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000825\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002200f164bffea14699967b4b737fe94f79\u0022\u003EHon Parekura Horomia\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s sharing and caring!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000826\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002298ab6b078b664f429086f8d12f9f6eed\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON\u003C/span\u003E: Yes. Really, really good\u2014the choice to drag a sick child out of bed and drag them off\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000827\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229092dff46f9b417eb8c33b125b07dd6c\u0022\u003EHon Lianne Dalziel\u003C/span\u003E: How much does it cost to go to the doctor?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000828\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f241fb231dd1475298435d515105a416\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, quite a lot. But, to be fair, the bill does provide that the employer\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000829\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eb6447f2de57455ca631c7e6c75a9af2\u0022\u003EHon Lianne Dalziel\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, the employer pays.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000830\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d454d5c2395f4e0b9fe9281ceda4ca34\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014pays the reasonable cost. The bill does not include the cost of a worker having to find a babysitter to look after the other kids. It does not include the cost of driving to the doctor. It does not include the time that people will lose from their job while they are waiting at the doctor.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226e74a60c074f4d778f503aa44b3579b9\u0022\u003EHon Lianne Dalziel\u003C/span\u003E: The doctors want this?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000832\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022219b05bfd7f7476aa186aabc6c358089\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON\u003C/span\u003E: No, the doctors do not want this. That choice has not been offered to the doctors. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000833\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EGoing back to the select committee process, I say that I was a member of the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee, and I recall that it was not a fair process. It is not a fair process that such a substantive issue that affects every worker in New Zealand is yet again rushed through under urgency. Submitters had 3 weeks to make submissions on this bill, along with the bill alongside it, the Employment Relations Amendment Bill. These are the biggest changes to the terms and conditions of workers\u2014or the biggest attack on them, actually\u2014since the 1990s. It is a huge change that affects every single worker in the country: every single wage earner and salary earner, from those who earn very little to those who earn a lot. One would have thought that people would be given a bit more time to make submissions. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000834\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EWe did not have hundreds of submissions, as the Minister said; we had thousands. There were thousands and thousands of submissions. The three key measures in the Holidays Amendment Bill that people objected to were the fourth week of annual leave being up for grabs, employers being able to make a choice about when workers get to take their alternative public holiday, and the sick leave provision.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000835\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EI will go back to the 2009 review of the Holidays Act, which was where this all started. It was a tripartite process. The review was conducted by the Government with Business New Zealand and the Council of Trade Unions involved. The Council of Trade Unions entered that review in good faith because one of the underpinning requirements of the review was that the Holidays Act could be changed, but entitlements could not be reduced. That is why the Council of Trade Unions went into it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000836\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EThat sounds really hollow now, because that is what this bill does. It reduces entitlements and it undermines the fourth week\u2019s holiday. It means that once again New Zealand workers will be comparing their entitlements to what happens in Australia and saying that it looks pretty good over there. Although Australian workers have had 4 weeks\u2019 annual leave since 1974, New Zealand workers have had it for only a couple of years. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000837\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EOur objection to the cashing up of the fourth week\u2019s leave is that the whole thinking and reasoning behind adding a fourth week\u2019s leave, after 30 years of campaigning for it, is that New Zealand workers should have a fundamental right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation on working hours\u2014and they do not have that very often. It also includes holidays, but this provision undermines that. Actually, it is a fundamental human right. Putting the fourth week\u2019s leave up for sale is like saying that people can trade off the minimum wage or that they could have a few more hours for a bit less. These are minimum entitlements. They should not be tradeable. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000838\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EWe are concerned that the option to sell the fourth week\u2019s leave will be forced on the most vulnerable workers and it will become part of their employment agreement when they are in their 90-day trial. It will be put in with their pay. It will inevitably lead to the degrading of the fourth week\u2019s leave. It will become optional. Over time, it will be degraded. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000839\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EThen the question has to be asked that if workers are able to cash up 1 week\u2019s leave, why not 2 or 3? Why have holidays at all? Workers could just have the money. That would be really good! Then employers would never have to worry about having workers off on leave. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000840\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EThe other thing that I object to about this provision is that it will replace wage increases. That is the truth. Workers will line up and request their employer to cash up their leave because they have not had a wage increase. What has been happening to wages\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000841\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002276b8ac469a834ba58d9ba9d731bfc5ef\u0022\u003EHon Lianne Dalziel\u003C/span\u003E: Simon Bridges just said that that is right.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000842\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ab1f921cdc924b1c8e6d717e2667d585\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON\u003C/span\u003E: He just agreed; that is right. Wages in New Zealand have hardly moved under this Government; in fact, they have gone backwards in many cases. Minimum wage workers got only a miserly 25c an hour in the last minimum wage increase. Another one is coming soon and I hope that the Minister will be a little bit more generous this time round. Where workers do not get a pay increase, the cash for that extra week\u2019s leave will be looking pretty good.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000843\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a2d1c25e7d4e469d9e4d59a337ae5c7a\u0022\u003EHon Lianne Dalziel\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s worth 2 percent.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000844\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221cba89fed61b4752bc085f101cee63e1\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON\u003C/span\u003E: That is right. One of the things the Minister could have thought of was putting a provision in the bill so the ability to cash up the fourth week of leave cannot be substituted for a wage increase. That is what we did in the KiwiSaver legislation, but I think the Government removed it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000845\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EFinally, I say just quickly that the medical certificate provision is the silliest provision. It caused outrage and anger. Not only are people still outraged and angry about it, but also people cannot believe how silly it is or see what difference it will make. It will make a difference to workers who have to go off and find a doctor\u2014the doctors are already fully committed and we do not have enough\u2014but it will not change absenteeism. We have a big problem with workers who go to work when they are ill because they cannot afford to take the day off. This will bring fear to workers. They will be worried about taking that day off because of the real hassle\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000846\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ae2fedcd6f534f9793d67c1a67da71d2\u0022\u003EHon Lianne Dalziel\u003C/span\u003E: What if it\u2019s just a cold?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000847\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f0f01399ffa4435388f2f91a8a4133b9\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON\u003C/span\u003E: It could be just a cold, but they will still have to go and get a doctor\u2019s certificate. This provision has been ridiculed. I honestly thought that the Minister would have seen sense and withdrawn this provision. Who knows who made it up? It was never asked for in the review. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022 data-id=\u00226823b11649ad458e849f1cf41fbcc8e3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000848\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226823b11649ad458e849f1cf41fbcc8e3\u0022\u003EKEITH LOCKE (Green):\u003C/span\u003E The Green Party will be voting against the Holidays Amendment Bill. We put in a minority report alongside the Labour Party on this bill because it is a big step backwards for the people of New Zealand. The thing that seems to be lacking is any concern with people\u2019s wellbeing. There is a whole trend in politics today of not only measuring everything by money and GDP but also looking at the quality of life that people have. One of the things that has been under the Green logo in the past has been the slogan \u201CQuality of Life\u201D. My Green colleague Kennedy Graham had a bill before Parliament that unfortunately did not get the Government\u2019s support, which was the Public Finance (Sustainable Development Indicators) Amendment Bill. One of the concepts behind that was taking into account the environmental and social factors, the good things in life, rather than just looking at everything in terms of the amount of goods produced and money made. There is a whole history of developing what are called genuine progress indicators, or indexes of wellbeing, and in Canada there is a law that has well-being as a guideline. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000849\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EAll that leads to a concept under this bill of leisure. Leisure is important. As we move forward in this\u2014[Interruption] The continuing barrage on that side of the Chamber is not acceptable. This bill reduces our leisure time, and the progress we have made to get 4 weeks\u2019 leave and the progress that has been made in other countries that have 4 or 5 weeks\u2019 leave, such as France, where they also have a 35-hour working week. In New Zealand, people work on average more than 40 hours a week, even though 170 years ago Samuel Parnell went on strike for the 8-hour day and the 40-hour week. In some ways we are moving backwards, even though the productivity of our economy has gone ahead in leaps and bounds. The idea that to sell off one of our 4 weeks of holiday is a step forward is completely unacceptable.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000850\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bc4b69bf238d4aa4af7a842b45323318\u0022\u003EMichael Woodhouse\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s called choice.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000851\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220f985ff79c1042489f9fcf4ecb86cc34\u0022\u003EKEITH LOCKE\u003C/span\u003E: It is not just a question of choice and it should not be a question of choice. People should be paid sufficiently so that they do not sell off the leisure time that the whole of society is moving towards. The question of the sick day is again not a question of choice; it is reducing choice. It is\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000852\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223ee6f2bc32124ac997799469f5b5d7ac\u0022\u003EHon Parekura Horomia\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I was a bit concerned at the interjection made by the member for Tauranga that workers will continue to fork out for beneficiaries. I am not too sure what he was insinuating.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000853\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227fac87e054c84faca3b6692a9b82a621\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: I am not sure what the member is doing with that as a point of order, because it is not one.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000854\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ffe9f069aadd44009310017a746f7076\u0022\u003EKEITH LOCKE\u003C/span\u003E: The requirement for a medical certificate for 1 day off sick is completely unreasonable and impracticable. It is unreasonable because it just makes people sicker if they have to get out of bed and go to the doctor. It makes the people in the doctor\u2019s surgery sicker because they might catch an infection. It encourages people to not even bother with the doctor, to go to work when they are sick, to become sicker, and to infect their workmates. It is impractical too, because in many cases it is just not possible to get an appointment with a doctor on that particular day, as the Green Party discovered when it did a survey on this question. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000855\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThe other point in the bill about transferring holidays from the traditional ones such as Christmas Day to perhaps another day undermines an essential element of the leisure built into our statutory holidays system so that the whole family can be together on Christmas Day, Boxing Day, or at Easter. If we have all sorts of provisions to transfer holidays off those days, we will not have that community or family feeling around agreed quiet days in the year.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EI was disappointed that in question time today Kate Wilkinson rejected the idea of Mondayising Anzac Day and Waitangi Day. We already Mondayise Christmas Day and Boxing Day, and it is perfectly acceptable to do that. It does not mean that we do not celebrate Christmas on 25 December, but if Christmas Day or Boxing Day falls on a weekend we have holidays on the following Monday or Tuesday. That is how it could be with Waitangi Day and Anzac Day. I think we should have a vision of a future where we are working less, not more. Unfortunately this bill goes the other way around. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000857\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EIt will not lead to advances in workers\u2019 wages. For example, if the workers at one factory producing some form of engineering product are convinced to sell off a week of their holiday and get a bit of a wage increase, and if at another factory producing the same products the workers do not sell off their holiday, I am pretty sure we will still find that the competition between workers for their labour, and the employers in those two firms, will be in terms of an hourly rate. The hourly rate will equalise between the two as time goes on, but one set of workers would have sold off their annual holiday and the other set would not have. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000858\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EWhen all of this is tied in with the 90-day provision in the bill, pressure will be exercised over a section of the workforce to have those workers sell off their holidays and to bring sick notes. All the disadvantages of the previous bill we discussed\u2014the 90-day provision\u2014will tend to apply to make workers accept a reduction of their annual holidays, to shift their holidays off the existing statutory holidays, and also to force them, for unreasonable reasons, to go to the doctor for 1 day\u2019s absence. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000859\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThat is not where we should be going. We should be more like countries like France with 5 weeks\u2019 holiday and 35-hour weeks. The French had big mobilisations to protect their pension system. We should be determined not only to protect what we have but also to advance it, to improve leisure in this society, to be able to share around work, and to have flexible working hours, which is another aspect of quality of life that was in the bill my colleague Sue Kedgley put before this Parliament. Unfortunately that bill was also knocked over by this present Government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000860\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EMany submissions were made to the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee, particularly in relation to employers being able to require a sick note for 1 day\u2019s absence when they can already do that under the law if there is a real reason, like someone taking off 10 consecutive Mondays and having 3-day weekends. Submission after submission said how onerous and impractical the new provisions would be. Surely the Government should listen to what the people say on matters such as this. If we look at the clean, green image of New Zealand, we see that it is an image of a country that is desirable to come to not only in terms of its environment but also its relaxed, friendly people and all that sort of thing. We are creating very much the opposite image internationally if we say we are going to, in effect, reduce the holidays people have, and if we are much tighter in relation to their taking time off work when they are sick and all those sorts of things. It is the wrong image in comparison to the one that we want to portray to the world. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022 data-id=\u0022a706be45a36b401b8bda4def9f2adc4b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000861\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a706be45a36b401b8bda4def9f2adc4b\u0022\u003EHon HEATHER ROY (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E I rise to speak on the second reading of the Holidays Amendment Bill on behalf of the ACT Party. The ACT Party does not sit on the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee so we did not sit through the submissions, but we are absolutely delighted with the outcome of this bill and we will be supporting it wholeheartedly. This bill, at a very high level, is about choice. It is about reaching decisions by agreement\u2014something that seems to have been completely lost on the other side of the House. It is about providing flexibility in the workforce. These are all things that will help with productivity and stimulate economic growth, which is something this Government takes very seriously.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000862\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003EIt has been a great day in this House. Firstly, we passed the 90-day trial bill. We are absolutely delighted that that legislation will now be extended to all workplaces. Again, this will provide choice and flexibility in the workforce. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000863\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f03d76b5997c4758bbfa1f8107377695\u0022\u003EDarien Fenton\u003C/span\u003E: Everyone has to say thank you to the ACT Party.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000864\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c9adc68aea3b4212ae0d875d11f8bdb4\u0022\u003EHon HEATHER ROY\u003C/span\u003E: Already, as predicted, the trade unionists on the other side of the House are becoming wound up and I am sure they will become more and more vocal as this speech goes on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000865\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003EBefore we start looking at what exactly Labour dislikes about this bill, I think we should look at what the bill does allow. Firstly, there are three main areas where we will see change. The first change is that by agreement\u2014and \u201Cby agreement\u201D is a very important part of this provision\u20141 week of an employee\u2019s minimum entitlement to annual holidays will be allowed to be traded for a cash payment to the employee. The second change we will see is employers and employees allowed to agree to the transfer of the observance of a public holiday to another working day. The third change is the provision for employers to request proof of sickness or injury within the first three consecutive calendar days of an employee taking sick leave without first having reasonable grounds to suspect that the sick leave is not genuine, and in a moment I will come to why that is important. These three provisions, along with the others in the bill that I have not mentioned but which were well outlined by the Minister of Labour, will provide choice and flexibility in the workplace. I reiterate that these decisions will be reached by agreement between employee and employer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000866\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003EOne of the reasons that I think members opposite object so violently not just to the 90-day trial bill but also to the provisions in this particular bill is that they do not have any trust. They do not think that things can happen without outside interference. They do not believe that an employee and an employer can sit down together and work out the provisions that are best for each individual and for mutual benefit. Labour thinks that there are no good employers. Labour members do not trust a single employer in this country.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000867\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b2637cbe2c6e446983e48d29b89fc44c\u0022\u003ECarol Beaumont\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s not true. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000868\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002254db1e162ed04d78958486b1f6c7ad64\u0022\u003EHon HEATHER ROY\u003C/span\u003E: There they go; they are getting wound up. Labour members do not think there are any employees who do not act and behave in an exemplary manner. They do not think there has ever been an employee who might swing the lead when it comes to sickness. They do not believe there are employees who might think that they feel like a day off so they take a mental health day when, in fact, there is nothing wrong with them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000869\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022badb0a39-849c-462a-b32f-77fc017c9fc2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022661ca102ec994c4f9c7befec42617921\u0022\u003ESimon Bridges\u003C/span\u003E: They know what that\u2019s like.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000870\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221ca17187376b4cf09e91ed799c3afa1a\u0022\u003EHon HEATHER ROY\u003C/span\u003E: That is right. How often does that happen? Every single one of us in this House knows that these things happen. For too long the balance has not been right between the rights of the employee and the rights of the employer. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000871\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022badb0a39-849c-462a-b32f-77fc017c9fc2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226cd2c34c27734d08bf77f0140c75330c\u0022\u003ESimon Bridges\u003C/span\u003E: Fairness went only one way with Labour.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000872\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e3511860ae6c4e7a88b914c493970bf8\u0022\u003EHon HEATHER ROY\u003C/span\u003E: As Mr Bridges has just said, fairness is a very important thing in the workplace. We hear about fairness on behalf of employees, but we hear nothing from members opposite about fairness when it comes to employers. If we are going to have settled workplaces, we need to have choice, fairness, and flexibility.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000873\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003EThe Green member who spoke before me, Keith Locke, talked about quality of life. He talked about quality of life as if only the 122 parliamentarians in this House can determine what that quality of life should be for people. I am not sure whether he thought for a moment that what I consider to be quality of life might not be the same as what he determines quality of life to be. It is individuals who determine what quality of life is for themselves, for their family, and for their particular situation. It is they who should be able to decide whether they want to take 3 weeks annual leave and cash in 1 week because they might need some extra cash\u2014they might have something they want to buy\u2014or whether they take the full 4 weeks of annual leave. The important thing is that it is done by agreement\u2014by agreement between employee and employer. That is what will be in the law. It is not for parliamentarians to tell people what will give them quality of life. That is for people to determine for themselves. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000874\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003ESome of the accusations that came from members on the other side of the House when we talked about cashing in the extra week of annual leave were absolutely ridiculous. One of those members should stand and answer this question for me: what about those people who do not take all of their annual leave, but when they leave a job they have a huge amount of annual leave accumulated and they are paid off? Is that also selling out? If we take Labour\u2019s argument to an extreme, we would say that nobody can ever leave a job until all of their annual leave is worked out. What is the difference between cashing up 1 week\u2019s annual leave every year from accumulating annual leave, as some people do, deliberately\u2014that is a choice on their behalf\u2014and having a large payout when they leave a job? Answer me that question. Those members are suddenly silent on the other side of the House; they cannot answer the question. The employer has to pay out that money, and they quite rightly should be able to do so.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000875\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003EWe hear all this talk of quality of life, which apparently we are much better at determining for individuals than they are themselves. We hear about the attacking of workers\u2019 rights, but never about the attacking of employers\u2019 work. What this bill is about, and what the 90-day trial bill before it was about, is making choices possible for employees and for employers. It is about sitting down and working out in a workplace what is best for both parties and getting a win-win result. But the Opposition do not believe that that is possible.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000876\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003EThe difference between members on this side of the House and members on the other side of the House is that we trust people to be able to make rational decisions, for employers and employees to get together and do that, and members on that side of the House do not. That was very evident when Labour was in Government and employment bills like this one were before the House. We would see the union officials wandering around the lobbies. It was very clear then where the emphasis was coming from. It was very clear where the Labour Party funding was probably coming from. It was very clear that they were pulling the strings, that the unions were leading the charge. But members on this side of the House are able to make reasoned decisions that will provide choice for people, provide flexibility in the workforce, allow fairness for both sides\u2014employees and employers\u2014and, most important, allow all parties in the workplace to reach decisions by agreement. That is the way life works outside the workplace, and there is no reason why it should not work inside the workplace, too.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000877\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003EThe ACT Party very proudly not only supported the 90-day trial bill before this but also supports this Holidays Amendment Bill. It will make life better and make choices better for workers and for employers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022 data-id=\u0022f871d50b6f4648c99d730d9eda5d1a90\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000878\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f871d50b6f4648c99d730d9eda5d1a90\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE (National):\u003C/span\u003E It is me again, the nemesis of those members on the Opposition side of the House. Do members know why? It is because I worked in the same area as they did. I saw what sorts of dirty tricks they got up to when they were employed. I saw with my own eyes the carry-on in those days. I saw it; I am a witness to their dirty dealings. I will take just a couple of minutes of the House\u2019s time on the second reading of the Holidays Amendment Bill. First of all, I thank my colleague Michael Woodhouse for allowing me to jump in front of him to speak. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000879\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003EI want to talk about this thing called holiday, and where the 4 weeks of holiday actually came from. Some members might think that it was a Labour idea. I thank my researcher for this information. Some of us would have thought that 4 weeks\u2019 holiday was a Labour policy from way back. But, lo and behold, when we did our research, and I have it on good authority from my researcher, we found that Matt Robson brought it to the House. But it was opposed by the Labour Government. It was opposed by the Labour side. It came about only because Matt Robson forced them to do it. That is what happened. Is it not funny and interesting that we get this idea that the Labour Party is the flag bearer of workers\u2019 rights\u2014but it is only when it suits it?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000880\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c186d0a2-99f4-408b-9b4d-d484cf19724d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227eafa28f217c4120a7f069bd91859241\u0022\u003EHon Lianne Dalziel\u003C/span\u003E: What, Raymond?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000881\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c5d4666bed614210bdb9d9d16b692d55\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE\u003C/span\u003E: Absolutely! My name is Raymond, not \u201Cmental\u201D. Let us talk about what Labour members really want.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000882\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229995d38be080431faef45d506a38d62f\u0022\u003EMoana Mackey\u003C/span\u003E: Why did you have to get your researcher to research something that happened when you were in Parliament?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000883\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002298779bcb57dd48faa6154da542db03a8\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE\u003C/span\u003E: Actually, it did not happen when I was in Parliament. There is another fallacy. I was not here when the fourth week of holidays came in; I was not here when that provision was brought in, under the pressure of Matt Robson who was an Alliance member. It certainly was not supported by Labour. But I digress. All we can hear from that front bench of Labour\u2014Darien Fenton, Carol Beaumont, all on the front bench; oh my God, what a team\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000884\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229655055155ca4acdad166a85a82685cc\u0022\u003EDarien Fenton\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I am enjoying the member\u2019s speech, but I do want to bring to his attention that my name is pronounced \u201CDaarien\u201D. It is not pronounced \u201CDarien\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000885\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a5a8d3c9d1d1433e99ad6be13aa0ccf3\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: Please use the appropriate and correct title.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000886\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228df1f3e2e0264ff28bd341b27c34bd9a\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you for that enlightenment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000887\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cfde4c52b0ee4554936e315e58613bee\u0022\u003EHon Member\u003C/span\u003E: Get your hand out of your pocket.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000888\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222012ccb08c754c3f9b480d4602ed4288\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE\u003C/span\u003E: Why? Is the member jealous? The holiday is a worker\u2019s holiday. It belongs to him or her, not to the Labour Party. That holiday belongs to the workers. It is the property of the workers. It is a property right. If it is the workers\u2019 property, it should be up to the workers whether they want to trade it in, or not. It is a holiday.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000889\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022490ccdbf-7c22-4e12-98f2-f3aa08f8e676\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e990b96b2eb94f38a3a63de293ca77df\u0022\u003EIain Lees-Galloway\u003C/span\u003E: Is this all holidays?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000890\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002255e7905508834b95ac1ca11a97f26b2c\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE\u003C/span\u003E: I ask the member not to be silly. What we get from those members is that they have not read the bill. It is not about trading in all holidays. It is about the ability to trade one holiday\u2014one measly little week\u2019s holiday. Labour members over there are trying to begrudge workers one small week that they own. It is their property. Those members are saying no, they will not let workers trade it in, because they do not think they should. Never mind what the poor person in Porirua thinks, never mind what the poor person in Cannons Creek thinks\u2014that is their holiday, not the Labour Party\u2019s holiday. Property rights are something that our party and the ACT Party have built their reputation on, and we will not see\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000891\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022490ccdbf-7c22-4e12-98f2-f3aa08f8e676\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223d109d56c2d940769ec904572830165a\u0022\u003EIain Lees-Galloway\u003C/span\u003E: Property rights haven\u2019t come up that often when I\u2019ve been doorknocking.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000892\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022802e191d9d8241428e69f4f4d210d440\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE\u003C/span\u003E: So workers do not have property rights? According to Iain Lees-Galloway, workers do not have any property rights. That is what he said, and that is what he means. It is disgusting. If any party is the defender of workers\u2019 rights, it is the National Party, not the Labour Party. I commend the bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022 data-id=\u0022b45ff8660a3d40df856bec4c23af3137\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b45ff8660a3d40df856bec4c23af3137\u0022\u003ECAROL BEAUMONT (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I am almost at a loss for words\u2014but before people get too excited, I did say \u201Calmost\u201D. I have heard so much absolute drivel in the last couple of contributions to this debate on the Holidays Amendment Bill. They have been factually incorrect and have absolutely attributed views to this side of the House that bear no resemblance to reality. I will start by saying that comments that Labour is anti-business are completely wrong. In fact, sitting behind me is the Hon Lianne Dalziel, who as a Minister did more for regulatory reform than any Minister for quite some time. If the Labour Party was anti-business, I do not know why she would have bothered to do that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000894\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EI stand to say that this Holidays Amendment Bill is another bill that is unjustified, unnecessary, unbalanced, and unfair. Somebody from the other side of the House talked earlier about the fact that the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) and the Holidays Amendment Bill go together. On that point I quite agree, they do, because underlying them are the same sort of principles of being backward-looking, taking away rights from people, and removing the opportunity to move forward in our workplaces. Contrary to what Heather Roy said, the quality of workplace relations and the building of workplace productivity is something that this side of the House cares about very much. Our view is that they should be built on workers\u2019 rights, high trust, lifting wages rather than reducing them, and improving conditions, not reducing them. There should be a collective voice so that people can genuinely have a say and contribute at work. Some of the better employers in this country\u2014not the mates of ACT\u2014tell us that having a highly engaged workforce, and having a vehicle where the workforce\u2019s concerns and views can be put on the table and worked through jointly with the employer, is how to lift workplace performance. I wanted to put those things on the table, because I have heard a lot of rubbish from the other side of the House about Labour\u2019s perspective that is just untrue. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000895\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EI will talk about what the Holidays Amendment Bill means for both the quality of working life and the quality of lifestyle. Basically, this bill undermines the chances of having work-life balance and improving the quality of not only working life but also life outside of work. Before I get into that, I reinforce the points made about the regulatory impact statement. I thought it was quite telling that Trevor Mallard\u2019s whole speech was able to be built around all of the negative things that are in the regulatory impact statement. It is absolutely extraordinary that we are dealing with a bill that is flawed from one end to the other. Even the Department of Labour, the Government agency dealing with this bill, has put that clearly in the regulatory impact statement. It says: \u201CThe analysis of the policy options under consideration is constrained by the limited availability of objective evidence of problems with the current holidays legislation, both on the type and extent of any problems. There is a lack of robust data available to quantify the potential impacts of the policy options considered.\u201D I know that probably doesn\u2019t matter to some members across the House, because why should we let the facts stand in the way of making changes? But it is pretty important if the Government\u2019s own department that deals with this legislation tells it things like that. I would have thought that, generally, it would be worth thinking about. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000896\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EThere are three areas that I will particularly focus on. They are three areas that I think will have a negative impact on work-life balance for the New Zealand workforce and our families. The first of these areas is a backwards and cynical policy shift. It is a backward-looking and cynical shift because it is happening at a time when people are under a lot of financial pressure. Wages are barely moving; in fact, in some cases household incomes are going down. Costs are rising and there is high unemployment, yet we are saying that giving people the opportunity to sell their statutory minimum holidays, in that environment, is a free choice. Actually, I think it is a misguided policy at a time when what we really need to see is wages shifting. We have a low-wage economy where we are 30 percent behind Australia, and that gap is getting wider under this National Government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000897\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EThis is a proxy for shifting wages. Leave has absolute value for individuals and the community. It cannot just be compensated for by money. Why stop at one week? If the choice to sell holidays is such a good free choice and it should all be up to the individual, why do we not say that all 4 weeks could be sold? That could be an individual choice as well. The reality is that leave has value. It has value for rest and recreation for the worker, but it has wider community value, too. It has value for families. In my previous role, I did a lot of work on the issue of work-life balance. We had a lot of research done. We looked at various research from around the world and we looked at what mattered to people. There was a very interesting piece of research done in Australia by a woman called Barbara Pocock where she talked to a lot of teenagers. She was trying to find out what they valued and wanted more of. Do members know what it was? It was not money and it was the not the latest technological device; it was time with their parents. That was the thing those teenagers wanted more of\u2014time with their parents. Like New Zealand workers, the people in the study were working very long hours. In fact, New Zealand has one of the longest working hours cultures in the OECD. The recession has probably impacted on that a bit with less overtime\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000898\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222c2be0f474dc4ae8ab3f076c5e10a0f0\u0022\u003EColin King\u003C/span\u003E: By how much?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000899\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220271227377654324879a7d94a797e9b5\u0022\u003ECAROL BEAUMONT\u003C/span\u003E: By a lot, and I can get the member those figures. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000900\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EI go back to my point about families. We in this Chamber all know people who, on reaching retirement age and reflecting on their working lives, do not say that they wished they could have worked more hours. A lot of those people will reflect on the fact that they wished they had spent more time with their families. Holidays have real implications for family time as well as for the rest and recreation of the worker concerned. This so-called option will inevitably be forced on to low-income workers and the most vulnerable workers. In some cases, it will be used as a proxy or an alternative for a real wage increase. A way for workers to get a 2 percent wage increase will be to just sell a week\u2019s holiday. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000901\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EI conclude my comments on the fourth week\u2019s leave by saying that there has been a lot of rhetoric from the other side of the House about it being a choice, that people do not have to do it, and all of those things. Actually, it is an example of the imbalance I mentioned at the start, because, ultimately, it is up to the employer. The employer can have an absolute policy that says that no holidays will be sold in that workplace, full stop. So much for the great choice with the two parties sitting down together to work it out, but, no, it is the employer who can absolutely determine that matter. That is the point I want to make on holidays. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000902\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EI say that the second thing is the most mean-spirited and unnecessary part of the bill in my opinion. It is the changes to alternative holidays, which are widely known as time in lieu. This is the time workers get when they work on a public holiday that would normally be a working day for them. The changes in this bill are so mean-spirited, they defy logic. Now, if agreement cannot be reached, the worker can determine when they will have their time in lieu. After all, they have worked on a day of great significance, on Christmas Day maybe, or Good Friday, or one of the public holidays when lots of their family and friends have time off. Often employers need people to work on those days. Employees work on that day, they are entitled to a day in lieu, and currently if agreement cannot be reached, they get to choose. The worker can choose another day that might have some value or significance for them. The balance in this regard is also changed. So I ask members: if agreement cannot be reached, who will make decision about when the day in lieu will be? It is no surprise; it will be the employer. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000903\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EThe Transport and Industrial Relations Committee received a very, very good submission made by an individual. Dennis Hickey is his name, and he is a bus driver for Howick and Eastern Buses in Auckland. He talked about this passionately. He absolutely understands that as a bus driver he needs to work on public holidays because people need to catch the bus. He absolutely accepts that that is part of his job and he does it in good spirit, but Mr Hickey said that if he works Christmas Day, why on earth, if they cannot reach agreement, should the employer be able to tell him that he might have a Wednesday off some time in March, when his wife is at work and his children are at school? That is how mean-spirited this bill is. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022 data-id=\u002232174faa2be24ccabb4f33978ecbea52\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000904\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002232174faa2be24ccabb4f33978ecbea52\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National):\u003C/span\u003E I begin by acknowledging the thanks from my colleague the Hon Tau Henare for allowing him to precede me in the second reading debate. I now realise why he wanted to speak earlier than me. It was because he stole my speech. I put on record that that is absolutely the last time I will share any threads of an idea of what my speech will be about. It was theft! But the issue was so important that it is worth continuing to flesh it out. We have heard members opposite say that Labour is somehow the champion of the fourth week of holiday, and that Labour has worked for 30 years for this workers\u2019 right. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000905\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003EI think that Labour\u2019s record on this needs bearing out. When the Holidays Bill was first introduced in 2003 it aimed to provide for a minimum of 3 weeks\u2019 paid annual leave, not 4 weeks. The Holidays Bill was referred to the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee and all the submissions were made on the likely outcome that the bill would have a 3-weeks\u2019 annual leave provision. At the same time, as my colleague Mr Henare mentioned, the select committee was considering the Holidays (Four Weeks Annual Leave) Amendment Bill, a member\u2019s bill from Matt Robson, a member of the Alliance, which party happened to be a confidence and supply partner of the previous Labour Government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000906\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003EThe business community, in particular, when making its submissions did not even take seriously the 4 weeks\u2019 annual leave provision, because the Prime Minister of the day, Prime Minister Clark, had ruled it out. It was said the Government simply would not mandate 4 weeks\u2019 paid annual leave. After the submissions had been heard and after the select committee went into deliberations, suddenly the 4 weeks\u2019 annual leave provision appeared. There was no opportunity for submissions to be reopened and reconsidered on this major change to the legislation, the amendments to which we are now considering. The members opposite can moan about having only 3 weeks to consider these changes, but at least this Government was up front about what these changes mean. One can only speculate why the Holidays Bill, when introduced in 2003, made no mention of 4 weeks\u2019 annual leave, but suddenly that is what happened. Was this a change of heart? Why did it take so long to enact the legislation? I was not a member of the House then so I can only speculate as to why that was the case. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000907\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003EI note that the Holidays Act came into effect the year before the 2005 election, probably at the time Labour was preparing its election manifesto. But it did not introduce the fourth week of annual leave into the legislation then; it left it out there for 3 more years, so that workers would not be eligible for it until 1 April 2007. Workers could then have a whole other year in which to accrue those entitlements. When did we get to those entitlements? It was in April 2008, which was another election year. So the electorate can be the judge of whether this was some principled change or a cynical election ploy. I think Mr Cunliffe gave us the insight into the answer to that question today in the Chamber, before lunch, when he said that the people of New Zealand elected a National Government, because they were dumb. That is what he said, so that is what Labour thinks of New Zealanders. They are dumb when they do not vote Labour, too dumb to understand the cynical nature of the passage of the 4 weeks\u2019 annual leave legislation, and certainly too dumb to think for themselves and make a choice about whether to cash up that fourth week\u2019s holiday. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000908\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003EBut in all of this someone forgot to give Phil Goff the union memo, did they not? That memo obviously came from the Council of Trade Unions and stated: \u201CLabour do not support this change.\u201D Good old Phil trotted off and said that as long as it was given freely, as long as there was agreement, he did not have a problem with it. Then what happened? \u201CHang on Phil, better check in with Helen first\u201D\u2014Kelly or Clark. It probably does not matter. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000909\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002223de6bd3-0482-495d-88f4-7cc3f75d8442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f4e3089c40eb4d7787a777a0acf2940a\u0022\u003EHon Nathan Guy\u003C/span\u003E: He got a text from her.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220d5bb111a0a44b279cd2706f10443f83\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE\u003C/span\u003E: Exactly! \u201CWrong answer Phil; jerk the lead; we\u2019re not going to support this.\u201D So much for thinking for oneself! I have more faith in New Zealand workers. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000911\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ec7cc5adbb0d4283bfd9832468f50773\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Not the Hobbit workers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000912\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dde98fa87800479ba7473d41608b2377\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE\u003C/span\u003E: Well, Helen Kelly still has to get over the fact that our Prime Minister will not go running to the Council of Trade Unions every time the Government wants to make a change. The council had 9 years of that under Labour, but life has changed. I have more faith in New Zealand workers, and more confidence in their ability to think for themselves and decide whether to take that fourth week\u2019s holiday. I support this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022 data-id=\u0022e1602571641c4bf9b1352355fdacf136\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000913\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e1602571641c4bf9b1352355fdacf136\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E Seriously, we are being lectured on abuse of process by National. We are here under urgency forcing this stuff through and we have disbanded entire democratically elected councils under urgency under National, yet the previous speaker, Michael Woodhouse, has the audacity to stand up in this House and say that the previous Labour Government abused process.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000914\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220359b13220534c1c9365ed06bf45ba63\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: No, it wasn\u2019t.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000915\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229d6fa54472084d42b08db33398d18ac6\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY\u003C/span\u003E: What was that?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000916\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002201e343c25a394155ad08cfa1a159920c\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: It was an audition for a Minister\u2019s job.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000917\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002232091b29224d4cc5b0b51884948202ff\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, it was an audition for a Minister\u2019s job! Look how the member feigns that that is not what it was. He thinks that it is not that at all, and asks how we could say that. Secretly, he is really pleased that Trevor Mallard just said that. Secretly, he is right chuffed. He will go back to his office with a big smile on his face, and say that Trevor Mallard has endorsed him in the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000918\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EThe speeches made by National and ACT Party members in this part of the debate have shown how out of touch they are with reality. They said that the Holidays Amendment Bill is about choice and about employees being able to cash in a week\u2019s annual leave.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000919\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225d2d963c50804c569ea925166ee1c217\u0022\u003EHon Tau Henare\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s right. I\u2019m glad you agree.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000920\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224482c523f2e143a29d273e7261155a29\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY\u003C/span\u003E: The fact is that Mr Henare is the worst union organiser in the history of the universe, ever. He was a Trojan Horse put into bring down the union movement, but fortunately he failed. Mr Henare does not understand that when people are living on the breadline, when they cannot pay their bills, when they have not had a pay increase, when the National Government promised before the election not to increase GST and then increased GST after the election, when all their costs have gone up, when their rent has gone up, and when they have no money to feed and clothe their kids, Mr Henare says that those people are in a position to choose to cash in a week\u2019s leave. I suggest to Mr Henare that they would probably like to keep their annual leave, be able to pay the bills, and have a proper wage increase. They would like to be able to pay the bills without having to give up time with their family. It is not choice; it is like saying that a family chooses not to pay their rent and then they get evicted, that they choose not to be able to afford to send their kids on a school trip, and that they choose not to be able to afford to buy clothes for their kids. That is exactly the same\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000921\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022badb0a39-849c-462a-b32f-77fc017c9fc2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224c62ae1b78aa4b569b02c8e91779d79c\u0022\u003ESimon Bridges\u003C/span\u003E: Some do.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000922\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002205fa00957cf04c3ebd37afb458ee425a\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Simon Bridges says they do. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000923\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022badb0a39-849c-462a-b32f-77fc017c9fc2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a1cf7ebd3e6d4a7d99def8cdbab399f1\u0022\u003ESimon Bridges\u003C/span\u003E: Did not.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000924\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c3b899513706406b87d060a4d26a4126\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Simon Bridges says they do. The Government is so out of touch that it thinks families are choosing not to pay their rent. Families have seen the cost of living spiral upwards, wages stall, and rents spiral upwards. The Government increased GST and made it worse for those families, and Mr Bridges says they are choosing not to feed and clothe their kids and choosing not to pay their rent. That is offensive and that sums up National.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EThis bill is not about choice. People are being forced into cashing up a week\u2019s annual leave because they are so desperate for money to bridge the gap at the moment. It comes back to what my colleagues have been saying: why do we have annual leave? Do we have it because we think it is a nice thing? We have it because we know that it improves productivity when workers are rested, when they feel that they have an adequate balance between time at home with their family and time at work. Workers who are stressed about what is happening to their kids at home unattended will not be as productive as workers who are able to be at home if they need to be. The holiday is there to make sure that workers are more productive and that they get time with their families.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000926\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EIt is very telling that National and ACT see annual leave only in terms of the dollar cost. They do not see it in terms of the value it has for families. They do not see it in terms of the benefit of families being able to have mum and dad at home for 4 weeks of the year, to be able to go on holidays together, and spend time together as a family. They see it only in terms of the bottom-line dollar cost. That is very telling about this National-ACT Government. This policy comes from National, who at the last election kept talking about supporting families, and being family friendly. Well, it has deserted hard-working New Zealand families who are not able to pay their bills currently, and who are struggling to get by. The Government\u2019s answer is not to make sure that every New Zealander has a living wage that can cover his or her costs, and that the cost of living does not spiral out of control to the point where families struggle to pay rent and put food on the table. The Government\u2019s answer is to put those people in a position where they have no other option but to cash in a week\u2019s leave, and then call it \u201Cchoice\u201D. It is not choice, and the ACT member needs to understand that. If someone is in a desperate situation, it is not choice. When there is no other option other than being evicted and not feeding one\u2019s family, it is not choice. All the rhetoric in the world from the ivory towers inhabited by ACT members and supporters will not change the fact that for the families on the ground, it is not choice. Families do not think it is a choice, but, of course, the ACT member and National members think they know better. I suggest the member talks to families who are struggling at the moment, rather than piously coming into this House and telling those families what they should think and how they should feel. He should not be saying that it is a great day for choice and freedom, when employees cannot pay the bills, when they will not be able to spend that extra week with their families although they would love to, and when the Government will not fix any of the actual issues regarding their families.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000927\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003ENowhere is the ideological bent of this bill more obvious than when it comes to the issue of sick leave. As colleagues have pointed out time and time again, if employers currently believe that someone is abusing sick leave provisions, then they can ask for a medical certificate. But National says that anyone who is away from work has to go to the doctor and get a medical certificate, even if it is for the flu or a cold. As we know, doctors often tell people to stay at home, go to bed, get lots of fluids. They tell people not to come to a doctor\u2019s surgery, because there is nothing that they can actually do for a viral infection. National and ACT say no, those people should have to get a doctor\u2019s certificate or go into work and make everyone else sick. That is a really good idea. They are so ideologically bent against employees. Heather Roy\u2014I cannot remember if it was Heather Roy or Tau Henare\u2014said that Labour thinks\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000928\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b5792687b92f4ab7b226c5fdeefc8343\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: They are so similar. They look the same.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000929\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223dd099882b084134b8f046efcc929f25\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY\u003C/span\u003E: They are. It is very difficult to tell them apart.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000930\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224331868cd8a245a6adaaa6259679339b\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I get them mixed up all the time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000931\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226f9ac8d2b3694f16a25f86ac00ac6d09\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY\u003C/span\u003E: I know. We can only tell them apart when they are together. That is the problem. She said that Labour thinks that all employers are bad and all employees are good. The fact is that we do not. We understand that employment law is a balance and it needs to address issues right across the spectrum. National members think that every single employee who takes a sick day must be rorting it, so we need to make all of them go to a doctor to get a medical certificate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000932\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ef341b15724c4e9b933f7727f9609533\u0022\u003EDarien Fenton\u003C/span\u003E: Shirkers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000933\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220f9d3b35d3f64de7b0fc4a9779be8495\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY\u003C/span\u003E: They say that those people are all shirkers; that is right. That is despite the fact that currently if an employer has reason to believe that an employee keeps taking Mondays or Fridays off, or that that employee is always taking the day off whenever there is a really nice day, or, as my colleague Carol Beaumont mentioned, they are seen on TV at the Rugby Sevens, then an employer can ask for a sick leave certificate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000934\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d67b8e09515c456eb46e2ed701b0f85d\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Helen did that to me a couple of times.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022224dce76a1ec4effa9b50cd4a5c8adbe\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY\u003C/span\u003E: Helen did that to Trevor Mallard quite a lot and I can tell members that the law worked just fine. But it is totally impractical for National to say that every employee who gets sick has to get a medical certificate regardless of the fact. General practitioners do not want it, because they do not want to have to see people whom they do not need to see. In fact, employees may not be able to always get an appointment, and I ask what happens then. If employees cannot get an appointment, I ask whether they will get penalised under this ridiculously unworkable legislation that National has come up with. I am not the only one saying that; Treasury, the Ministry of Economic Development, and the regulatory impact statement also say that is unworkable. Suddenly people will be penalised for something that is outside of their control.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000936\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EI want to refer to the 2009 National Employers Wage and Salary Survey. Let us put some facts on the table about sick leave. The survey found that the average number of sick days that New Zealanders took was 4.6 days, which is actually far lower than everywhere else in the world. So I ask where the mischief is that we are trying to fix with this legislation. As we found out, none of the Government departments collects statistics on this, so this measure cannot be based on any kind of evidence; it is just ideological nonsense. Research conducted by Southern Cross Healthcare found that the majority of the costs incurred by employers for sick workers was not from sick leave, but from the lost productivity of employees who still go to work when they are sick. That is the big issue. That is the issue that, if we wanted to address productivity, would have some impact. When workers go to work when they are sick, they are less productive and they make other people sick. That is an issue that could be dealt with. The issue of employees taking sick days has no impact on that, and if the Government was serious about productivity, it would address that issue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f99bcf9e-1ad4-4ed4-9a97-1cccb5b1e11a\u0022 data-id=\u0022dc55ac102a4247d4ae2220a6702d41fd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000937\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f99bcf9e-1ad4-4ed4-9a97-1cccb5b1e11a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022dc55ac102a4247d4ae2220a6702d41fd\u0022\u003EDr JACKIE BLUE (National):\u003C/span\u003E I am pleased to speak to the second reading of the Holidays Amendment Bill. I will make sure I finish the speech so that we can conclude the second reading before the dinner break. The legislation will improve the overall function of the Holidays Act 2003, the principal Act, parts of which have been criticised as being overly complex and prescriptive.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000938\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f99bcf9e-1ad4-4ed4-9a97-1cccb5b1e11a\u0022\u003EThis legislation is part of a suite of employment law designed to grow the economy, boost jobs and living standards, and generally move the country forward. This is the main focus for the Government, and I make no apology for that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000939\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f99bcf9e-1ad4-4ed4-9a97-1cccb5b1e11a\u0022\u003EThis legislation contains practical solutions for employers and employees. It will help to reduce compliance costs, thereby giving businesses confidence and the opportunity to grow. It will resolve workplace disputes faster and provide choices for employees and employers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000940\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f99bcf9e-1ad4-4ed4-9a97-1cccb5b1e11a\u0022\u003EA number of provisions that we have already discussed today have been hotly debated. I also want to touch on the agreement and provision in the bill for 1 week of an employee\u2019s annual holiday to be swapped for cash if he or she so chooses. There has been widespread support from many employees. They want choice, and this change gives them exactly that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000941\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f99bcf9e-1ad4-4ed4-9a97-1cccb5b1e11a\u0022\u003EWe campaigned as a party on this particular change, and this legislation achieves that. We believe in New Zealand workers, and we believe that they are best placed to make their own decisions about their own personal circumstances. Importantly, employers cannot apply pressure to employees to exchange holidays for cash; employees can decline any request. It is really a win-win situation for both employers and employees. We trust employees to make the decision that is best for them and their families. That is what we believe in, and we make no apology for that. It is great to see that the fourth week provision was supported by Phil Goff. He supported the provision, and he backed the Government policy. It is really good to see that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000942\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f99bcf9e-1ad4-4ed4-9a97-1cccb5b1e11a\u0022\u003EThere are many other excellent provisions. Amending the average daily pay will be welcomed by businesses. That issue has been quite confusing, and it is good to see clarity now in this particular area. The Opposition has talked about the request for proof of sickness or injury and how that might be used. An employer can, in the first 3 consecutive calendar days, ask an employee to produce a sickness certificate, but this would have to be done on reasonable grounds. Employers will not use this provision willy-nilly. They will have to cover the cost of the employee going to see the doctor and getting that certificate, so it will be done only when there are suspicious circumstances or a pattern of behaviour. I am quite sure it will not be used unless the concern is absolutely genuine. I will leave it at that. This is an excellent provision and I commend this bill to the House. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022 data-id=\u0022bbe489f2b2b44b888f562c577553df89\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000943\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bbe489f2b2b44b888f562c577553df89\u0022\u003ECOLIN KING (National\u2014Kaik\u014Dura):\u003C/span\u003E It has been very enlightening to listen to the debate during the second reading of the Holidays Amendment Bill. I would say on balance that it certainly reinforces choice. The National Government and the ACT Party certainly trust workers. We appreciate that there is a different view across the House. However, we must also be mindful that we have to reinforce our workers and I believe that providing for 1 week of holiday to be cashed up, at the worker\u2019s choice, is certainly a good idea. I commend the bill to the House. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022bec0c65bfd6545698b58652c1e4d320b\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendments recommended by the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee by majority be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 51\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\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=\u0022797a5b77f58a4910a720821a2dd3e2cd\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 Holidays Amendment Bill be now read a second time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 51\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill read a second time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000944\u0022\u003ESitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7 p.m.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000945\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022cb1956f54eeb415a98d0b4615e1c9ba2\u0022\u003EIn Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000946\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002245c665bcff0647efabe1c87ca301ea08\u0022\u003EPart 1  Amendments to principal Act\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022 data-id=\u0022bf6e9ac61ec74e30be0bf999d955f2d2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000947\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bf6e9ac61ec74e30be0bf999d955f2d2\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: The debate on this part includes schedule 1. I recognise the Hon Trevor Mallard.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u0022a68054f5a82e40b38f80efae5865146d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000948\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a68054f5a82e40b38f80efae5865146d\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E Only just, I think, with the bags under his eyes today, Mr Chairman.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000949\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022221f91ba36bf451fa6d4b05ba9a4fac5\u0022\u003ECharles Chauvel\u003C/span\u003E: But does he call you?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000950\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225130a039e4f044ebbac85b45421710f7\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: He calls me quite a few things, actually, but not normally from the Chair\u2014it is more when he is sitting next to me in the caucus room. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000951\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EAs is obvious from some of the amendments that have already been tabled in the House today\u2014and there will be more to come\u2014the Labour Opposition is attempting in this Committee stage to improve the Holidays Amendment Bill, not to the point where we think we will vote for it, but to the point where we think it would be less offensive to workers. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000952\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EI will go through some of the amendments that we are putting before the Committee so that members opposite can give them consideration. The first amendment would take out clause 13, \u201CRequirements for alternative holiday\u201D. Clause 13 provides: \u201CIf an employer and employee cannot agree \u2026 on when an alternative holiday is to be taken, the day must be taken on a date determined \u2026 by the employer.\u201D The amendment would take that clause out because we believe it is unfair for an employer to have the right to tell an employee that they must have a holiday on a particular date. To give an example, they could require someone who would otherwise be entitled to a holiday during the school holidays to take time off either in the school holidays or outside the school holidays, both of which could be inconvenient. We want to make sure this is a genuine agreement, not one imposed on workers, as would be the case. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000953\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EWe also make clear that rather than being driven by the employer, it should come from an employee\u2019s request. There has been a lot of talk by members opposite about choice and flexibility for workers. Well, let us test them on that with an amendment that indicates that these approaches should be based on choice. We will put forward an amendment that inserts something that was originally in the bill around the question of the changes being informed and voluntary. Again, it will be a test for National members opposite as to whether the requests, and the responses to the requests, should be informed and voluntary. That is the essence of the argument that members opposite have been making: that these changes should be informed and voluntary. The Government has removed those words. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000954\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003ECourts look at changes to legislation. When they are trying to determine intent, they look at phases of legislation. I can remember, going back to some of my earlier experiences in legislation\u2014even as far back as the 1980s\u2014the courts, in making decisions on particular cases going to what the intent of the Parliament was, looked at changes that Parliament had made as legislation was going through. I think the particular case that I can remember was a Court of Appeal case that flowed from the rape law reform legislation. The court looked at the legislation that went in, looked at the decisions of the select committee, and went behind the final words of the legislation and to the intent of the Parliament, because of the changes that were being made. It appears to be the case here\u2014and I would be interested in comments from the Minister in the chair, the Minister of Police, or other members opposite on whether it is the case that the removal of the words \u201Cinformed and voluntary\u201D could be taken to mean that, in fact, it does not have to be informed or voluntary, because those words have been removed. The other related suggestion around the proportion of annual holidays to be paid out is that they must be made in the absence of duress. It is certainly the view of the Labour Opposition that these decisions should not be made under duress; they should be informed and voluntary, and made in the absence of duress. There are also questions around how often these arrangements should be used; a series of amendments gives the Committee the opportunity to make a determination as to how often within a period of continuous employment these particular arrangements should be made. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000955\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EThere has been a lot of discussion within the House on the question of whether the current arrangements are adequate if an employer has any reasonable cause to believe that someone is throwing a sickie when they are not actually sick, and therefore on the question as to the necessity of this provision. I draw the Committee\u2019s attention at this stage to the regulatory impact statement as it relates to this group of clauses, in particular. It makes it clear that no case has been made, and there has been a determination of the Minister rather than evidence. I think we know this. We have all heard the evidence of Business New Zealand and others, who have said that this is not a priority area for them, and it is not an issue that they think is important. I think it was just a case of John Key being slightly short of material for a speech to the National Party conference, and therefore he decided to give wage earners and salary earners a kick. That is one of the things that Tories like doing at their annual conference: kicking people who work for a living as opposed to being born to rule, as a number of people there are. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000956\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EThere is the question of which days are determined, and we will be focusing on a number of public holidays as we move our way through. I think it is fair to say that there are a few things in this legislation where there is agreement across the Committee; I think there might be about three issues. We should be dealing with this bill in a proper way, clause by clause. I might say that it is getting to the point of ridiculousness to have a 19-clause bill divided into two parts. It is totally unnecessary. Substantial clauses in the bill are agreed on, and the Opposition is placed in the position of voting against stuff it believes in because it is tied up with clauses that, in fact, are clearly contrary to what most New Zealanders want. If the Attorney-General, who is in charge of the Parliamentary Counsel Office, dealt with that in a way that had some more integrity, I am sure we could work through legislation in a way that I do not think would take any longer, but where we could have genuine debate on the particular clauses and the way they fit, have votes on each of them, and deal with each of them on their merits.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000957\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EAt doctors\u2019 rooms in Wainui\u014Dmata people often have to wait for 2 or 3 weeks for things that are currently non-urgent, and even for urgent things it is sometimes hard to see a doctor within the same week. We already have quite a few people from Wainui\u014Dmata going to accident and emergency departments for things that are strictly not accidents or emergencies. What this bill will do is put pressure on general practitioners\u2019 rooms, but, worse than that, people who have illnesses that are infectious, like colds and flu, will be wandering along and spreading them around. They will be sitting amongst pregnant mothers and spreading their diseases all over the place. It is absolutely unnecessary, and it is all because John Key had nothing to say at his conference.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022 data-id=\u002223d42c52078a44ec9cf1c37aec82cd2d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000958\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002223d42c52078a44ec9cf1c37aec82cd2d\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National):\u003C/span\u003E I am very happy to take a call on Part 1 of the Holidays Amendment Bill. I will focus on an issue that has not, as far as I am aware, been discussed at all either in the second reading or in the Committee stage so far. Yet as far as employers are concerned it is probably the single most important change that was made to the 2003 Holidays Act and the single most important change in this bill\u2014that is, the issue of relevant daily pay. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000959\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003EIn 2003 I was the vice-president of the Private Hospitals Association. It was an organisation that represented not only surgical hospitals but also a very wide range of the aged-care providers in this country. They were not the residential villages or retirement villages but rest home and hospital-level care for the elderly. We were absolutely emphatic about this issue, as many employers were. Regardless of the merits of what was being attempted by the relevant daily pay calculations, the calculations created some serious disincentives. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000960\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003EFirstly, it was completely unworkable from a payroll perspective. It simply was not possible for a payroll system to calculate relevant daily pay for organisations that ran around the clock, 24/7, as hospitals and aged-care providers do. Thanks to collective employment agreements, a number of allowances were being paid for evenings, night shifts, and weekends. The possibly unintended, but certainly perverse, outcome of the relevant daily pay clause, as it is at present in the Act, was that staff would be paid more for being sick than they would for being well and at work. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000961\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224e026b765c1940a99a736082b332ac48\u0022\u003EDarien Fenton\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s not true.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000962\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220f1c181652b342bb877c6896849fd267\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE\u003C/span\u003E: It is absolutely true. If time allowed, I would give that member the numbers. Somebody working a mixture of shifts\u2014who might work an evening shift, the odd weekend shift, the odd night shift, and then was rostered on a day shift\u2014is, according to the Act, required to be paid a relevant daily pay that includes all of the allowances that they earned on those swing shifts in the previous 4 weeks. Somebody on a base rate with no allowances who calls in sick has to be paid more than that for staying at home. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000963\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003EWhat did that do to the sick leave provisions? Well, every employee is honourable and I am sure that they did not intend consciously to take sick leave when they were not sick, but two things happened. Firstly, sick leave went up, and it went up quite considerably. But what also happened was really interesting, and it was observed across the country: the pattern of sick leave changed. Whereas there was usually an even distribution between days, nights, weekends, and so on, the sick leave shifted into the day shift. Who knows what might have been happening? Certainly the payment for being sick on the day shift was greater than what would be earned if an employee had come to work. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000964\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003EThat has been the case for nearly 7 years, and it needed to change. It was one of the things that the working-group that the Minister set up was charged with addressing. It was their No. 1 recommendation. Although the Minister and the officials worked the solution into the bill in a slightly different way, I think it represents a vast improvement to what we have now. The average daily pay calculations are much more straightforward. It is likely to take out those perverse incentives, at least to some degree. I offer the view that we can still take a journey that will merge the annual leave, sick leave, and alternative day provisions in the future. But this is a huge advance compared with what we have. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000965\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003EIn the time available I will touch also on the issue of the employer determining when an alternative day might be taken. I offer a story that was given to the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee by a primary industry company. A whole department of workers who tended to be on the same shift wanted to take annual leave to go to the races. The employer, quite rightly, said they could not do that, as the disruption to the business was too great. They had to keep things going, and the employees were a whole shift. They could not do that. What did the employees do? They all took their alternative days and the business had to shut down so that those guys could go to the races. Members can draw their own conclusions about whether that was a good thing or a bad thing, but someone has to determine it, and when it comes to the running of a business, I am very comfortable that it is the employer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022 data-id=\u0022b735e8e1da3c464ea3704347e3b89473\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000966\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b735e8e1da3c464ea3704347e3b89473\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I am pleased to take a call on Part 1 of the Holidays Amendment Bill, which is the substantive part of the bill. It is the guts of the bill; it has all of the changes that the Government is planning to make to the rights of wage earners and salary earners in New Zealand to their holidays and sick leave. We do not disagree with everything in the bill, but there are three fundamental things that we do disagree with.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000967\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EI will start with the fourth week\u2019s annual leave, if I may. I go back to why the fourth week\u2019s annual leave was brought in, in the first place. Yes, sure, it was Matt Robson\u2019s member\u2019s bill in the Labour-Alliance Government, and that was fine. But it got through only because Labour supported it. Did National support it? Did Tau Henare\u2019s party support it? Did the ACT Party support it? It is a bit rich now to be making speeches about the fact that it was a bill\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000968\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002202513e4310494dba8a07522c01678bcf\u0022\u003EHon Tau Henare\u003C/span\u003E: What? What are you on about?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000969\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228a72f7ab3fee42ff9aa061cadb2f86f5\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON\u003C/span\u003E: That it is a bit rich. It would never have got through this Parliament if Labour had not supported it. In fact, it was Labour policy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000970\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002298b2227680904f6a93451dbdf01236e3\u0022\u003EHon Tau Henare\u003C/span\u003E: It was never Labour policy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000971\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002241af124e05e041c7946055da66514a47\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, it was, actually\u2014yes it was. It was Labour policy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000972\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EThe fact is that here we are in 2010 with 4 weeks\u2019 paid holidays for all wage earners and salary earners in New Zealand. If we had left it to National or the ACT Party, would that have ever happened? They voted against it, did they not? I remember John Key said it was a bribe\u2014he said it was a bribe. All it was really about was recognising that if we were serious about trying to keep wage earners and salary earners in New Zealand and making life attractive for them in their jobs, one of the things we could do at the time was to catch up with Australia on providing decent annual leave. Australia, after all, has had 4 weeks\u2019 annual leave since 1974. It was around about that time that New Zealand workers got 3 weeks. I also remember very well during the 1990s that Max Bradford, who wanted to get rid of all annual leave, wanted to put all of it up for grabs and sell it off. So it is a bit rich for National to be getting all precious about the fact that workers have choice around that. The only reason they have choice\u2014which is not true, anyway\u2014or the only reason we are even debating the fact that there is a fourth week\u2019s leave, which could be cashed up, is the fact that the previous Labour-Alliance Government brought in 4 weeks\u2019 annual leave. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000973\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EI have to say that I am quite relieved that at least we are not saying \u201CLet\u2019s go back to 3 weeks.\u201D, although that will be the effect of this provision in Part 1\u2014that will be the effect of it. [Interruption] Yes, it will be the effect of it. It one of those National policies that is\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000974\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c3079c313afa49ad9db75bf8b4c9b42d\u0022\u003EHon Steve Chadwick\u003C/span\u003E: Up for sale.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000975\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b2dc6d37b7d14be3bdb0bfa0c6a41f5b\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014yes, but hung over from the 2005 election. It was one of those manifesto promises National made for no particular reason. I am not aware of any demand from workers to sell the fourth week\u2019s annual leave. They might want to do it if they do not get a pay rise, which is what has been happening under this Government. They are not getting a pay rise, so I can understand why workers may say: \u201COh well, I haven\u2019t had a pay rise in a year, so that is looking pretty attractive. The cost of living is going up, GST has gone up.\u201D I can understand that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000976\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EI go back to the reason that we brought in a fourth week\u2019s annual leave: there is a fundamental right to rest, recreation, and leisure. It is a fundamental right to have paid holidays, and New Zealand was lagging behind. The provision in Part 1 will ensure New Zealand starts to drift down to the bottom of the scale again in terms of paid annual leave. Members opposite can talk about choice all they like, but the reality is that this provision will undermine the 4 weeks\u2019 annual leave. That leave will be devalued, because it is cashable\u2014it is up for sale. We know that many, many workers will not have a lot of choice about this matter. National members like to talk about choice. David Bennett should not shake his head; I know he does not want to listen to this, but it is true. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022 data-id=\u00224307a78e2ac04604a333788881f9770d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000977\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224307a78e2ac04604a333788881f9770d\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE (National):\u003C/span\u003E Well, here we go again. Let us rewrite the rewritten history. Let us rewrite it. The Labour-Alliance coalition\u2014it was a member\u2019s bill by Matt Robson\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000978\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f12073e033f24afa8c32943ab0112fe0\u0022\u003EDarien Fenton\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s what I said. I said that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000979\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f3cef9ba45b84d1a96ed3a8a6aa11418\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE\u003C/span\u003E: No, no. You see, the subtle difference is that that member tried to tell the Committee that the fourth week of annual leave was Labour policy. If it was Labour policy, why was it not on the previous Labour Government\u2019s agenda? Why did the person in charge of the House, Michael Cullen, who was in charge of the legislative calendar, not bring the legislation in during the first year, the second year, or the third year? It had to come up in the House because\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000980\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224c1bbf90dc4a4063a72eecb63f21016b\u0022\u003EDarien Fenton\u003C/span\u003E: So?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000981\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002289f6146f007a44fd9f44845e9df1d80e\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE\u003C/span\u003E: She says: \u201CSo?\u201D!Well, here is the \u201Cso\u201D\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000982\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ba39f3195c38487dbfbb068b2137cf5e\u0022\u003EDarien Fenton\u003C/span\u003E: But you let ACT tell you what your policy is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000983\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022036b5567dfce4e8698b8401817aac016\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, my God! No wonder employers and employees did not like that member coming on to the blimmin work site. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003EThis provision of the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) is about a property right. What is it?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000985\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022552090b489a14dec97d978ec3a934a4f\u0022\u003EDarien Fenton\u003C/span\u003E: Never saw you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000986\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002258acfe3efc46401387cdcd9ddf7cb0c4\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I was an organiser in the heady days, with you, Mr Chair, and those were good times. We had a lot of fun. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000987\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003EHere is the rub: why does Labour not want the worker to have the ability to trade one of their property rights? That is what a week\u2019s holiday is. It does not belong to the Service and Food Workers Union and it does not belong to the Engineering, Printing and Manufacturing Union; it belongs to the workers themselves. Helen Kelly and her mate \u201CStuart Little\u201D cannot come along and say to workers that they cannot trade in their week. They think they know better than the workers\u2014they know better than the workers! That is exactly what Labour\u2019s line is. It harks back to the days of the dictatorship of the proletariat, which said that they do not understand, so we will make the decision for them. Shame on Labour\u2014shame on Labour! If those members think that that is supporting workers, then they are sadly mistaken. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000988\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003EWe can ask any worker on any job site whose holiday it is. In the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee I continued to ask that question of union representatives, and of anybody who came to the select committee to make a submission. It was quite clear that the answer, every time I asked it, was that the holiday belonged to the worker. It did not belong to the union organisation, and it certainly did not belong to the party in Opposition today.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000989\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eaddbd0f6bb3454a8c6c97d6e78a40b7\u0022\u003EDarien Fenton\u003C/span\u003E: So why are you taking it off them? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000990\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d7eb8ecd48b9432b806206a528d79b74\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE\u003C/span\u003E: I am not taking anything off employees. In fact, National is saying to workers that if they want to trade one of their property rights, they can go for it, because that right belongs to the worker, and not to the slimy little Labour Party and union organisers who are stealing money out of their back pockets\u2014like the Service and Food Workers Union, and the $300,000 that they gave to the Labour Party. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000991\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022051a094edafc4bc9ac816606394905d4\u0022\u003EDarien Fenton\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. For the last week or so that member has made references to the Service and Food Workers Union stealing money from union members and giving it to the Labour Party. I say that that is completely untrue, and I take complete offence. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000992\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002242d2bfceb331486fb603f9c69b502d30\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: The member may take offence on behalf of the union, but this is a Committee of robust debate. It is a Committee of free speech, and the comments do not offend the rules of the Standing Orders. The comments may not be in good taste, but that is for the member to decide. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000993\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bc344f0a931840d8b72bed9fbdd67846\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I think you would be aware, Mr Chair, that the person who took offence was the national secretary for the Service and Food Workers Union, and would have been responsible for any such theft. An accusation of theft against a member, even if the accusation was made about a period before they were a member, is certainly offensive. If I made similar comments about Mr Brownlee or Mr Woodhouse, they would rightly be offended. The member was the national secretary of that union; she was the person responsible to the national executive for the collection of subscriptions, fees, and disbursements, including money paid to the Labour Party. I take offence.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000994\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220ae85cfc93c84ee89784b7614196b2d2\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: The member makes a point. But at no stage did the member speaking, Mr Henare, attribute theft to a particular individual in this Chamber, at all. The member speaking just now, Mr Mallard, drew all of the connections; he put all the dots on the page and then drew a line between them. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000995\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EI say to members that it is not an easy task to find the balance between taste\u2014what people think is fair\u2014and things that are offensive. If this Committee is to have robust debate, and if people are to say things robustly themselves, then they have to expect that other things will be said in return. Members have the opportunity to later get up and state their case, and to state the contrary. Those are the rules of the debate. If members want to have things ruled out of order because people are offended, then the amount that people can say will contract and contract, and we will not have a Committee of free speech. I am a defender of free speech; I think people should be able to say what they feel. In saying whether this speech has crossed the line, I think we need to be careful about where we draw the line. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000996\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EI accept the point that Mr Mallard made, but the Hon Tau Henare did not accuse an individual member of theft. Had he done that, I would have stopped him immediately.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000997\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002239b1f048b3e1432f90242aca4db0fff0\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I realise that I have put you in an invidious position, because of your own previous work history\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000998\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002296f25b06b22a4a2e8b077929addcb7fd\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: The member will not bring the Chair into the debate. If the member wants to make a point of order, he should make it. It must be about order, the Standing Orders, and Speakers\u2019 rulings.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u00223da43f4e8f0445cd93d9f99552edc945\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69000999\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223da43f4e8f0445cd93d9f99552edc945\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the Chairperson report progress to obtain the Speaker\u2019s ruling on a personal reflection that the Chairperson had ruled against. The reason I am doing that is that I think it is unfair for the Chair to make a ruling on a matter that I realise, in retrospect, was a reflection on him, as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001000\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001001\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00228a2dfa6ab9b74efaa88f2db8eb65f448\u0022\u003EHouse resumed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001002\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002258a945f2fcd8477eb49e9d53e59ee234\u0022\u003ESpeaker Recalled\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022 data-id=\u0022bf72013bf01c454293f0c098c7c927c0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001003\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bf72013bf01c454293f0c098c7c927c0\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Deputy Speaker, the Committee has passed a motion asking that you be recalled to make a ruling. The matter had its genesis in a speech made by the Hon Tau Henare on the Holidays Amendment Bill. In making reference to the Holidays Act Mr Henare made reference to his own personal knowledge of unions and union activity. As part of that he said that the Service and Food Workers Union had been involved in theft, and that the money was from union funds and had been paid to the Labour Party. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001004\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EDarien Fenton raised a point of order and said that she objected to that statement and found it offensive. I ruled that it was not offensive. I ruled that it was, in fact, a matter of taste, and that the accusation of theft had not been directed at a person, and I left it at that. Subsequently, a point of order was raised by the Hon Trevor Mallard, who brought to the attention of the Committee the fact that Darien Fenton had been an official of the Service and Food Workers Union and that, therefore, an accusation of theft against the Service and Food Workers Union was, by implication, an accusation of theft against Darien Fenton. That piece of information might have been known to people personally, but it certainly was not a matter that was put on the record by the Hon Tau Henare. I ruled that although that may have been the case, no direct accusation had been made against Darien Fenton, and therefore it was a matter of taste, and I refused to rule it out of order. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001005\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe Hon Trevor Mallard then raised a further point of order and drew to the Committee\u2019s attention the fact that I also had been an official of the Service and Food Workers Union and, by implication, was compromised. He thought that it was inappropriate for me to rule on the matter. At that point I simply put the motion to recall the Speaker, and you have been recalled to make a judgment. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001006\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EIn my opinion the issue rests principally on the words of Mr Tau Henare and his making the statement about theft and the Service and Food Workers Union. In my opinion he had not crossed the line on that, regardless of the positions that members of this House have held previously. I thought those matters were not relevant, because they had not been brought into the debate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u0022fb8aea5ac1c54c4181d46c83b981ca79\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001007\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022fb8aea5ac1c54c4181d46c83b981ca79\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E The Hon Rick Barker has summarised the situation well, and there is not much doubt about the facts of the matter. The problem as I see it is that there are within the Parliament a large number of people who know that both Mr Barker and Ms Fenton have had national secretary responsibilities for the Service and Food Workers Union, and that they would have been the people legally responsible for theft on the part of the union. If there was theft and disbursement of stolen funds to a particular party, they would have been the people responsible. I know that with Tau Henare we have to be a little bit careful about taking accusations seriously, but if anyone in the Chamber\u2014and I would say that half the people in the Chamber know the facts and the relationships\u2014took that accusation seriously, it is a very bad reflection on those two individuals. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001008\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EMs Fenton, quite properly, took offence, because Tau Henare was clearly aiming the comments at her. To be generous to him I think he was not attempting to reflect on Mr Barker, who was in the Chair at the time, but some of us who have been around, in and out of, the union movement for a period of time and know the history, are offended by that. Really, the additional factor for recalling you was that there is always a temptation on the part of a Chair to overcompensate the other way when these matters are being dealt with, and I thought it was therefore appropriate to get the Hon Rick Barker out of the position where he was making a final ruling on something that a number of us knew was a reflection on him personally, through accusations that he was involved in theft and passing money on. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u0022d4b069bb75ac4c76a5c2be8c9a2b5176\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001009\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d4b069bb75ac4c76a5c2be8c9a2b5176\u0022\u003EHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House):\u003C/span\u003E I think that was an interesting contribution and attempted justification from Trevor Mallard, who has just resumed his seat, for disrupting the business of the Committee. Firstly, let me make it very clear that I did not know of the previous associations of Ms Fenton or, for that matter, the Hon Rick Barker, but I do think the Hon Rick Barker has made exactly the right call in this case. I can recall debates earlier this year when we were passing taxation legislation and, repeatedly, Labour members referred to members on this side of the Chamber as people who were advantaging their Tory mates. That was never pulled up by the Speaker; it was made clear that it was a comment in general in the debate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001010\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EI think we need to have a robust Parliament. The shrinking violet approach that Mr Mallard wants to take at the moment is not consistent with his general offerings in the Chamber. He will be aware that during the debate on the Employment Relations (Film Production Work) Amendment Bill and on the changes it made to employer and contractor status, just a couple of weeks ago, there were regular references suggesting that members on this side of the Chamber had somehow caved in\u2014I think at one stage the term \u201Cbent over\u201D was used\u2014and had acquiesced in a number of fashions to a large corporate. That seemed simply to bring a degree of mirth to the faces on the other side of the Chamber, and Ms Fenton was one of those who enjoyed that particular style of humour.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001011\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EIf we are to become so sensitive to general comments such as those the Hon Tau Henare made, we will be saying very little in this Chamber at all. It was not the theme of Mr Henare\u2019s speech, and I repeat that I think the Hon Rick Barker has made the correct decision in ruling that there was no personal attack in the statement. In fact, there was simply a turn of phrase that was part of the general debate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022 data-id=\u002256493b50189145639cabea6ad757e6dc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001012\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002256493b50189145639cabea6ad757e6dc\u0022\u003ECHARLES CHAUVEL (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I want to make three points in response to what we have heard from the Leader of the House, and I think they reflect concern on this side of Chamber. The first is that although Mr Brownlee may not have been present for the entire debate, members who were present knew very well the status of Ms Fenton as general secretary of the union concerned, because she referred to it a number of times in her speeches, of which there have been several in this debate. Certainly Mr Henare knew about the status of Ms Fenton in respect of the matter. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001013\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003EThe second relevant point is that there is a world of difference between accusing a party of \u201Cadvantaging its Tory mates\u201D, and imputing criminal behaviour to an organisation and, by extension, to a member who has been its principal officer. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001014\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003EFinally, one of the aspects of Mr Barker\u2019s ruling in his rejection of the point of order was his comment, rightly, that this is a Committee of robust debate. But he commented that if a member had made a disorderly statement, or one that caused offence without, in his ruling, breaching the Standing Orders, the proper response from the Opposition would be to engage in similarly robust debate. My submission is that that comment is simply an invitation to disorder in the Chamber, and that is really why I think it is appropriate to uphold the point of order that Mr Mallard originally raised in response to the comment and in support of Ms Fenton having taken offence to it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022 data-id=\u00223bc372c8962e4c879dbde7df985f0ae5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001015\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223bc372c8962e4c879dbde7df985f0ae5\u0022\u003EMr DEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you for those comments. This is certainly a robust debate. I was listening, so I heard the interchange\u2014but, I have to say, not all of it. It has been a robust debate. One of the things that I believe is important is that if members feel that they are overstepping the mark, they need to be very mindful of how that could reflect on others. In respect of robust debate, however, I would have to say that the Chair of the Committee was the best person to judge. He was here at the time, and he was able to get the feel for what was happening in Committee, what was being said, and the reactions of members. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001016\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003EPersonal reflections, as mentioned by the Hon Trevor Mallard, are covered by Standing Order 116. It refers to a personal reflection against a member or against a party. In the ruling that the Hon Rick Barker made, there was no reference to that Standing Order in terms of interpretation. I refer members to Speaker\u2019s ruling 41/7. The same thing applies under the definition of personal reflection\u2014that is, that something dishonourable must be attributed to another member for there to be a personal reflection. Words used robustly in debate that do not impugn the honour of the member will not be ruled out of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001017\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003EI say to members that the Chairperson was the best person to judge at the time; he was here. He is the best person to rule on that matter. The personal reflection was not attributed to one particular person. He has ruled in that way, and it is a matter of taste. A reflection has not been made against the member, and I uphold the Chairman\u2019s ruling. It is consistent with rulings of previous Speakers. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u0022543778fef5834d8694c9553102b4895f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001018\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022543778fef5834d8694c9553102b4895f\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I think you alluded to one further matter in your ruling. Your quotation from Speakers\u2019 rulings goes to the second part of the matter. There are two parts to the objection. One was the objection by Ms Fenton to the reflection on her and her role, but also there was a reflection on parties. Included in the comments of Mr Henare, which I understand that you heard, was an indication that the Labour Party was receiving stolen money. As a member of the Labour Party I find that grossly offensive. It is inaccurate, and I am not sure what the right procedure is\u2014whether we have to go back into Committee for that to be brought up with the Chair, or whether it is appropriate for you to deal with it now. As well as not being able to make reflections against members, there was the matter of making reflections against parties. There was the accusation of both the theft and the receiving, and I take offence at the receiving element, as well. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001019\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a06dd0530828441491bec1b2540fa613\u0022\u003EMr DEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the member. Possibly, that should have been brought up when the Chairman was actually making his ruling. I will not add anything further to my ruling. My ruling is clear in terms of personal reflections. I understand the sensitivity of these matters; I certainly do not want to downplay that. The Chairman has ruled. It is in line with previous Speakers\u2019 rulings. That is my ruling.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001020\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022be57af7d00f64a0989f586279b189598\u0022\u003EIn Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001021\u0022\u003EDebate resumed.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u00228baeecc0c71b47da9fab5beb18ac91f3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228baeecc0c71b47da9fab5beb18ac91f3\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. It will not take a genius to work out what this point of order is. It is the subsequent point of order, and the offence that I have taken as indicated by the Deputy Speaker. When there is reflection on a party, then that is similar to a reflection on a member. I agree with the sidebar comment made by the Deputy Speaker very recently, and I say that I take offence at the accusation made by Tau Henare that the Labour Party is guilty of receiving stolen money.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001023\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002249623e9007ff4407a7ac5fa65c125d66\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the member. That is a fresh point and I think it is a fair point. It is inappropriate to say that a party has received stolen money. Theft is stealing, and I ask the member to withdraw.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001024\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c31e286301d44d3fb6a1ac307ab5d332\u0022\u003EHon Tau Henare\u003C/span\u003E: I withdraw and apologise.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001025\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b67eb11a8e6d4eb4a4f8d9ec4c69444f\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: I must mention something else that should have occurred to me at the time. At the time I gave my ruling I should have made a delineation between parties inside this House and parties outside this House. I say to members that if an organisation outside this House has been offended, it is not for members of the House to take umbrage for them; it is for those organisations outside to do so. The Standing Orders provide for them to make an application to make a response. I refer members to Standing Order 155.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022 data-id=\u002296dd1b8472ac4c5e994667a7f6b81f7e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001026\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002296dd1b8472ac4c5e994667a7f6b81f7e\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE (National):\u003C/span\u003E Somebody could have just asked me and I would have apologised. There is another word for it\u2014divert. That is another word for it. We are back to it now, are we not? Money was diverted\u2014members\u2019 dues were diverted\u2014to the Labour Party. It is the same thing and the same story, and most of the workers did not know it was happening.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001027\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022565250fd917c42b7a046a05799be1d26\u0022\u003EDarien Fenton\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s bullshit.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001028\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220e8e67a61ea64e80891464998a80773a\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry? What was that? It was bull what?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001029\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022677d7438300d4ec5af158bb9a76d18c8\u0022\u003EDarien Fenton\u003C/span\u003E: Bull.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001030\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bca93bf99c074720becb02e3af41b2d5\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, OK. We have got right down to the gutter now. That is the union representative I know from long ago. No holds barred, and she talks like the old cloth-cap unionist, Helen Kelly\u2019s dad, used to be, and he was proud of it. Helen Kelly\u2019s dad was proud of being a cloth-cap unionist. This is nothing more than a steal of workers\u2019 rights.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022 data-id=\u0022ae0176d81c7d4e3f9e0046f425ee0865\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001031\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ae0176d81c7d4e3f9e0046f425ee0865\u0022\u003ESU\u2019A WILLIAM SIO (Labour\u2014M\u0101ngere):\u003C/span\u003E The allegations made earlier by the member who has just resumed his seat, Tau Henare, have dragged us a little closer to the gutter politics we have tried to avoid in this Chamber. As a result of his allegation, we have been forced to drag the poor Deputy Speaker from his busy schedule to make a ruling. That member should never have made those accusations here tonight. It is sad, because once upon a time that member used to defend the working class. I would say that people who knew that member in his former life as a trade union organiser would be bowing in shame because of his support for the Holidays Amendment Bill\u2014a bill that is designed to screw the workers, and screw the workers it will. At a time when this Government should be focusing on giving workers higher pay and an income that can sustain them, the Government is instead saying to cleaners, caretakers, women workers, M\u0101ori workers, Pacific workers, and low-income workers: \u201CHere, sell off 1 week of your holidays.\u201D, and that forces workers who are on incomes that cannot sustain them, to be in a position where they are forced to sell that 1 week just to try to get by. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001032\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022\u003EHere is something else. Two years ago when this Government came into power, the first thing it did prior to Christmas was give workers a Christmas present\u2014the 90-day fire-at-will bill. Now, prior to Christmas this year, we are getting an extension of the \u201Cscrew the workers\u201D outlook. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001033\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022aa5ecdf38b6f488ca585f00a0f19eb28\u0022\u003EDavid Bennett\u003C/span\u003E: You\u2019re reading your lines well, mate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001034\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222a04c210d21949bc8524c8df9f731e03\u0022\u003ESU\u2019A WILLIAM SIO\u003C/span\u003E: I say to that member and to every member on that side of the Chamber: \u201CShame on you! Shame on you! Shame on you!\u201D. This bill is unfair for working people, it is unbalanced, and it is unnecessary. It is designed only to drive down wages. It is designed to ensure that the greedy become greedier. Instead of handing out rightful money for fair wages to the working people, the Government is forcing the working class to sell off every little bit of entitlement just to make a living. Once upon a time, it used to be that one worker would be able to sustain a family of three or five. The mother stayed home and looked after the children while that one worker earning a high salary would sustain the family. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001035\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022\u003EOver the years we have been fooled by Governments such as the National Government, such as the John Key Government saying that by giving more money, as this Government has done to employers, somehow jobs will be created. Jobs have never been created when money is given to the wealthy. Instead, the Government cuts jobs\u2014it cuts jobs. That is the kind of philosophy that underlines this Government and its policies. The Government talks about narrowing the wage gap between Australia and New Zealand and increasing productivity, but this kind of bill will not narrow the wage gap between the working people of New Zealand and the working class of Australia. It deepens that divide. It increases that gap, because all this bill is designed to do is drive wages down to make the poor poorer, and to make the poor, who are on low incomes, beg from the likes of this John Key Government. The sad thing is that this bill is the Christmas present from this Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001036\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002284373e390f9f44648dd9ab8c8d2978d3\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: Before I take the next speaker, I remind members that we are debating the Holidays Amendment Bill. We have had some pretty wide-ranging speeches. I want members to come back to Part 1. We have got a little bit off focus here. There have been more general, second reading speeches, so before I accept the next call, I remind people to be a bit more focused.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022 data-id=\u0022e70bbd9288794da1abdae74ab4ee65af\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001037\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e70bbd9288794da1abdae74ab4ee65af\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I wish to speak on the Holidays Amendment Bill, and I start by commenting on Tau Henare, who said that Labour is going back in time when we bang on about workers\u2019 rights. Well, I put it to that member that it is the National Party that is going back in time. This bill is exactly what National did in the 1990s, except that at that stage it was trying to cut 3 weeks\u2019 leave down to 2 weeks\u2019 leave. I can still remember the postcards. I can still remember, as a union official, going in and having workers asking for the postcards. They did not want to sign one; they wanted 10, and they wanted to take them home to their families because they were so opposed to the Government selling off their holidays. What did those postcards say? I can still remember it: \u201CMax Bradford wants to take a holiday\u2014yours\u201D. I put it to this Government that that is exactly the line that John Key is saying. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001038\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EIf this Government thinks it can be so arrogant and keep chipping and chipping away and, effectively, assaulting workers by taking rights away from them, then it will find at the end of the day that there will be a consequence. We know that the regulatory impact statement gave some very, very clear advice to this Government on the changes\u2014the shafting of holiday entitlements, because that is what this is\u2014to the Holiday Act. Did it listen? No, it did not, and that is the arrogance of the Government. Why this Government cannot see it is completely and utterly beyond me.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001039\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002227525bc802004b1c87d2967251312435\u0022\u003EDarien Fenton\u003C/span\u003E: They\u2019re blind.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001040\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ab78c16d8abd42f2a912bf9aee6152cf\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: They are completely blind. The advice was that the bill would reduce opportunities from rest and recreation from work. It would increase working hours overall and decrease time for family. It may negatively impact on health and safety, including increased risk of fatigue and stress-related illnesses. It would reduce entitlements over time, the net payment would be less, it may decrease motivation and productivity, and the list goes on. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001041\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003ENo Government in a developed country can argue that it is progressive to cut holiday entitlements or that 3 weeks\u2019 holiday is acceptable in this day and age, with the stress that people are under in this country. I put this to members: there is no one on that side of the Chamber who has only 3 weeks holiday\u2014no one. We could argue that some of them have about 40 weeks.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001042\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002290d3397675334a7785df6912eeb138c7\u0022\u003EDarien Fenton\u003C/span\u003E: The ACT member who went off.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228f60ed0e76604925b6d7346fcd4b9e15\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: Exactly. There have been all sorts of examples, but the reality is that it is not acceptable. It was absolutely reprehensible when that Government tried to cut entitlements to 2 weeks. We remember the arguments and how vehemently opposed to holidays John Key was. I was on the select committee when young workers told him they wanted 4 weeks\u2019 holiday. I still remember to this day what John Key said. He said: \u201CI wouldn\u2019t employ anyone who preferred holidays over money.\u201D Those were John Key\u2019s words. I challenge John Key to take a call and deny that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001044\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c10478bcf95f43d1a3f5b9407e5af4da\u0022\u003EDavid Bennett\u003C/span\u003E: You can\u2019t challenge anyone.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001045\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b800c61f45124dada3e3f4fceb3df69a\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: We can challenge whomever we like. That is the arrogance of this Government. We live in a free world. We may not heap a torrent of abuse on the Government, but we can challenge the things this Government does because they are dreadful. Mr Bennett should hang his head in shame. That member should be utterly and completely ashamed of himself. He might get the pat on the head\u2014there have been a few pats by the look of it\u2014for what a good member he has been. He has delivered, because he has completely ignored all the submitters. He can do that, but I am telling the member that what he did in ignoring every submission to the Transport ad Industrial Relations Committee was a travesty.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022 data-id=\u0022aeaa1344b6c44c228bbb872df121737f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001046\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022aeaa1344b6c44c228bbb872df121737f\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE (National):\u003C/span\u003E I will go through the main provisions of Part 1 of the Holidays Amendment Bill. By agreement\u2014and that is a really interesting starting point\u20141 week of an employee\u2019s minimum entitlement to annual holidays is to be commuted for a cash payment to the employee. So the first thing we have to look at is that it is by agreement. This is not about forcing anybody to do anything. The employer is not even there, because it really is a matter of the employee, the worker, fronting up and saying \u201CExcuse me, I wouldn\u2019t mind getting into a discussion with you\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001047\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224456a00367d34c34812fa5e42fe6904a\u0022\u003EMoana Mackey\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s the way it\u2019ll happen!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001048\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c751bffc7a774cb4a9530eb5e781a67b\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE\u003C/span\u003E: Look, in most probably 99.9 percent of workplaces it will. The other thing is that it is about amending the calculation and the application of payment for public holidays, alternative holidays, sick leave, and bereavement leave. This bill is about tidying up provisions, not taking away provisions, not making them harder to get. Part 1 is about making sure that the Act works properly. It allows employers and employees to agree to transfer the observance of public holidays to another working day. Sometimes workers like to work, maybe on the public holiday, so that they can take another day off somewhere else that suits the family. Maybe there is a school trip coming up. It actually works being flexible. It is, again, all about being done by agreement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001049\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003EThis bill allows employers to request proof of sickness or injury within the first 3 consecutive calendar days of an employee taking sick leave, without first having reasonable grounds to suspect that the sick leave is not genuine. Who in their right mind would not want to verify\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001050\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022647a525a8f514f078fc7a3ec325afe17\u0022\u003EMoana Mackey\u003C/span\u003E: You can do it now.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001051\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002236aeeb2be99d439d9d91e873893d497b\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE\u003C/span\u003E: If we do it now, what is the big problem with it?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001052\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ab8d2f48010848099729065ea31e156f\u0022\u003EMoana Mackey\u003C/span\u003E: Because you are making everyone do it, even when there\u2019s no problem. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001053\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227cda80ac551845b1b33bf10a87170017\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE\u003C/span\u003E: No, no, if these things are done now, then what is the big opposition to them?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001054\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223b3464692b3546e1913e9b947b9d5538\u0022\u003EMoana Mackey\u003C/span\u003E: Because they have to actually have some evidence\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001055\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a319570c6f83456baa530ecc1d6b6794\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE\u003C/span\u003E: No, there is an opposition to them, and it is because there is too much power, from what I have heard tonight from William Sio, the man from South Auckland\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001056\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f843d7dbf79a4afbaa507b184b12bbf9\u0022\u003EDavid Bennett\u003C/span\u003E: From where?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001057\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022528d7711613a4d9eb52b6442f94dd41e\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE\u003C/span\u003E: From Manurewa most probably. He used to live in the heart of \u014Ctara until he decided he wanted to move up in the world and he moved to Manurewa, but that is beside the point.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001058\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222362e83445b94f07b211e64f128396a9\u0022\u003EDavid Shearer\u003C/span\u003E: M\u0101ngere, mate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001059\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225c87c462657c4ca6aa2c4309a37d30fa\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE\u003C/span\u003E: He now lives in M\u0101ngere. If in our childhood he had said to the brothers and sisters who lived in \u014Ctara that he wanted to live in M\u0101ngere, he knows what would have happened\u2014but I digress. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001060\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003EThis is clearly about workers\u2019 choice. This is clearly about doing things with the agreement of, and initiated by, workers. So I do not know how the fantasy can be achieved by Labour that there are thousands of ratbag employers out there who want to say to workers that they must take cash instead of a holiday because they do not want them to have a holiday. Of course there is a bad apple out there, and that is what we want to avert in Part 1. I cannot see the argument the Opposition is putting forward to the Committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022 data-id=\u0022ace4c0c857694e4ab786ec37e657231f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001061\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ace4c0c857694e4ab786ec37e657231f\u0022\u003ECAROL BEAUMONT (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I will speak about two particular clauses in Part 1: clause 13, \u201CRequirements for alternative holiday\u201D, and clause 14, \u201CProof of sickness or injury\u201D. When I spoke in the second reading I talked about this bill being unjustified, unnecessary, unbalanced, and unfair. I will measure these two provisions against that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001062\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EI mentioned earlier a very good submission\u2014a very short but very good submission\u2014made by a man called Dennis Hickey, who is a bus driver for Howick and Eastern Buses in Auckland. Dennis obviously cares very strongly about his job and believes he is there to provide a service to the public. He recognises that if he is rostered to work on public holidays, he works those days. He also knows that if the public holiday falls on an ordinary day on which he would normally work, he will get what is commonly called a day in lieu and in this bill is referred to as an alternative holiday. He was telling us that the current system is fair. Basically, if he works Christmas Day, and he has done that in the past, then he will get a day in lieu. He recognises that he is losing something by working on Christmas Day, and that is the ability to spend time with his family and friends and enjoy a day off that most other New Zealanders have. However, he accepts that his job is to provide that service, and he does it. He gets another day off in lieu, and that has always worked perfectly well for him. He has been able to choose a day that means that he, his wife, and his children can spend some quality time together.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001063\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EWhat is being changed here\u2014let us be clear: we are not talking about whether people are flexible, as the previous speaker said\u2014is who gets to decide. As the law exists at the moment, Dennis and his employer, Howick and Eastern Buses, can agree when he will take his day off in lieu, and it sounds as though they do that in most cases. But if they did not agree, ultimately Dennis, as the person who has given up his Christmas Day and time with his family and friends, would get to decide which day he would have as a day in lieu. This bill provides that it will be up to the employer. If there is no agreement, the employer will decide. The example Dennis gave was somebody like him getting a Wednesday off in the middle of March for working on Christmas Day. His wife works on a Wednesday and his kids are at school on a Wednesday, so that day off would have no value for him and would not be a good alternative holiday to the day he worked. That is the point.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001064\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EThis is an incredibly mean-spirited change. There was no evidence of a need for change. The Department of Labour stated in the regulatory impact statement that it \u201Cconsiders that the issue of an employee choosing when an alternative holiday is taken is limited to a few employers (less than 10 submitters to the Group said that employees should not be allowed to choose when alternative holidays are taken).\u201D\u2014that is, this is another solution to a problem that does not exist. We are getting a bit of that at the moment. This is just a ridiculous, unnecessary provision. The department\u2019s advice to the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee on this matter was that this change addresses\u2014[Interruption] We had submissions and the overwhelming majority of submitters were opposed to this change. There was very little evidence of a need for change.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001065\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EMichael Woodhouse gave an example before of somebody submitting on a real-life example. However, most of them went like this: \u201CAllowing employers to direct when alternative holiday must be taken: Business New Zealand supports the proposed amendment.\u201D Well, that is hardly compelling evidence, is it? It is hardly evidence that there is a problem. However, departmental officials came back to us and stated: \u201CThis [change] addresses concerns that the current arrangements can have a negative impact on business operations and productivity if employees choose to take an alternative holiday on a day that is not convenient for the operation of the employer\u2019s business.\u201D Well, that is fine, but equally one could say that it would not be very good and it would have quite a negative impact if Dennis was given a day off when his wife was working and his children were at school.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001066\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EThis change has implications for the workers. After all, the worker in that case gave up a day of national significance\u2014a day that mattered to him and his family. I say to those opposite, genuinely, this legislation is mean-spirited but they can fix it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022 data-id=\u00221b396fda255242839629243d8eb090e1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001067\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221b396fda255242839629243d8eb090e1\u0022\u003EKEITH LOCKE (Green):\u003C/span\u003E The Green Party is continuing to oppose the Holidays Amendment Bill. There is a bit of hypocrisy built into the way that this bill will operate. It was pointed out by Lynne Pillay, I think, that MPs will have a real choice. We all work pretty hard, actually, so it is often hard to take holidays, but we have the choice as to whether we want 4 weeks\u2019 holiday. If we went through the top-paid layers of society\u2014the chief executive officers, the top layers of the legal profession, the judiciary, etc.\u2014I do not think we would come up with anyone who did not have a real choice to have at least 4 weeks\u2019 holiday. For people at the top of society, there is no problem. They will not be affected by this legislation. I do not think that too many judges will be trying to buy out the fifth or sixth week of their holiday. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001068\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EIt has been said that it is all a question of choice, and that anything done under this bill will be done by agreement. But a lot of choices in our society, particularly choices in the workplace, are subject to a power relationship, because the employer not only employs us in the first place but also can direct which section of the workforce we work in, whether it is an interesting one, and whether we are working with interesting people. It is the employer who determines whether we get promotion. All of these things can be, and are being, held over the worker\u2019s head. They will be held over the worker\u2019s head when it comes to questions of selling off the fourth week of a holiday if the employer wants that person or a section of the workforce to sell off the fourth week of the holiday so that it can perhaps increase the length of time the particular enterprise is operating in January, say. That control over promotion will mean that it is not a real choice. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001069\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThe other end of the problem with choice is that the extra money will be a certain enticement for people who are at the very bottom and are paid only $13 an hour and are really struggling to keep their families afloat. The answer for them is not to give away what little leisure they have, maybe on top of all the stresses and strains of holding together a big family on a small income. To on top of that have only 3 weeks\u2019 holiday is not the answer; the answer is to have a higher wage. A minimum wage of $15 an hour is a good start in dealing with that problem. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001070\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThe power relationship problem does not operate only in big enterprises. It also operates in small shops, farms, etc., where the person in charge, the owner, might want to take 4 weeks\u2019 holiday or more themselves. What better way to achieve that than to convince the employee, through the power relationship\u2014and using the various mechanisms of potential sacking, particularly if the worker has been employed for less than 90 days\u2014to sell off a week of their holiday? Someone else in the enterprise\u2014usually the boss in the shop, on the farm, or wherever\u2014can then take an extra week themselves. The idea that it is a choice is a bit mythical. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001071\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EAs the last speaker, Carol Beaumont, indicated, transferring the day off from Christmas Day to some other time will now no longer in effect be by choice or by any real agreement, but can be determined, in the last analysis, by the employer. The whole concept of choice in our society is a bit mythological when we have power relations and when we have what is still called in law a master-servant relationship in the workplace. In many respects it still is. The unions help to redress the power, but the whole aim of this Holidays Amendment Bill and the preceding bill, the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2), is to redress the power balance in favour of the employer, against the union, to reduce further whatever choices ordinary workers have in the workplace. I am not saying an element of choice does not exist, but it has been reduced.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220fc05f1c-47b0-4fb0-8298-2f347adae4e3\u0022 data-id=\u00221e2c108fc6ff425e89e9940b9428a69e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001072\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220fc05f1c-47b0-4fb0-8298-2f347adae4e3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221e2c108fc6ff425e89e9940b9428a69e\u0022\u003EHon Sir ROGER DOUGLAS (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E I could not help myself. The arrogance of it! That is what this is about\u2014real, downright arrogance. \u201CWe know best. Thou shall not do what you want to; we will make the decision for you. You are actually too dumb to understand\u2014\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001073\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e89fd587cbb746f9a9bbddd71ef8068e\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson\u2014[Interruption]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001074\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ebc2c542c5154c41bb8dd550aea0db9f\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: Order!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001075\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002229b64431d5d74cd2b80f8500baf715d2\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I am coming to the Chair\u2019s defence. We all know that the Chair is not dumb, and for the member, who has more than slight experience in the House, to accuse the Chair of that is inappropriate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001076\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ce84354211d04216a35859bbf0757813\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: I thank that member. Before I call the member, I say that when I stand, it actually means something. [Interruption] I am sure members can see me when I am standing. It means that we terminate the speech at that time and the member with the call sits down. Regarding the point that was made about bringing the Chair into the debate, I am sure the member knows that that should not happen.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001077\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220fc05f1c-47b0-4fb0-8298-2f347adae4e3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002289ab52b91326487f92a065b82f0b377c\u0022\u003EHon Sir ROGER DOUGLAS\u003C/span\u003E: I apologise. I say that the Labour members opposite believe that they know best. They are saying to workers that you shall not have the right to choose. You will not have the right to choose what you do. They are saying to a family that you shall not trade that fourth week\u2019s leave. You cannot decide\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001078\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227edb4e03704842d8b75ff0b848293198\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: Order!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001079\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220fc05f1c-47b0-4fb0-8298-2f347adae4e3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002230e4f6455b154288859728a54c2e39e1\u0022\u003EHon Sir ROGER DOUGLAS\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry, Mr Chairperson.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001080\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022795601f2f74e43cbb66003f18683298c\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: The member should not bring the Chair into the debate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001081\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220fc05f1c-47b0-4fb0-8298-2f347adae4e3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002259994af671e148dcadeff3c0bae1c724\u0022\u003EHon Sir ROGER DOUGLAS\u003C/span\u003E: I was not, Mr Chairperson; I was saying to people\u2014I was not referring to you\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001082\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022702d44f6b8f34c5aa0c3ccba8cfbc0f9\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: The member will not argue with me; I have ruled. The member brought the Chair into the debate, and that is not allowed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001083\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220fc05f1c-47b0-4fb0-8298-2f347adae4e3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002218becab5a97f47efa0f75ddb58db596f\u0022\u003EHon Sir ROGER DOUGLAS\u003C/span\u003E: I was saying that Labour members are saying to people that they should not have the right to choose. They are saying to workers who do not have the money to take their families away at Christmas that they will not trade off 1 week of their holiday. You will stay home for the 4 weeks of your holiday and you will not be able to\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d75c0a6c15e14a94a29cb215a0a62edc\u0022\u003ELynne Pillay\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I think the Chair is being brought into the debate again.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001085\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002238c0c0083059409ba03fa6b5c5a6dc3e\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: I am prepared to allow some flexibility. If it is a direct reference to the Chair, then that is completely out of order. We have had some points of order on that, and the member is correct in that sense. I ask the member to speak in the third person, as opposed to referring to the Chair directly.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001086\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220fc05f1c-47b0-4fb0-8298-2f347adae4e3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a835c2aff68c4d4c8b849c73552bd94b\u0022\u003EHon Sir ROGER DOUGLAS\u003C/span\u003E: Labour is saying to workers who might want to trade 1 week of their 4 weeks\u2019 holiday, so that they can take their family to Paihia, Russell, or wherever they want and have 3 weeks\u2019 holiday, that they shall not be able to do that. Workers cannot trade off that week. The Labour Party wants to decide for workers. It is saying that people are better to stay at home for 4 weeks and not be able to take their kids out, rather than be able to take them to Russell, Paihia, or Tauranga for 1 week, and have only 3 weeks off. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220fc05f1c-47b0-4fb0-8298-2f347adae4e3\u0022\u003EThe Labour Party is saying to a family who may have a son who is an exceptional young soccer player that they are not allowed to trade off 1 of those 4 weeks of holiday in order to buy that child a decent pair of soccer boots and get special training, because that is not a decision people are capable of. The Labour Party and the Green Party will make that decision for workers. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001088\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220fc05f1c-47b0-4fb0-8298-2f347adae4e3\u0022\u003EI find it disgusting that members opposite are not prepared to allow workers to make that decision. If a family has a young talented singer who wants some special lessons, the Labour Party is saying that it will not allow that family to trade off 1 week of its holidays in order to get their child some special lessons and expertise. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001089\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220fc05f1c-47b0-4fb0-8298-2f347adae4e3\u0022\u003EThe Labour Party and the Green Party think they know what is best for workers. Frankly, it disgusts me.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u00224b65ea05610d475591073697a1d71e4d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001090\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224b65ea05610d475591073697a1d71e4d\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E That was a spirited attack from the Hon Sir Roger Douglas. It is the sort of attack that we see from him after dinner. It is interesting that the attacks on the Labour Party have come from the ACT Party and the pet former union official Tau Henare, formerly known as Raymond. That member came into the House for two reasons. One was his venerable surname. But, more important, the second reason was that he came in on the back of Winston Peters. Tau Henare\u2019s first promise, when he came in here, was that he would never go into Government with National. What did he do? In 1996 his was the swing vote that decided to go into Government with National. That is what that member\u2019s word is worth. He broke his word at the first opportunity. His word was not worth much as a union official, either. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001091\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EThen, when Winston Peters\u2014who was the reason that the member was here\u2014had some integrity and walked away from the then National Government, Raymond stayed with it, because he was in National\u2019s pocket then. He was taking National\u2019s coin; he would not resign his position as a Minister. He stayed with Jenny Shipley because he had no principles then, just as he had no principles when he was a union official and went around bottling his colleagues. That was Tau Henare. He has not changed in all those years. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001092\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EIt will be interesting when we come to Darien Fenton\u2019s amendments to give people the right to have an extra holiday when Easter and Anzac Day clash. I agree with a number of members that Anzac Day is a sacred day and that its observance should not be shifted, but I tell members that there is nothing in my religion that says Easter Monday is sacred. There is nothing sacred about Easter Monday at all, and in my opinion shifting the observance of that day is no problem whatsoever. Some people, who have no idea about religion, will stand up for Easter Monday. Who on the other side of House will say that Easter Monday is a religious holiday? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001093\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c101aef6562d425bbc631ed92d61e092\u0022\u003EDavid Bennett\u003C/span\u003E: Who cares about your opinion?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001094\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bb56fd2e89f945a0ad78c050b4a45434\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, David Bennett will say that. David Bennett has not had the courage to get on his hind legs and debate this part. The chairperson of the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001095\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002231833704904a4c36952198095f9ff469\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: The member cannot say another member does not have courage. The member should know that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001096\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022adaf579096ed49a0900b3521603c24e7\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: The member opposite who chaired the select committee cannot find the inclination to get on his hind legs and make a contribution to the debate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001097\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b04ee1d535e64ff7909a1081d3bc3023\u0022\u003EHon Tau Henare\u003C/span\u003E: Aw!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001098\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e4c0c9bc808d45b99e07cfc399b4a39d\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: We hear moaning from over there. \u201CAw!\u201D says Tau Henare. We have the pet of the National Party, the tame member whom the party leads along and lets out\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001099\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228a3cb26320f249088da9cda2a63b34b3\u0022\u003EJo Goodhew\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. In amongst all the personal abuse of members on this side of the House, I find any mention of the Holidays Amendment Bill distinctly lacking.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001100\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002228036553e9e34febb17fd7afdf8c35f5\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: I am the judge of that. We have 1 minute 30 seconds to go, and I will take that into consideration.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001101\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002221c180b62b95486f8261ba9c48c97d4e\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: The point I am considering, as we debate Part 1 of the Holidays Amendment Bill and look at the \u201CProof of sickness or injury\u201D provision, is why Tau Henare wants west Auckland health centres to be overrun. Why does Raymond Henare want west Auckland health centres to be overrun with people who do not need medical certificates, but who are trying to get them? That member does not care about the sick M\u0101ori kids. He does not care about the pregnant mothers who will be infected by the people forced to go into those health centres. He is an uncaring member, but he is the pet of the Tories. They let him out every now and again. They let him off his leash, and he is allowed to have a go. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EWhat about Michael Woodhouse? He at least understands the legislation\u2014well, maybe he does not. I ask members where he comes from. He comes from Dunedin South. No, Michael Woodhouse does not understand the bill at all, but he understands it better than Tau Henare does. I would like to know why Tau Henare cannot take a decent look at the amendments and tell the Committee what is wrong with them, instead of attacking unionists all the time. The amendments are very, very carefully focused on trying to make this legislation work in a way that is appropriate. But I will make it clear to the Minister that although Labour is encouraging her to pick up a few of these amendments and support them, even if she does that Labour will be unable to support the legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001103\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EI think it is fair to say the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee has done quite a lot of work to try to improve this legislation. I think it is fair to say some of the changes have improved it, but some of them have made it worse. I will focus in particular on the deletion from new section 28A, inserted by clause 10, of subsection (2)(a), because in the bill as it was introduced there was a requirement for requests made under subsection (1) to be \u201Cinformed and voluntary\u201D. In making a request, a wage earner and salary earner had to be informed, and the request had to be voluntary. The implication was that the request could not be made under duress. I ask members what happened to that in the select committee. The National Government used its jackboots to take out the requirement for workers\u2019 consent\u2014for the request to be voluntary and informed. One of the amendments that is sitting on the Table\u2014one of several hundred amendments that are being developed to sit on the Table\u2014will put that back in. Labour believes very strongly in that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001104\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EI say to Sir Roger Douglas that I enjoyed his speech, but I ask him whether he believes in that kind of consent. No, his speech was entertaining. It was entertaining in the way that horror movies are. Does Sir Roger Douglas believe that workers\u2019 consent should be informed and voluntary? There is not a word, not a whisper, not a whimper from him. He was full of fire earlier on, but when some of the ACT principles come back at him\u2014the right to be informed, and the right to make a voluntary decision\u2014he shuts up. He will wander along, against ACT principles, into the lobbies with his old mates from National. Every now and again there is a coincidence of view between the Labour Party and ACT, and there are small parts of this legislation, and some amendments, where we do have the same view. But does Sir Roger Douglas have the ability to stand up and say he will act on principle, join the M\u0101ori Party, the Green Party, and the Labour Party, and do what he thinks is right? No, he does not. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001105\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EI reckon that 20 years ago Sir Roger Douglas would have acted on his principles. I reckon that at that stage he was someone who had principles. He says he has forgotten what it was like. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001106\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002273492a795a754f0698e00e0d21c4c613\u0022\u003EHon Member\u003C/span\u003E: Thank goodness.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001107\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cb118798c22347a0b1264af34683020e\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: No, I think it is sad, because, although I used to disagree with Sir Roger Douglas much more often than I agreed with him, we used to know that when he said something and he believed something, he would act accordingly. We know that he thinks that these requests should be voluntary. Members know this, because he told us that workers should have the right to request this, but that it should be voluntary and it should be informed. He said that earlier, and I want to know whether we can take Sir Roger at his word. Is he prepared to stand up for what he believes in, or is it the case that when the Government says he is to go into the lobby, he will ask how quickly? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001108\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EThat is the approach that the ACT Party appears to be taking now. It is taking the Rodney Hide line. It is all right for the M\u0101ori Party every now and again\u2014less so\u2014to take the Tariana Turia line rather than the line of principle, but in the case of ACT it appears to be happening all the time now with National. Rodney Hide says \u201CGo this way.\u201D, and Sir Roger says \u201CHow quickly?\u201D. I think it is sad that someone who used to have principles that I know he felt very deeply is not prepared to have workers make their decisions voluntarily. He is not prepared to vote for workers to be informed, and I think that is a sad comment on the end of a political career.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022 data-id=\u00221753a148c0374c8dbdb0fd0d7fb1a0d1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001109\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221753a148c0374c8dbdb0fd0d7fb1a0d1\u0022\u003EDAVID BENNETT (National\u2014Hamilton East):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222aa0b524-c38d-45aa-bd5b-99c5927085f4\u0022 data-id=\u00220444ab515d5d402ca0390d46f3e57216\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001110\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222aa0b524-c38d-45aa-bd5b-99c5927085f4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220444ab515d5d402ca0390d46f3e57216\u0022\u003ECLARE CURRAN (Labour\u2014Dunedin South):\u003C/span\u003E First, I say that I have to disagree with my colleague the Hon Trevor Mallard on two particular matters. Usually we agree on most things. I will take issue with one thing first, and that is about the people of Dunedin South: they are a pretty bright bunch and I think they certainly do understand the Holidays Amendment Bill. I will not cast aspersions on the intelligence or otherwise of my Dunedin colleague on the other side of the House, Michael Woodhouse, who lives in my electorate. I say that the people of Dunedin South can recognise a rort when they see one, and this bill certainly is a rort. The second thing I will take issue with Trevor Mallard on, and maybe it is because he likes horror movies\u2014I am not sure\u2014is the speech given by Roger Douglas, which made me feel sick. I certainly did not enjoy it at all. Perhaps that is because I do not like horror movies. I occasionally try to watch them, but I am not very good at watching them. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001111\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228d1e98bd78db4ca2b88766678e2ea5d5\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Maybe he\u2019ll be in The Rocky Horror Show like his old mate Rob.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001112\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222aa0b524-c38d-45aa-bd5b-99c5927085f4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b4bae0621cfc452d86e50a9c3580c697\u0022\u003ECLARE CURRAN\u003C/span\u003E: Perhaps he will be in The Rocky Horror Show and maybe he could follow in the proud tradition of that former Prime Minister of this country and end up being the narrator at some point. That would probably be a fitting thing for him to do, because, seriously, the speech that he gave was a joke in terms of the meaning behind this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001113\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222aa0b524-c38d-45aa-bd5b-99c5927085f4\u0022\u003EI want to share a story with members. Last week after the House rose I caught a cab to the airport, and in the fine Dunedin tradition I shared that cab with my Dunedin colleague so that I did not sit in the cab on my own. The cab driver listened to us talk for a while about the week\u2019s events\u2014this story has relevance to Part 1\u2014then he ventured his own opinion. He said that he had had enough. He had been driving a cab for about 15 years in this country and had done OK but in the last couple of years he had had enough, because he could not make a living. He could not make ends meet. Costs were going up, he could not make it work, and he was heading off to Australia in 10 days\u2019 time. This Government makes claims that it will close the wage gap between Australia and New Zealand, but its actions are causing more people to take that step to leave for overseas. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001114\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222aa0b524-c38d-45aa-bd5b-99c5927085f4\u0022\u003EThat is the travesty of the speech made by Roger Douglas in which he said the bill was about trading-up provisions, flexibility, and giving people choice. He said that the justification for this bill was to give people the money in order to take their family on a holiday. I say pay people more money instead of making them trade off a week\u2019s leave. That is not trading up; that is trading down. He talked about workers\u2019 choice and flexibility but they are all code words for employers having more power in the employment relationship. We all know about that and the people of Dunedin South all know about that. It is a joke, and I feel ashamed to be in this Chamber and listen to people speak like that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001115\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222aa0b524-c38d-45aa-bd5b-99c5927085f4\u0022\u003EI mention the speech made by my colleague Su\u2019a William Sio in which he said that this bill is about screwing workers, keeping wages low, and giving people the awful choice of trading off an important part of what makes this country a good country\u2014that is, the right to have holidays. The bill forces people to make that choice and gives employers the power to enforce that choice on workers. I agree the bill is about screwing workers, keeping wages low, and affecting the most vulnerable workers. New Zealanders work really hard, and I challenge any members to disagree with that and say that we are a nation of bludgers and that workers try to rip the system off. We have a strong work ethic.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022 data-id=\u0022bed671b34281429ebefbd0377773ee32\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001116\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bed671b34281429ebefbd0377773ee32\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I am very pleased to take a call on Part 1, and I want to break through some of the ridiculous rhetoric we have been hearing from the other side of the Chamber. This bill is not about choice.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001117\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e35c7ad68c844f9a811c021144db9d14\u0022\u003EDavid Bennett\u003C/span\u003E: You should listen to Roger Douglas; he got you in here.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001118\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a4b9c1151a3d484ab87bf6dc0001fc11\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY\u003C/span\u003E: That was another stellar interjection from David Bennett, the chair of the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee! I thank the submitters. I think they are lucky that they made it past David Bennett, because he stops people submitting at our select committee. We were lucky that some submitters managed to make it past the guard dog; he does not like people coming along to make submissions against Government legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001119\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EThe fact is that this bill is not about choice, and when ACT and National say it is about choice they are just showing how out of touch they are. There is no choice for a family who are living on the breadline because their wages have stalled, because the cost of living has gone up, because this Government\u2014which promised, when it was asked during the election campaign, that it would not increase GST\u2014increased GST in October this year. Those families have found that all their costs have gone up, and they are struggling to get by. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001120\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003ENational and ACT members would have us believe that those families have a choice when it comes to whether they trade in a week\u2019s holiday. Do members know what real choice is? Real choice is asking people whether they would rather have a pay increase and be able to live on their salary. I guarantee that every single one of them would say that that is what they would like to do. There is no choice involved when someone is desperate and has to make cut-backs. There is no choice involved when families cannot send their kids on a school trip because there is no money left at the end of the week. It is not a choice when people have to choose between work and spending time with their families, regenerating, and taking time to make sure they can be more productive workers. That is why we have annual leave. It helps productivity, and it helps workers to feel rested. It means they can spend time with their families and do not feel that they are neglecting them. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001121\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EIt is not a choice to say to them that instead of a pay increase they will be given the option of cashing up a week\u2019s leave even though we know they do not have a choice about it because it is a choice between paying the bills and not paying the bills. Saying it is a choice is like saying that a family who get evicted because they cannot pay the rent, chose not to pay the rent. It is like saying that a family who cannot afford to buy their kid new shoes chose not to buy their kid new shoes. It ignores the reality, which is the nub of this issue, that too many New Zealanders now are struggling, and this Government is doing absolutely nothing, except passing ridiculous pieces of legislation like this bill. Such legislation does absolutely nothing to address the core problems facing many New Zealand families. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001122\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EThis Government said it would be family friendly. How is it family friendly to view annual leave only in terms of the dollar cost of it and not in terms of the value that it provides for workers, to their families, and to the employer when they have a more productive worker?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001123\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022490ccdbf-7c22-4e12-98f2-f3aa08f8e676\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022748032512ed64426bcffca70dd7f8d9b\u0022\u003EIain Lees-Galloway\u003C/span\u003E: They plunder families.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001124\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002287bdcdfde8874f9599fdbe32d111ae04\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY\u003C/span\u003E: That is right; it is just a commodity to the National Government, and it is very telling that it views it only in terms of that dollar value. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001125\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EWe see that view again when we talk about the changes to sick leave provisions. If an employer has reason to believe that someone is rorting sick leave, the employer can demand a medical certificate. But the flipside is they have to have reason to believe that someone is rorting it. How is that unfair? How is it unfair to say that employers should have reason to believe it and be able to show some evidence of it, for example someone consistently takes Fridays and Mondays off, or the boss sees someone on the television at the rugby? Of course they should be able to demand a medical certificate to prove that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001126\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EBut this Government says that anyone can be made to provide a medical certificate if they are sick for 1 day, even if it is a cold or flu, even though, as the Government knows, all the research in New Zealand shows that there is no problem. Our workers take less sick leave, on average, than those of most other countries. The biggest cost to the Government overall is not the cost of sick leave and how much workers are taking. The biggest cost is the loss of productivity that results when workers who are sick go to work. That is the biggest cost to employers in New Zealand. The Government knows that. It has been told time and time again that that is what the studies show.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001127\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221933577c127b4513a751596c421b1610\u0022\u003EDarien Fenton\u003C/span\u003E: Even Treasury says so.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001128\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022add03ddc15a44c96a6553f95f97e9daf\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY\u003C/span\u003E: Yes. Treasury says that the biggest cost is caused by workers going to work when they are sick. If workers are told they have to get a medical certificate if they take a day off sick, they will go to work\u2014and they probably would not be able to see a doctor on that day. They probably cannot afford to go to a doctor just to be told that they have a cold or the flu and that they should stay home and rest. Why would they waste money on doctors\u2019 fees\u2014ever-increasing doctor\u2019s fees under this Government\u2014to get a medical certificate from a doctor who will tell them they should not have bothered going to the doctor?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f99bcf9e-1ad4-4ed4-9a97-1cccb5b1e11a\u0022 data-id=\u0022781b8c25c31c4d4284b4df7878a458a1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001129\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f99bcf9e-1ad4-4ed4-9a97-1cccb5b1e11a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022781b8c25c31c4d4284b4df7878a458a1\u0022\u003EDr JACKIE BLUE (National):\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=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022 data-id=\u0022f440d44bcd914ef4aad37c51ee069d07\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001130\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f440d44bcd914ef4aad37c51ee069d07\u0022\u003EDAVID SHEARER (Labour\u2014Mt Albert):\u003C/span\u003E I will follow on from my colleague Moana Mackey and talk about evidence. The assumption is that when we pass legislation we do it for a reason: because there is something wrong, because we want to improve things, or because there is a problem. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001131\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003EI will look at Part 1, which deals with the idea of the sickie, and I will pick up from where Moana Mackey left off. Let us look at a survey that was done of workers taking sick leave in New Zealand in 2009. It surveyed 593 employers and 38,000 employees, and found that in a 12-month period the average amount of sick days taken was 4.6 days. Do 4.6 days sound excessive? Is that a problem? Why are we passing this legislation through Parliament when there is simply no problem? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001132\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003EThis bill is about ideology. It is about playing to one\u2019s friends. It is about making a pretence or trying to create some sort of illusion that this Government has a plan for productivity. Labour productivity in New Zealand is among the lowest in the world; in fact, I think it is the second to lowest in the OECD\u2014it is one place above Iceland. We work hard in New Zealand. We work harder per hours worked than just about anybody in the OECD. This bill is not about trying to further penalise people for taking the odd sick day because they need to; it is about ideology. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001133\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003EIf this bill were about evidence\u2014and we wanted to look at evidence to support this bill\u2014we would have expected to hear from the Department of Labour, from Statistics New Zealand, and from the Accident Compensation Corporation, but we have not. We do not have data from them. We would have hoped to read a regulatory statement from the Department of Labour. That was something that ACT and Rodney Hide were very adamant about. He wanted to see a regulatory statement for all legislation that went through Parliament. We did not even give the Department of Labour the chance to give or offer any advice on this legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001134\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003EI come back to the point about evidence and a plan. This bill does not have a plan, and there is no evidence. It is simply, as I said before, the ideology of this Government. In the case of sick leave, the legislation is unworkable. Fancy taking the phrase \u201Creasonable grounds\u201D out of the Holidays Act! What is the problem? As Moana Mackey just said, if an employer suspects an employee of rorting the system they can ask that employee for a medical certificate\u2014they have reasonable grounds. If we take \u201Creasonable grounds\u201D out of the Act, then every employer can ask any employee at any time to come up with a medical certificate within 3 days. Imagine the issue of having to go to a medical centre or a doctor in order to get one. Even Peter Dunne, who is supporting the Government\u2014as he normally does, but he is supporting the National Government this time\u2014said that was unworkable. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001135\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003EThen in this Chamber we heard Roger Douglas talk about the right of choice and the 40-hour week. We could go back 100 years and hear the same speeches about employers from people in this House asking why workers have to have a 40-hour week, and why they cannot have the choice to work an extra 10, 20, or 30 hours. By that logic, why give the option of only 1 week\u2019s holiday; why not 4 weeks\u2019 holiday, so that people just continue to work through their holidays? There is no logic and this bill shows no understanding of the power relations between an employer and an employee. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001136\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003EThis bill is not based on evidence, it is not based on any logic, but it is based on ideology. It is based on the fact that we want to pretend that there is a plan, and that we want to pretend that we will make New Zealand more productive. All we will do is to take away the rights of people who do not have the right to say no. I am tired of sitting in this Chamber and having ideology rammed down our throats as a plan.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022 data-id=\u00224a66cdf36ef44840b3f7feae42a7a070\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001137\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224a66cdf36ef44840b3f7feae42a7a070\u0022\u003ELOUISE UPSTON (National\u2014Taup\u014D):\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=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022 data-id=\u0022bbd25e7a3a4b4e33950abfbe3d26c2d4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001138\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bbd25e7a3a4b4e33950abfbe3d26c2d4\u0022\u003EDr RAJEN PRASAD (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I wanted to take a call to address the provision in this bill to sell the fourth week of one\u2019s holiday. I have sat here for some time listening to how the provision is justified by this notion of choice. We have heard a lot about choice today. The Hon Dr Wayne Mapp said earlier, when he entered the Chamber, that it was also about money. Well, I say to the Hon Dr Wayne Mapp that it is not about money\u2014time is important. I wonder when a Government member will rise to defend the rights and needs of the families who require that time. I wonder whether members opposite will stand up and defend the right to cry \u201CFire!\u201D in a crowded room simply because they feel like it, because that is the choice they have. They will not. Members on that side of the Chamber are reluctant to speak about the limits of this notion of choice. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001139\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003EPresenting the notion that the provision to sell 1 week\u2019s leave is a choice is really being cute. It is being cute with the lives of our families, and I will explain why as I go along. The idea behind the fourth week of annual leave is to give our families time. I do not see Government members rising to defend the right of choice in everything; they do not. They are always very, very selective, and they have been today, as well, when they have been talking about choice. It essentially means a choice when members on that side of the Chamber have the chance to peddle their particular ideology on any matter that is introduced into this House. I ask why they do not defend the right to choose in relation to speeding. I ask what their basic argument is to say that one does not have the choice to drive beyond the speed limit. They can see that doing that has dangers. This House has rules in place, and that one is about safety; it is about the safety of others. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001140\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003EChoices have to be balanced out, as well. It is not just a matter of choice, willy-nilly, but it is for members opposite, when they want to make a particular ideological point. There is no choice over whether to break into a house, because that is about safety and the rights of others. There is no choice over whether we pay our taxes. That is something we all have to do, because that is how a decent society and our kind of democracy operates. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003EWhy has choice become so important for this Government, and why is the Minister of Labour driving the notion of choice through this particular provision\u2014the provision to sell the fourth week of one\u2019s annual leave. I wonder when members opposite will show a real appreciation of the notion of the fourth week of annual leave. Why was it introduced, and why did Labour members when in Government support that notion? I understand that National members never supported the notion of having a fourth week of holiday. Did they? No, they did not. This is one way, by stealth, that they are trying to get rid of it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001142\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003EEssentially, this provision says to me that the Government is anti-family; it is absolutely anti-family. The notion of spending time with the family is one of the most important predictors of family well-being. The one thing that families constantly tell us is that they require time\u2014time to parent, to celebrate who they are, to build relationships, and to have real family time. This is when a family recovers. This is when a family enjoys themselves. This is when the family develops all of the good will that family members require throughout their lifetime as a family. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001143\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003EWhen this bill attacks family time, it is essentially attacking our families. It is taking away from the very unit that we want to make the strongest unit possible in our society. The fourth week of holiday is a very important time. It is incredible that Government members have not shown any appreciation of the provision of the fourth week of holiday. Government members have said that this is simply a choice, but it is a choice on the employer\u2019s side only.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022 data-id=\u0022bdd01e9bd48e4870a19baee7f4cfe670\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001144\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bdd01e9bd48e4870a19baee7f4cfe670\u0022\u003ECARMEL SEPULONI (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E Thank you for allowing me to take a call on the Committee stage of the Holidays Amendment Bill. I think it is important to put this bill into perspective, and before I get to the gist of this, I will reflect a little bit on National\u2019s past record on employees\u2019 rights. For those members, it has been all about employers\u2019 rights as opposed to employees\u2019 rights, but let us look at their record on employees\u2019 rights.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001145\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EThe unfortunate reality is that far too many of the Ministers in the current Government are from National\u2019s school of the 1990s, and we need to remember that. We need to remember that that school of thought taught that employees\u2019 rights should be secondary to business profits. We on this side of the House are not anti-business; we think it is important to support business while ensuring that employees have their rights protected. But the reality is that the Government side of the House does not believe the same thing. National, as everyone in this Chamber would know\u2014even those from National\u2014has an absolutely shocking record on employees\u2019 rights. It tried to put on a smiley face at the 2008 election and pretend that things were going to be different from last time, and that things would not change much with regard to what Labour had put in place when we were in Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001146\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EI will touch in particular on what the Government side of the Chamber has tried to say with regard to stopping the sickie.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001147\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220a9a7bdfd49e476ea8a676aa17705d7f\u0022\u003EDarien Fenton\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s insulting.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001148\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f6f19931fe0d49b5b32ce70821cf4501\u0022\u003ECARMEL SEPULONI\u003C/span\u003E: It is incredibly insulting. It is incredibly insulting because the Government side of the Chamber has implied the whole way along, with regard to the rhetoric it has put out there, that New Zealanders are basically ripping off the system, New Zealanders are lazy, New Zealanders are lying to their bosses, and New Zealanders are taking every opportunity to stay home when they are not sick and not only waste their employer\u2019s time but take advantage of their position. It is a horrible way to think. It is a petty way to think. It is a terrible foundation on which a Government builds a relationship with the public if that is the assumption they are making about workers out there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001149\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EThe idea that in taking 1 day off sick an employee would be expected to visit a doctor and get a doctor\u2019s certificate is just absolutely ridiculous. All of us know that since National has come into power, since the National Government has been at the reins\u2014since 2008, when it won that election\u2014the medical bills have gone up. Yet now we are putting more costs on to the average working person by saying that if they decide to take just 1 day\u20141 day\u2014off sick, they will have to visit the doctor, and they will have to fork out for that themselves. We on this side of the Chamber think that is an unrealistic and unfair expectation of ordinary Kiwi workers, who are not lazy, who work hard, and who when they say they are sick they are genuinely sick, and should be supported by their employers to take that time off and stay home.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001150\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EMy colleague who spoke just before me, Mr Prasad, brought up the fact that this Government\u2019s employment policy shows that it is, unfortunately\u2014but in reality\u2014anti-family. When we look at the provisions that are in place with regard to sick leave, we see it is another area that proves that the National Government is anti-family. After 1 day off\u20141 day off\u2014employees must go to the doctors and get a medical certificate. The cost of going to the doctor is money that is taken away from that adult\u2019s ability to look after their children. That 1 day that they need to take off sick, they may not be able to afford to. Therefore, they continue on at work, and later on they end up much sicker than they would have been. Who suffers from that? It is the children, because they have parents who cannot spend time with them. In the long term the parents will be much sicker than they should be because they did not take the time off when they needed to. The Government side of the Chamber makes no sense with regard to the decisions that they make.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022 data-id=\u002211ac56a68894417eace9df46d0752a78\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001151\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002211ac56a68894417eace9df46d0752a78\u0022\u003ECAROL BEAUMONT (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I want to follow up on a couple of points in this part of the Holidays Amendment Bill. First of all, I will follow on from my colleagues regarding proof of sickness or injury, and then I will go back to alternative holidays. I will also talk about some ways that we can improve this bill. There are some very good amendments, which those members on the other side of the Chamber might want to look at. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001152\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EI made a point earlier about alternative holidays and that this bill is mean-spirited and unnecessary. I note that the Minister of Labour is in the chair. This is her legislation. Why is that provision there? When we look at all of the material and all the submissions, we see there seems to be no great desire to make the change around alternative holidays, so why is it there? Why does the Minister not rise and address the Committee and become part of this debate? These are important changes that are disadvantaging New Zealand workers. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001153\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EOn the issue of proof of sickness or injury, it is really impossible to figure out the reason behind this. In fact, no evidence was provided of a need for this provision. For example, there was no commentary about it in the regulatory impact statement. What need is this provision addressing? What problem is it meant to be solving? Doctors have publicly commented on the fact that it will not work. The General Practice New Zealand chairwoman, Bev O\u2019Keefe, told the New Zealand Press Association that there could be capacity problems in our medical centres if people who are sick for 1 day are trying to get in because they are required to get a medical certificate. I think everybody in this Chamber would probably tell us that it is nigh on impossible to see one\u2019s doctor on the day one is sick. The General Practice New Zealand chairwoman said that capacity problems could well ensue. Doctors also tell us that when people are generally unwell, sometimes the best thing to do is to stay at home in bed\u2014not to go into work and spread their illness, and not to go into very busy medical centres and spread what they have around everybody else. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001154\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EWhat is the purpose of this provision? How fair is it to be able to require somebody to get a medical certificate for sickness or injury, without having to have a genuine reason for doing so and without having to tell that person why? I can see a situation where this provision could actually be abused. We can see a harassment situation occurring where, if somebody had got up the employer\u2019s nose, one way to go about it would be to start being really hard line on medical certificates. It sounds crazy, but it does not sound any crazier than the actual provision. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001155\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EWhy is it necessary to make this change, when there are already very clear provisions in the Act that say if an employer has good grounds to suspect that somebody is abusing the sick leave provisions, the employer can require the employee to get a medical certificate? It is already there. The only difference is that the employer actually has to have a reason. That does not seem to me to be unfair, but it does seem unfair that an employer can make somebody go and get a medical certificate without giving a reason. I would really like to ask the Minister about that, because I may be missing something profoundly important. It would be great to hear the Minister speak on this important legislation, that makes major changes to our employment legislation. Certainly, I think this is a real concern. Overwhelmingly, people who submitted felt that this provision was just Draconian and going back, as one submitter said, to the Victorian ages. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001156\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EWe have some good amendments in this area. One of those is an amendment that would require the employer to advise the employee why they are asking them to get a medical certificate. That seems only fair. At the moment, the clause provides for the meeting of reasonable expenses. The employer must meet the employee\u2019s reasonable expenses in getting a medical certificate. We in this Chamber all know that the cost of medical certificates can vary around New Zealand. Where I live in Auckland it is pretty expensive. We are proposing that we omit \u201Creasonable\u201D and substitute \u201Cfull\u201D. That would be an improvement, at least, in that the full cost of getting a medical certificate would have to be covered. I would like the Minister to get up and answer some of these questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022 data-id=\u0022ecea7595722243a6bfb3dcaf81873dfc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001157\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ecea7595722243a6bfb3dcaf81873dfc\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022ba9985274edb4b29ae25728a3ff47a41\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 51\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001158\u0022\u003EThe result corrected after originally being announced as Ayes 59, Noes 51.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001159\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard to clause 10 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001160\u0022\u003Eto insert in new section 28A(2) the following paragraph above paragraph (b):\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001161\u0022\u003E\u201C(a)\tmust be informed and voluntary; and\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002203326a9061b8446f8142fa60c70aa4b1\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 51\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 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\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022 data-id=\u00224545ef94f14a48008678af8d01146a1f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001162\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224545ef94f14a48008678af8d01146a1f\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: There is a correction to the closure motion. The Ayes are 69 and the Noes are 51. The record will be amended.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001163\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard to clause 10 be agreed to: \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001164\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003Eto insert in new section 28A(2) the following paragraph above paragraph (b):\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001165\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u201C(a)\tmust be made in the absence of duress; and\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002269b241c3ca7f4905b0c0d8deb5cd9bf3\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 51\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 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=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001166\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard to clause 10 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001167\u0022\u003Eto omit from new section 28A(2)(c) \u201C1 week\u201D and substitute \u201C1 day\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022bfc22fdd581741be8ca3f37d0d832826\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 51\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 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=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001168\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c206bf3a877142edbecc80409f228842\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: The next three amendments in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard to substitute other amounts of days are ruled out of order as being substantially the same as an amendment already determined by the Committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard to clause 10 be agreed to: \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001170\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003Eto add to new section 28A(2) the following paragraph:\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001171\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u201C(d)\tmay only be made once in a 10-year period of continuous employment.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00220cec17e20ced4413bb39657ad49ab688\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 51\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 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=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001172\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022696853bed223422d9d233e7d0023b3f3\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: The next eight amendments in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard to substitute other dates are ruled out of order as being substantially the same as the amendment already determined by the Committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001173\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard to clause 10 be agreed to: \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001174\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003Eto omit from new section 28A(4)(b) \u201Cnot\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022f0ddb7e080e44a74b4708dda52bcd3b9\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 51\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 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=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001175\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard to clause 10 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001176\u0022\u003Eto add to new section 28D(b) \u201C, nor may it be raised at any time in the future as a reason for not providing a pay increase to an employee\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022bcfc4ef3914143878f5f26fd65b98141\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 51\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 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=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001177\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Darien Fenton to Part 1 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001178\u0022\u003Eto insert the following new clause:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001179\u0022\u003E11A\tDays that are public holidays\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001180\u0022\u003ESection 44 is amended by adding the following substection:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001181\u0022\u003E\u201C(5)\tWhenever Easter Monday and Anzac Day fall on the same day, Easter Monday must be treated as falling on the following Tuesday.\u201D\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002232544977fdf74b7c9e3ec11d8b9301b9\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 51\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 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=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001182\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard to clause 12 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001183\u0022\u003Eto omit from new section 44A(2) \u201Cthe employee and his or her employer may agree in writing (whether in an employment agreement or otherwise)\u201D, and substitute \u201Cthe employee may request that\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002257201a6e81b341baa2290176c1759948\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 51\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 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=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001184\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard to clause 12 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001185\u0022\u003Eto insert in new section 44A the following subsection after subsection (2):\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001186\u0022\u003E\u201C(2A)\tAny reasonable request by an employee under subsection (2) must not be refused by the employer.\u201D\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002206732389c3a3431a8b598a9f8eaa55e0\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 51\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 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=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001187\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard to clause 12 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001188\u0022\u003Eto omit from new section 44A(3) all the words after \u201Cfor working on a public holiday\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022568e3a4738ae4ad892d437e192013ffe\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 51\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 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=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001189\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Kate Wilkinson to clause 13 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001190\u0022\u003Eto insert the following subclause after the clause heading:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001191\u0022\u003E(1)\tSection 57(1) is amended by adding \u201C; and\u201D and also by adding the following paragraph:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001192\u0022\u003E\u201C(d)\tnot to be taken on a public holiday.\u201D\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022e34b191022fe42b484a82fb9f7ad8c86\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 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 51\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\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=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002263ccf7584c9447379d07074657d0a4b5\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: The next 12 amendments in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard to clause 13 are ruled out of order, as contrary to a previous decision of the Committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001194\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard to clause 14 be agreed to: \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001195\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003Eto omit from new section 68(1A)(b) \u201Creasonable\u201D and substitute \u201Cfull\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00221664ea66d0b04369a7d1b4254bc47260\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 51\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 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=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001196\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard to clause 14 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001197\u0022\u003Eto add to new section 68(1A) the following paragraph:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001198\u0022\u003E\u201C(c)\tinforms the employee of the grounds upon which the employer suspects that the sick leave being taken by the employee is not genuine because none of the grounds in section 65(1) are met.\u201D\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00224269a3aa5a574fb5acfcdc5c54675dee\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 51\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 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=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001199\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002270f72996b48a401f95a8cd1ecc78ee35\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: The Hon Trevor Mallard\u2019s second amendment to in clause 14 add new paragraph (c) to section 68(1A) in relation to genuine reasons for sick leave is ruled out of order, as the amendment is substantially the same as an amendment already negatived by the Committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022de4fda390d784713b957e7f017042050\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That Part 1 as amended be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 51\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 1 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001200\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00225ee15e0651424c868bcaf9f3a222d9fd\u0022\u003EPart 2  Amendments to other Acts and transitional provisions\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u00228332e15b91614aeda5396e8fc3c1676e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001201\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228332e15b91614aeda5396e8fc3c1676e\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I think it is fair to say that Part 2 is not quite as big as the previous part that we have been dealing with in the Holidays Amendment Bill, but it involves schedule 2 and clause 19, \u201CTransitional Provision\u201D. Schedule 2, \u201CAmendments to other Acts\u201D, cross-references the Employment Relations Act 2000 No 24. Schedule 2 involves repealing section 79(1) and substituting new section 79(1), which states: \u201CAn employer must pay to an eligible employee the employee\u2019s relevant daily pay as defined in section 9 of the Holidays Act 2003 or average daily pay calculated in accordance with section 9A of that Act (as the case may be) for every day or part of a day taken by the employee as employment relations education leave.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001202\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EThere is a further amendment, in this case to the Parental Leave and Employment Protection Act 1987 No 129, whereby there is an addition to the end of section 42(2) of the words \u201Cis taken or paid out\u201D. So the essence of schedule 2 is that the Acts listed\u2014the Employment Relations Act and the Parental Leave and Employment Protection Act\u2014are amended. At first glance, they appear to be relatively minor changes, but when one looks at them more carefully, one can see that these provisions hook right into the vicious attacks on workers. In the case of the first Act that is amended by the schedule, this nasty new approach to relevant daily pay is important to the Employment Relations Act for people who are taking employment relations education leave, as well as for other reasons.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001203\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EClause 19 is the other operative clause of the bill and, effectively, is a transitional provision. It states: \u201CTo avoid doubt, a request under section 28A of the principal Act (as inserted by section 10 of this Act) may be made only in relation to an entitlement year that begins on or after the commencement of this Act.\u201D I think members agreed to insert this amendment as part of section 10. One of the questions is whether it should be \u201Csection 10 of this Act\u201D or \u201Cclause 10\u201D, because I think that when this bill is passed, the provision will be part of the substantive Act, and then there will be a numbering question. It may well be that because this bill will not be a stand-alone Act, because it amends the Holidays Act, there is the question of whether the reference in clause 19 should be to\u201Csection 10 of this Act\u201D, or to \u201Cclause 10 of this bill\u201D. A section, of course, is what finally goes into legislation; a clause is what we are dealing with here.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001204\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EThere will not be a Holidays Amendment Act standing alone in the statute book. All the changes that are made as a result of this legislation will be imported into the substantive Act, which is the Holidays Act\u2014I have lost the original year, my colleagues might be able to help me\u20142003. It has been about 7 years. I cannot quite recall whether this Holidays Act was one that was totally rewritten in 2003, or whether it is one from an earlier date. As it turns out, the principal Act is from 2003. When the legislation is reprinted and all put together, there will be a 2003 Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001205\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EThe Holidays Amendment Bill that we are dealing with now will not exist as an Act, because it will sit right through the other bits of legislation. We will not be able to find it. When the legal people of Brookers have worked their way through consolidating the Acts in the way that they do, wandering through our offices every now and again, this bill, which will become an Act, will be part of the substantive Act, and we will be able to find it in the statute books with the points I have mentioned all made. It is a question for the Minister in the chair, the Hon Kate Wilkinson\u2014and I know she is right on top of these drafting and constitutional issues\u2014to tell us whether the reference in clause 19 to section 10 should read \u201Csection 10 of this Act\u201D or \u201Cclause 10 of this bill\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001206\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EIn fact, the person who was an assistant lecturer at a polytech and could not make it into the legal faculty but instead made it into the commerce faculty as an assistant lecturer, Dr Wayne Mapp, is the font of legal wisdom currently on the other side of the Chamber. It may be that he is able to take a call and let us know from his experience, which got him as far as being an assistant reader. Does that mean that he helped people read, or does it mean that someone had to read to him, if he was an assistant reader at the polytech in the commerce faculty rather than the legal faculty? Perhaps he could not quite make it into the law faculty because his qualifications were not flash. It may be that he has the drafting knowledge to indicate to us what the right approach should be.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001207\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EGoing back to the question of employment relations education leave, I am pleased that the Minister of Labour has decided to put it in the bill. She raises what is an important issue for us. Making sure that the conditions are appropriate for people as they take their employment relations education leave is very important. This bill is designed to drive down the conditions and drive down the payments that people receive when they have employment relations education leave, which used to be pretty widely available and is now very, very rationed. The leave initiative has been widely supported by the union movement and by a lot of employers, because they know that a well-educated workforce, which understands the industrial relations area as a result of employment relations education leave, is much more likely to take a problem-solving approach, rather than a combative problem-causing approach.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001208\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EOf course, National has different views on this. Those members prefer people to be at the barricades and lobbing grenades at each other, and we can look at schedule 2, which contains amendments to other Acts, including substituting section 79(1) of the Employment Relations Act 2000. Labour is very strongly supportive of making sure that when employees take their employment relations education leave, they are not disadvantaged in the way that has been done in that amendment. Frankly, it has been done in a pretty sneaky way. I ask why the Minister of Labour did not stand up in this Chamber and say that the Government will cut employees\u2019 pay when they take employment relations education leave. I ask why she did not get on her hind legs and admit to the House that the objective of this Government is to cut back the payments that people receive when they take their employment relations education leave. What did she do? She sneaked it into a schedule, sitting it at the back of the bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022 data-id=\u0022d6a3fc384d2447e69927550b7d415f38\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001209\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d6a3fc384d2447e69927550b7d415f38\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I have to admit to being absolutely dismayed on examining schedule 2 and the amendment to the Employment Relations Act in relation to employment relations education leave. I was on the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee and I have to admit that the provision went past me. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001210\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226fe00ed02b8b4b19be6a33fd2bcce39a\u0022\u003EJo Goodhew\u003C/span\u003E: Oh!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001211\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002226e1ecf833654c27ab8d4e51c7c3c3b9\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON\u003C/span\u003E: Jo Goodhew should listen, because it is a very, very important provision for workers when it comes to having an active and engaged workforce, whose members understand their rights\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001212\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229ac60cc4dbe944209839fcbc0c809584\u0022\u003EHon Dr Wayne Mapp\u003C/span\u003E: Unlike the current member, who is neither active nor engaged. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001213\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224d68ecfbf3774c13b6f31064a6a0ecf0\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON\u003C/span\u003E: What is that noise over there? There is a bit of a noise going on over there. It would be good if it just stopped. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001214\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EThis provision comes on top of the sneaky cuts that this Government made to employment relations education in last year\u2019s Budget. It cut the contestable fund by 56 percent.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001215\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022592b612401794dfcb30f93388d3a0f3e\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Well, this is consistent with that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001216\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ca01b5c55ef345f381b196906b845ec2\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON\u003C/span\u003E: I know that Wayne Mapp gets all excited when we start talking about workers\u2019 rights, but that fund also applies to employers. They were just as upset about that as unions, workers\u2019 representatives, and the Council of Trade Unions were. Employers also use that fund to educate their managers and businesses about productive employment relationships. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001217\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003ELet us face it, one of the problems we have in this country, and it has been well researched and well documented, is that we have a low quality of management. That is one of the issues that are standing in the way of increasing our productivity.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001218\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228fd33d51fbf14cbdb60629dec8169c7a\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: If they went to some of those union education leave courses, the quality of their management could well improve.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001219\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e1fbb92efcb945988e7dce0c3efeb483\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, that is true. They might learn something. But now it will be even more difficult, of course.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001220\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f33272320f2f42bfb00f6aba23f806fc\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: The managers wouldn\u2019t want to go on the pay that the workers get for it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001221\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002245b3326e8a684453b13d76d35c1ae083\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON\u003C/span\u003E: No, that is true, and what will happen is that unions will have to top up that pay. It will become yet another compliance cost on unions, which are trying to do the right thing. They are trying to make sure that they are able to have engaged, informed, and well-educated workers, so that they do not have to knock on the door of employers all the time to talk to them about what is going on in their workplaces. The whole idea about employment relations education leave is that many issues can be solved in the workplace by workplace representatives or delegates. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001222\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EI am disappointed about that, but I also refer to the transitional provision in clause 19 in Part 2, which refers to section 28A of the Holidays Act. I think it is an illustration of the mess that this whole legislation has got us into. We heard from members opposite in the earlier debate about how workers will just love the ability to cash up their annual leave and that they cannot wait to do so. We heard that they are so grateful to the Government. Of course, this bill will not come into force until next year. I come to the commencement date, because there is some confusion over that, as well. The bill will not come into force until next year. All sorts of people have been listening to the National Government\u2019s rhetoric. They are thinking that at least they can get a pay increase by cashing up their annual leave this year. They have not had any other sort of pay increase, because this Government has no plan to build the economy\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001223\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c0b1187acd3b45b0a1bd552368b90c59\u0022\u003EHon Tau Henare\u003C/span\u003E: Stop your moaning and stand up straight. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001224\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226057bf0d15874cea90d4be4723c124b1\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, sergeant-major, I say to Tau Henare. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001225\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EThere is no plan to build the economy, to increase wages, or to bridge the gap with Australia\u2014we all know that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001226\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EIn schedule 1, \u201CConsequential amendments to principal Act\u201D, what we have again is an illustration of the confusion of this bill. Although we have not talked a lot about average daily pay versus relevant daily pay, because overall we do not have major difficulties with the change, what we do have in this bill is a choice for employers between one system and the other. How confusing is that? We have heard again and again how difficult the Holidays Act is to interpret, and how complicated relevant daily pay is to calculate and so on, but now we have a choice. Oh my goodness, all of those sections under schedule 1 will be amended, and I think we are getting into a right old mess. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001227\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EThe Holidays Act is criticised again and again, and this bill is supposed to be the opportunity for the Government to show everybody in the country that it can do a better job than the previous Labour Government, but I think it has mucked it up. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022 data-id=\u0022d3818c78547e4c73b9cfacd7547478a2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001228\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d3818c78547e4c73b9cfacd7547478a2\u0022\u003ECAROL BEAUMONT (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I will also talk about clause 19, \u201CTransitional provision\u201D, in Part 2. It contains the phrase \u201Csection 28A of the principal Act (as inserted by section 10 of this Act)\u201D, which relates to the question of when people will be able to cash up 1 week of their annual leave, as my colleague Darien Fenton has said. New section 28A(5) defines the term \u201Centitlement year\u201D. It is \u201Ca period of 12 months continuous employment beginning on the anniversary of the employee\u2019s employment; and (b) includes a period of 12 months continuous employment described in section 16(2).\u201D of the Holidays Act. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001229\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EWhen we look at the provisions in new section 28A, \u201CEmployee may request portion of annual holidays be paid out\u201D, we see that they go through the process as to how that will happen. Originally that process was to be informed and voluntary. It will no longer be informed and voluntary. The suggestion that was made to people that the process would happen only when employees wanted it to happen and that everyone would understand the full implications and be very, very clear that it was voluntary is no longer there, but there are some other provisions on how employees will request that a portion of their annual holidays are paid out. The request must be made in writing, and it may be made on one occasion, or on more than one separate occasion, for example. Employers must consider the request and advise employees in writing as to whether they agree. Employers can decline the request. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001230\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EWe heard a lot of rhetoric about this matter. We heard that Labour is not supporting workers\u2019 choice, and we have had all the high dudgeon about property rights and about whose holidays they are. They are employees\u2019 holidays and, apparently, we are trying to stop employees using their property, their holidays. Well, actually, if people were honest\u2014and members opposite did not mention this bit\u2014the absolute right is with the employer. We have heard all the great rhetoric on this matter tonight from ACT and National, but the property right in relation to buying out holidays effectively sits with employers, because they can deny the request. But, more than that, employers can have an absolutely blanket policy that workers in their workplace will not be able to buy their fourth week\u2019s annual leave. That will be the policy of those employers\u2014full stop, tough luck. I would quite like to see whether Ms Roy will get up and explain that situation with regard to the property right and choice. Given that the Opposition got such a bollocking from her about that, perhaps she can explain why it is OK for employers to do that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001231\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EAfter section 28A, there is a whole range of requirements in clause 10 regarding how this provision will work. New section 28B, \u201CPayment for annual holidays paid out\u201D, sets out how the payment will be made and what will happen if it is incorrectly paid out. New section 28D, \u201CRequirement to make payout prohibited\u201D, provides that an employee\u2019s request under section 28A for a portion to be paid out must not be a term or condition of that employee\u2019s employment. We agree with that\u2014we certainly agree with that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001232\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EIn new section 28E, as I said, employers may have a policy preventing paying out a portion of annual holidays. New section 28F, \u201CLabour inspector may determine payout\u201D, states: \u201C(1) This section applies if an employer has agreed to an employee\u2019s request to pay out a portion of the employee\u2019s annual holidays under section 28A,\u201D\u2014which is the bit that the transitional provision in the bill applies to\u2014\u201Cbut the employer and employee cannot agree on\u2014(a) the portion of annual holidays that are to be, or have been, paid out; or (b) the amount that the employer is required to pay the employee for the annual holidays that are to be, or have been, paid out.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001233\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EThese provisions are quite a lengthy bit in the bill. My point in relation to the transitional provision, and section 28A, is that before employees may be able to access this provision, depending on whether their employer has a policy that they can access the right to cash up their holidays, a year might be necessary to deal with all the arrangements.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022 data-id=\u002284fe5504f33344ae9a57f6e53cbe9673\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001234\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002284fe5504f33344ae9a57f6e53cbe9673\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE (National):\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=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022 data-id=\u002273989b992ad241e9beed9dce3f44b6fb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001235\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002273989b992ad241e9beed9dce3f44b6fb\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I am standing again, along with my colleagues, to take a call.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001236\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fe3a0400a9b54a21969deaa072f259eb\u0022\u003EHon Tau Henare\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, you\u2019re not standing again!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001237\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dcf9cdede2a7401fa07a707dc0e57fb8\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: Well, it is a pity that that member is\u2014[Interruption] I will start again. I am not getting into any of that nonsense. Members should settle down. I want to talk about schedule 2, which relates to employment relations education leave and average daily pay, which will be calculated, let us be honest, on the lesser amount. What does that mean for workers in New Zealand? I know that the Government would argue about the value of paid education leave, and I acknowledge that it has not applied its usual slash-and-burn approach this time. It has been more a case of burning a bit off the corners, but, essentially, it takes some money out of it. As my colleague said, paying at the rate of employment relations education leave for the day means, effectively, less pay\u2014just as there are fewer holidays and fewer rights, etc. It is a case of same old, same old from National.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001238\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EMembers on the Government side of the Chamber\u2014certainly not those on this side of the Chamber\u2014may say: \u201CWell, so what? What\u2019s a few bucks less on paid education leave? What\u2019s a few dollars less?\u201D. Again, it is one of those dreadful choices that workers have to make. They want to take education leave because they know the value of it, but they know that if they will be a few bucks down, it will make a real difference to their household incomes. Why? Because this Government does not care about ordinary people and their ability to earn a good living. And I could go right through all the cuts and all the things that have happened under this Government. But I want to talk about the importance of a few dollars when workers take paid education leave. Workers will weigh up the increased cost of GST and the increased cost of early childhood education, which may be up to $50 a week for some parents. So when it comes to paid education leave, which is a necessity for good workplace relations, it will be another one of those dreadful choices. National says it is the party of choice. Yes\u2014and the choice people are given is absolutely reprehensible.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001239\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022941020d1d08f40b9955dddb42c442c3e\u0022\u003EHon Tau Henare\u003C/span\u003E: And the choice New Zealand made was not you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001240\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b05d1b4edd3c4c16ae47ec656b077944\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: I am not even listening; I cannot hear what the member is saying. I am really pleased about that because he has been talking nonsense all night. I will not even acknowledge him, although it is irritating. [Interruption] I ask whether David Bennett has taken a call. No, it has been Tau Henare every step of the way. We are over that man! Let the Minister in the chair, the Minister of Defence, take a call. Come on, bring it on!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001241\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EI want to finish by acknowledging the value of paid education leave. I have been to paid education leave days that enlightened employers have attended in order to learn about health and safety. They see the value of it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001242\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EOnce again, this Government is trying to disincentivise workers using, and having the right to use, paid education leave. It is being done, as are other things in this House\u2014and I can see Chairman Roy looking sympathetic\u2014by stealth. That is what is most offensive. At least we know where the ACT Party\u2014shocking as it is\u2014and Roger Douglas are coming from. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u00228400eab38e754ae39b5f7066da69d64e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001243\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228400eab38e754ae39b5f7066da69d64e\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I want to focus again on the schedules and the consequential amendments in the Holidays Amendment Bill to the principal Act. I take my lead from my colleague Darien Fenton, who has made a great contribution in this area. I am sure at some stage, as these matters get to the Employment Court, if it still exists, or the Court of Appeal, or the Supreme Court, they will be cognisant of it. In particular, I want to look at section 16(4) of the principal Act, which, as we established after a little bit of work last time, is the Holidays Act 2003. I know it is spelt principal with an a-l and not an l-e, because, due to the way it has been changed, it could never be described as a principled Act; it is a principal Act in this particular case. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001244\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EAs a consequential amendment to the principal Act, section 16(4) is repealed and substituted, not surprisingly, with new section 16(4). It states: \u201CAn employee\u2019s entitlement to annual holidays remains in force until the employee has\u2014(a) taken all of the entitlement as paid holidays; or, (b) been paid out under section 28B for the entitlement in the entitlement year.\u201D One of the questions that I want to ask is a drafting question. We have as the Minister in the chair the former \u201CAssistant Professor\u201D Mapp of a commercial law faculty of a polytech, the name of which I cannot remember. It is a question of drafting. What is the technical name of quotation marks, the thing that sits in front? I note the quotation marks are sitting at the beginning of each of the clauses, but are only at the end of the last one. I wonder why the statements are not either all surrounded by quotation marks or each of the headers in the subclauses are surrounded by quotation marks. Again, I think it is pretty important at some stage that we get this right.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001245\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002242d8adc481db47fa87123ad1ab3c6d57\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: I think the member is talking about schedule 1, and we are debating schedule 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001246\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bc72ee6738f2475197bb6a2136cdc92d\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry; I am happy to switch to schedule 2. I thought we were on schedule 2 as well, because as I indicated I heard my colleague Darien Fenton make an entire speech for 5 minutes on schedule 1. I thought it was such a learned contribution that the Chair had decided we would open it up and have another debate in that area so that we could go to some of the possible drafting errors there. I know the Chairman comes from Southland and is generally pretty reasonable and not too stuffed shirt about his approach to these things\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001247\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fb4fd401d721424b9529b41b9145bea8\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: Schedule 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001248\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022277f838cfe704ab983941d14dd667d2d\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014and I just thought that he was being generous in a way. Frankly, I want to know which drafting approach is the proper one. Is it the approach in schedule 1 or in schedule 2? In schedule 2, the quotation marks are just at the beginning and the end. I think it is fair to say that in schedule 2 there is only one subclause. There are no subparts of the clause; therefore, what has happened is that there are quotation marks around the beginning and the end of it. That could be the reason. But when one looks at the parental leave change, one can see that the quotation mark is partway through the line and the addition, repeal, or substitution is outside of it. It does not appear to have the type of quotation notations that are in the earlier stage. I know that after a number of years in this place I should be used to some of the drafting foibles and some of the questions\u2014and I ask the member not to yawn, because I am likely to go sleep during my own speech if she continues\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001249\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002222ac586bbef8467780e050641e668c95\u0022\u003ECarmel Sepuloni\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m not yawning.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001250\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002271bbec6642bd4ff196929411fcc921ac\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: Or is she hiding her face in amazement at the contribution?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f99bcf9e-1ad4-4ed4-9a97-1cccb5b1e11a\u0022 data-id=\u0022b945980015c04e30bcfc5c9ea04d2da7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001251\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f99bcf9e-1ad4-4ed4-9a97-1cccb5b1e11a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b945980015c04e30bcfc5c9ea04d2da7\u0022\u003EDr JACKIE BLUE (National):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001252\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022982c7855692b461e93aa81444beb060b\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is, That the question be now put. Those who are of that opinion will say Aye, of the contrary opinion will say No. Party vote called for?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001253\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002299bc5242aaa54beeb382e4fc4835f2d2\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Absolutely.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001254\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ec5aa8ae5d3a46eabc7d15f287ef2d9d\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: The Clerk will conduct a party vote.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u0022a72f24465c634fe9a619381bebf5081e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001255\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a72f24465c634fe9a619381bebf5081e\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I do not think you declared a result. I think you have to declare a result before we challenge it. You did not say that the Ayes have it or the Noes have it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001256\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221277182e9be143c7885b818f5cc8424a\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: I am not sure that is the case. I can make a determination that it is a split call. I said \u201CParty vote\u201D, and the member consented that that is what Labour wanted. That is what we are doing. The Clerk will now conduct a party vote.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022b1ca0761f3f247d8aa7be7892f8fbef4\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 51\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022137e94bfedb34a278adc78f090fbe584\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That Part 2 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 51\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 2 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001257\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002229149924d09045878d60df56d8ca5628\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: There is zero tolerance for comments made during voting\u2014zero.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u0022075fa99dd6df459aaf63f2f41586d2b3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001258\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022075fa99dd6df459aaf63f2f41586d2b3\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. It is a minor matter, and it is a matter that I have referred to. I refer you to Standing Order 136. The Speaker is required to state the result of the voice vote. I am not challenging your ruling, asking the Speaker to come back, or anything like that; I am just indicating that point. I know you are getting a bit tired, but in future\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001259\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224735d3b058cb43c0a9a2db5c4cec773f\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: I think the member would note through my conduct in the second vote that I had already absorbed the point he made. I thank him for his contribution.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002259efaf5fef7e4a85a4caf067fb8ee872\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That schedule 1 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 51\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESchedule 1 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00227ba7c6c3a136474ca02c8f93a95dd7f0\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That schedule 2 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 51\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESchedule 2 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001260\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00221399436ac62648ed853a667ebbb4574e\u0022\u003EClauses 1 to 3\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022 data-id=\u0022ee11276f23f9421a844993275dd1522d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001261\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ee11276f23f9421a844993275dd1522d\u0022\u003ECAROL BEAUMONT (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I rise to speak about the title of the Holidays Amendment Bill, and I want to reflect for just a moment on the word \u201Choliday\u201D. When we think about the word \u201Choliday\u201D, generally we conjure up an image of having time away from work on pay. I think that is generally what the average person would think of when he or she thinks about that word. I think they would also think about spending time with their family and friends while they are off work. I can even see members across the Chamber nodding about that. A holiday means time off work with family and friends. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001262\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EThe Holidays Amendment Bill amends the provisions around holidays. One of the major changes\u2014and let us cut to the chase\u2014one of the most controversial changes is the new provision relating to the ability to cash up 1 week of the statutory minimum, which is currently 4 weeks. Currently we have 4 weeks when we can have a holiday\u2014that is, be away from work and spend time with family and friends. One of the major provisions in this bill will allow that to change so that the statutory minimum could be 3 weeks away from work with family and friends and 1 week in money. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001263\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EFirst of all, I ask whether the name Holidays Amendment Bill is appropriate when a full quarter of our statutory minimum holiday will now not be a holiday as we know it, but, in fact, will be a lump of money. There is a rather convoluted process in the bill to work out how one would go about getting that, how it is paid out, for what period it applies, and so on. I wonder about that title, given that money is not time off work. Perhaps an alternative title might be something like \u201CHolidays (Dollars Instead) Amendment Bill\u201D, or \u201CHolidays (Stay at Work) Amendment Bill\u201D, because that is what people will be doing. They will not be having a 4-week holiday away from work with family and friends, as we have agreed is a good definition of a holiday. Instead people will receive a week\u2019s pay and they will be at work. Therefore, those are perhaps alternative titles for the bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001264\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EWe have holidays so that we can have time off work. Why do we need time off work? Obviously, time off work is time for rest and recreation. The Act actually talks about a worker\u2019s need for rest and recreation. I think we can all agree, sitting here now at 9.55 p.m., when some of us have been in the debating chamber since 9 o\u2019clock this morning, that time off work can be a very good thing\u2014a bit of rest and recreation. That is why we have holidays, and generally those holidays are times that we spend with family and friends while we have that rest and recreation. Usually people go back to work refreshed, and probably often more productive as a result of having had some time off. Certainly many people argue\u2014and there seems to be evidence to support this\u2014that fewer accidents occur when people are rested and refreshed, as opposed to what happens if people keep working. That is one important part. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001265\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EI thought that my colleague Rajen Prasad, who was previously a Families Commissioner, gave an exceptionally good speech about the importance of holidays for families. When we have a holiday we get to spend time with our family. In our country we have a culture of working long hours. Many people regret, especially when they reach an older age in life, that they have not spent more time with their family. I may have mentioned earlier that there are probably not too many people who, when they reach their retirement age, look back and say: \u201CGee I wish I had spent more time at work.\u201D Most people would wish that they had spent more time with their family, their friends, and having holidays and enjoying themselves. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001266\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003EOne of the real, genuine concerns we have about the payout on holidays is that it is not a particularly family-friendly thing to do. It means that people who really need the money will take the money and, as a consequence, they will miss out on spending time with their family. There are broad and significant implications from parents not spending time with their family, and this has been shown by good research. There has been some really interesting research done by an Australian researcher\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022 data-id=\u00228c4e1b1066ed4ebab58195d9d63ac8df\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001267\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228c4e1b1066ed4ebab58195d9d63ac8df\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I am pleased to take a call on the\u2014[Interruption] What?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001268\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229aff3ebf11a647a0a944ba91149ab06d\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s all right. I was just criticising my colleague for taking only one call.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001269\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022379ae6e9498944b9884170701c577195\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON\u003C/span\u003E: All right. I was beginning to speak on clauses 1, 2, and 3, \u201CTitle\u201D, \u201CCommencement\u201D, and \u201CPrincipal Act amended\u201D. I want to talk about clause 3, \u201CPrincipal Act amended\u201D: \u201CThis Act amends the Holidays Act 2003.\u201D. My colleague Trevor Mallard was trying to remember earlier the date of the last Holidays Act. It was 2003. I could not remember it either, actually. But I did know that it was during the term of a Labour Government, and that the last time we amended the Holidays Act we made some significant improvements. We made significant improvements to the holidays of New Zealander workers. It was great because we were on the path towards catching up with Australia in terms of its annual leave. We approved things like improvements to sick leave and bereavement leave. We gave workers time and a half for working on a statutory holiday, which they had not had before, plus a day in lieu. I was not in the House at that time but I really supported what the Labour Government did. It made a huge difference to working people throughout New Zealand. If they had been asked about it at the time, they would have said it was one of the most significant amendments to any Act that the Labour Government made.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001270\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EHere we are in 2010 amending the Holidays Act once again, but, unfortunately, we are going backwards. We are now in reverse drive and going back and undoing all the good work that Labour did. The National Government is picking at it bit by bit. I think there will be more change as time goes on. It is a real missed opportunity, because while we are debating this in the Chamber tonight our friends and fellow workers and employers in Australia have been talking about holidays once again. They have been talking about what happens next year. There is a great opportunity for this Government to do something right for a change. Next year we have the unique situation where Easter Monday and Anzac Day fall on the same day, so New Zealand workers will miss out. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001271\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b7b0639f2c1d4df181af48000432379d\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s April 2011, just after this comes into force.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001272\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002213516404dfe84062ab1f42b20bbd157f\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON\u003C/span\u003E: That is right. It is just after the commencement date for this legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001273\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e84b97e43f8f4e09beb0ba0b339a2937\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: It might be on the 25th. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001274\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f65af9d8936646079f0841bb41cdd455\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON\u003C/span\u003E: That is true. The Minister of Labour said that Anzac Day should be revered. Well, we agree with that. It does not mean that workers should not get another day off to compensate for the fact that they will miss out on one public holiday next year. That is the truth. Every state in Australia has brought in a provision giving workers an extra day off on pay next year to compensate. In the meantime, we are making it harder for workers to have proper days off to recognise public holidays that they are currently entitled to. We are going backwards. This is a huge missed opportunity.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001275\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EThere are other things that the Government could have done. If the Government really had to go down the path of doing the things it has done\u2014for example, requiring a medical certificate after 1 day\u2019s sick leave\u2014it could have introduced an amendment to make sure that the reimbursement was for actual costs. It could have ensured that the reimbursement was not just for the cost of the doctor but also for the cost of finding a babysitter or childminder, getting into the car to go to the doctor, and perhaps taking time off work. The Government could have done that, but of course it did not. It was one of the sensible amendments that members on this side of the Chamber proposed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001276\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EAnother amendment that would have made this bill much fairer related to the whole issue of transferring public holidays. Labour members do not have a problem with the idea that people can transfer their holidays to a day that has more cultural meaning to them. Our concern is that it could be used to avoid paying time and a half on the actual day. This bill could have been amended to make it much stronger so that that could not happen. If a worker is required to work on an official public holiday\u2014a recognised public holiday\u2014the worker should be paid time and a half.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001277\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003EAnother missed opportunity was an amendment to make sure that if workers cash up their leave, it is not a substitute for a pay increase.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022 data-id=\u00228734ad28553a4e299e99a17adffcfb0f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001278\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228734ad28553a4e299e99a17adffcfb0f\u0022\u003ESUE MORONEY (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E Thank you for the opportunity to rise and speak to clauses 1 to 3 of the Holidays Amendment Bill. The part that I really want to focus on is clause 3, \u201CPrincipal Act amended\u201D. The bill says that the Holidays Act 2003 is being amended. I pose the question of whether the Health and Safety in Employment Act should also be amended as a result of what is proposed in this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001279\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003EThe Health and Safety in Employment Act, which was brought in under Labour, requires the employer to take all practicable steps to keep employees safe at work. I wonder whether the legislation we are debating in the Chamber tonight complies with that requirement. We know, and all the research and evidence tells us, that there is a really strong link between the hours of work that people engage in, their ability to have a rest, their ability to take holidays, and their fatigue at work, and therefore there is a link with their susceptibility to making a mistake, having an accident, hurting themselves, or even worse\u2014perhaps a fatality in the workplace. We know the evidence is very strong about that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001280\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003EThe bill that we are debating gives an incentive, particularly to low-paid workers, to cash up their right to have a week\u2019s annual leave to recuperate and to do all the things that good health and safety practices tell us are really important in the workplace. It gives them an incentive to give up their week of annual leave, and therefore put themselves at greater risk of having a workplace accident. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001281\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003EWe know that in New Zealand, because we focus a lot on primary production, many of our workplaces are in very dangerous industries and we have a high level of workplace accidents and, increasingly under this Government, a larger number of workplace fatalities. I ask whether, as well as amending the Holidays Act 2003, the Government\u2014[Interruption] Tau Henare does not seem to take very seriously workers\u2019 rights to be kept healthy and safe at work, but I am asking whether the requirement under the Health and Safety in Employment Act still holds true if we amend this Act. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001282\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003EThere is a requirement for the employer to take all practicable steps to keep employees safe at work. A worker might come along and say they would like to cash up their fourth week of annual leave\u2014for which they can thank the Labour Government. Does that mean that the requirement under the Health and Safety in Employment Act requires the employer to say that actually, because of the nature of the workplace and because fatigue is a really big problem in that workplace, they cannot be allowed to do that, because the employer would not be upholding their legal responsibility under the Health and Safety in Employment Act to take all practicable steps to keep the worker safe? It is a question that has not been asked in this debate so far, and I would really appreciate it if the Minister in the chair, the Hon Dr Nick Smith, rose and responded to the question of whether the Health and Safety in Employment Act, as well as the Holidays Act, ought to be amended to make this provision lawful. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001283\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003EThe commencement date of 1 April 2011, of course, is pretty interesting. I think some witty official must surely have come up with that date. The Government has chosen April Fool\u2019s Day as the commencement date for this legislation, and I think it is, sadly, very appropriate. But I hope that I am wrong.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u0022aad05a5f3de843c990ac7d6468594e15\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001284\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022aad05a5f3de843c990ac7d6468594e15\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E I would like to talk to clauses 1 to 3 of the Holidays Amendment Bill, but probably in a slightly unusual order. I would like to start with clause 2 and focus on the Royal assent. I think it would be inappropriate to do it on 1 April. Today we have the announcement of the impending marriage of Will and Kate in the spring of 2011, which in British terms, of course, means the wedding could well be held on April Fool\u2019s Day. I have made it very clear, and my Facebook friends all know, that I think Will\u2019s dad should not be the King. But it does not mean that Will and Kate should not get married; there is nothing wrong with that. The question is whether, on their honeymoon, they could pop into New Zealand and, using the royal prerogative, sign the bill. Could Will sign the bill?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001285\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022199ebfa73f5848f099a7694e8124dd91\u0022\u003EDarien Fenton\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m sure they would love that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001286\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022173ad4b3ae0d4e6b908d7a958821e960\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: Well, of course. If they really thought New Zealand was important, they could have the wedding at Huka Lodge or at one of the churches in Wainui\u014Dmata, or at a number of places like that, and as part of the general documentation the Royal assent to this legislation could occur.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001287\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cd559ee361454951886cc46586216f5d\u0022\u003ESue Moroney\u003C/span\u003E: John would love to go with them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001288\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c3b84af94d5c47e1bc3e3265776d97c4\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: John would smile and wave, and he probably would not even walk away if the Royal assent was applied in that way. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001289\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EOf course, some provisions of the bill come into force on the day after it receives the Royal assent. Clause 7(2) and schedule 1 are the ones that relate to section 29 of the principal Act. They are the sections that come into force on the day after the date on which the bill receives the Royal assent. But the rest of the Act, as I am sure you are aware, Mr Chairman, through your intimate study of this bill, comes into force on April Fool\u2019s Day. I think for the Minister in the chair, the Hon Dr Nick Smith, and the Minister in charge of the bill, the Hon Kate Wilkinson, that is probably an appropriate date for the bill to come into force. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001290\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EI do not think there can be a lot of debate about clause 3, \u201CPrincipal Act amended\u201D. There is not much doubt that it has an effect on the Holidays Act of 2003, although I think after the debate on the schedules we could consider whether clause 3 should state that the Act amends not only the Holidays Act 2003 but also the Employment Relations Act 2000\u2014which was subsequently amended by the Employment Relations Amendment Act 2010, which we debated not long ago\u2014and the Parental Leave and Employment Protection Act 1987. We should consider whether to say that the principal Acts amended are those three Acts, rather than just the one Act to which we refer. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001291\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EWe then turn to the title, which is the Holidays Amendment Bill 2010. You will be aware, Mr Chairperson, because I know you have been carefully studying the bill, that some very thorough work has gone into some alternative titles for this legislation. Some of the titles go to whether there are better names for the bill, and whether the title should be the \u201CHolidays (Taking Away) Bill, or whether some better alternative names than that should be considered.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001292\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226d2e77fbbc464ab4be18d1e08b0c3dd0\u0022\u003ECarol Beaumont\u003C/span\u003E: The \u201CHolidays (Cash Instead) Bill\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001293\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b98afbbe895841be81810498a4392995\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: It could be called the \u201CHolidays (Cash Instead) Bill\u201D, the \u201CHolidays (What the Hell Are We Doing with Our Time) Bill\u201D, or the \u201CHolidays (Go to Work Instead) Bill\u201D. It could be the \u201CHolidays (John Key Says \u2018I Am Going to Hawaii\u2014Stuff the Workers\u2019) Bill\u201D. There are a number of alternatives. I agree with Whale Oil. He said tonight that probably the reason John Key turned down Pansy Wong\u2019s resignation from Parliament last week was that he did not want to disturb his holiday in Hawaii over Christmas. He wants her resignation to come after Christmas, so that he can have an undisturbed holiday. So instead of this bill being called the Holidays Amendment Bill, it should be called the \u201CHolidays (Leave Me in Peace in Hawaii) Bill\u201D. I ask whether that would be appropriate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022dc6c0f88-e781-476d-bca1-d1bf9b69302b\u0022 data-id=\u0022e7bfe74668e0406ab614a0b6e32c919d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001294\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dc6c0f88-e781-476d-bca1-d1bf9b69302b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e7bfe74668e0406ab614a0b6e32c919d\u0022\u003EAMY ADAMS (National\u2014Selwyn):\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=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022 data-id=\u00222cf0ef0dfd4d4acbab3b2f7d1622169b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001295\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222cf0ef0dfd4d4acbab3b2f7d1622169b\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I am really pleased to join my colleagues in taking a call. Obviously, this is a very important bill\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001296\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022801772a5ab864ecd90261b89570b73f2\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: You cut me down.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001297\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b5085c99d8584551b025ced1bac6c75f\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: What was that?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001298\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227e1d158890114f158d36685128a859b5\u0022\u003EHon Member\u003C/span\u003E: You\u2019re a shocking member, cutting me out of the debate like that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001299\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229c41cb36c4af46dbb398100b5b738481\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I know\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d4546d04dab24b55b5b1b7c7796a3f2c\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: The Chair has sole prerogative on who speaks. The Chair is not shocking. He did not cut that person out. The call has gone to the honourable member Lynne Pillay.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224012b63c5d9d48e5a3669a61cbebee01\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much, Mr Chairperson. I know that you will be very happy to hear a contribution from Mr Mallard again, because he makes very good contributions. Perhaps a little bit of camaraderie and team playing around his fellow team members would be very good. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001302\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EI return to the bill. As my colleagues have said, the name Holidays Amendment Bill is not appropriate. There have been many other suggestions. I know that Darien Fenton and Sue Moroney had one before. Just thinking about it, we could call it the \u201CHolidays (Entitlement Repeal) Bill\u201D. Some of my colleagues are being a little bit flippant. Or it could be called the \u201CSelling Your Holidays Bill\u201D, the \u201CHolidays for Cash Bill\u201D, or the \u201CHolidays (Workers Must Not Be Trusted) Amendment Bill\u201D. We know why that is, and people may ask why we would call it that. It is simply that we ask why else would a worker have to get a sickness certificate for 1 day. We could call it the \u201CHolidays (Enabling Bad Employers) Amendment Bill\u201D. These titles are more in keeping with what the bill is all about. It could be the \u201CHolidays (Loss of Productivity) Amendment Bill\u201D. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001303\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022440b921ca0324ae1af55ef5f42f807ea\u0022\u003ESue Moroney\u003C/span\u003E: What about the \u201CHolidays (More Workplace Accidents) Bill\u201D?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001304\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022578912e2659d44c7b2ff5c422140572a\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: It could be the \u201CHolidays (More Workplace Accidents) Bill\u201D. I ask whether Trevor Mallard will be taking another call.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001305\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224aae54c4aaca4823a733e349aca6f987\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ll work on it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001306\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ac5475eddc954e899e408917dc970583\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: He will suggest some other titles, I am sure. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001307\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f02dc30ac1ef40d5bb57d294e332ae2d\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: You\u2019ve only two and a half minutes to go. Keep going.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001308\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cb29d68a56114ad2bfce39bca92bcd9a\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: OK, the title could also be\u2014rolling up a number of titles into one\u2014the \u201CHolidays (Entitlement Repeal, Selling Your Holidays, Holidays for Cash, Workers Cannot Be Trusted) Bill\u201D. I think that pretty much sums up what this Government thinks of the workers of New Zealand. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001309\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EI note that this will be the Holidays Amendment Act 2010, or whatever it will be called if those suggestions are accepted by the Government, yet quite a bit of the Act comes into force in 2011. I have always found that quite confusing, because if the amendment Act is enacted in 2010, we would expect all the parts of that Act to be enacted. But some of the amendment Act\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001310\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022aa30c3bdd8c14810a39bab7d69fa890e\u0022\u003ESue Moroney\u003C/span\u003E: Dribbles in.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001311\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bfe79ea27d4646d49fc2379d472c3733\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014dribbles in, as other people have said, on April Fool\u2019s Day. One wonders, for clarity, whether it should be called the \u201CHolidays (Entitlement Repeal) Act 2010 and 2011\u201D, because by virtue of being called that, it would signal that it will not all happen at once. The whole Act will not be enacted in 2010. Some of it will actually be enacted in 2011. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001312\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EMembers opposite are quite stunned and are thinking that that shows quite a bit of common sense. They are having another look at it. Tau Henare is having a big debate over it. I wonder whether those members can give it that consideration. I know that my colleague Trevor Mallard has a very important contribution to make and he will be able to enlighten the Committee on that pretty soon. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001313\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EGoing back to the title of the Holidays Amendment Bill, I say that even if it was called the \u201CHolidays Amendment Act 2010 and 2011\u201D, it still would not say enough about what the legislation is about. If there was more of an explanation in the legislation, then members in this Chamber would know and people outside this Chamber would know.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022 data-id=\u0022e14161d6d60a4f5597bf142d3c530068\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001314\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e14161d6d60a4f5597bf142d3c530068\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National):\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=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022 data-id=\u00227cada223bc4448638cffa0fe6f586347\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001315\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227cada223bc4448638cffa0fe6f586347\u0022\u003ECARMEL SEPULONI (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I will continue on from that very inspiring speech given by one of my great mentors, Lynne Pillay.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001316\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c58a03923488416c9fc5a3767aa8a45f\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Standing shoulder to shoulder with her!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001317\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022467a549987784fa2a0ba0f5046739688\u0022\u003ECARMEL SEPULONI\u003C/span\u003E: We are definitely the long and the short of the Labour Party. Stand up, Lynne. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001318\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bf71201011434aba9ad48415ddf80689\u0022\u003ELynne Pillay\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m not allowed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001319\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228694c5240b284bfe87b601f85e49d747\u0022\u003ECARMEL SEPULONI\u003C/span\u003E: OK then, sorry, Lynne. In all seriousness, I will add to what Lynne Pillay was saying and provide the Government with a few other ideas for what might be more appropriate titles for the Holidays Amendment Bill. Lynne Pillay provided some very good suggestions, which followed on from Trevor Mallard\u2019s very, very good suggestions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001320\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EOne of the suggestions I would like to put forward, which I am sure the other side of the Chamber will take some time to consider seriously, is that we title this legislation the \u201CHolidays are for Slackers Bill\u201D. I am sure Government members would appreciate that title, given that that is their general attitude towards workers. Using that as the title of this bill would demonstrate and illustrate the National Government\u2019s attitude towards workers. Alongside that, I think all the members from the Government side of the Chamber should really consider whether they will need a holiday at the end of this year. Perhaps they want to give their holiday up, given that they see no value in holidays and do not believe that workers\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001321\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221226e6fe45fb4a478aad36009cc38492\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: What about Pansy\u2019s holiday?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001322\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002289586e7cf9b84cfc8f7b2bee175fe78e\u0022\u003ECARMEL SEPULONI\u003C/span\u003E: Well, we do not know how long that holiday will be. As Mr Mallard said earlier, Mr Key has deliberately asked her not to resign too early, so he can have his holiday in Hawaii. Is that correct? Yes, it is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EGiven the undervaluing of holidays from the other side of the Chamber, it would be appropriate to call this legislation the \u201CHolidays are for Slackers Bill\u201D, but it would also be appropriate for all the Government members to consider giving up their holidays at the end of this year. They could spend Christmas Day, New Year\u2019s Day, and all of January not with their families, because the members do not value families\u2014in fact, they are anti-family. They could instead spend all of their time away from their families as they would expect the ordinary Kiwi worker to do, and they could spend all of their time working. That would set the example of what those members expect of every other worker. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001324\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EAnother example of what might make a more appropriate title for this legislation would be the \u201CHolidays (Stopping the Sickies) Amendment Bill\u201D. From the other side of the Chamber an assumption, a generalisation, has been made that all ordinary Kiwi workers are lazy, good-for-nothing slackers, and because of that those members want to make sure that if workers take even 1 day off sick they will have to visit a doctor, pay the money, and get a medical certificate to prove they were sick. Unfortunately, the Government members do not trust workers, because they believe that workers are all lazy and slack. Their attitude toward other workers is a reflection of their own work ethics. They see in others what they themselves are like. It is quite sad, because the vast majority of workers are nothing like National MPs. They work really hard and can be trusted. The reality is that the legislation before us does not reflect that type of attitude towards workers. Instead it shows complete distrust and a very patronising and condescending attitude towards workers. Again I say they really should consider calling it the \u201CHolidays (Stopping the Sickies) Amendment Bill\u201D as that fits with their attitude towards workers. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001325\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fd23a48567d54404b603fdafacc2285a\u0022\u003ELynne Pillay\u003C/span\u003E: I like that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001326\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f4f79a888a514c82b1a406d277fa1fb2\u0022\u003ECARMEL SEPULONI\u003C/span\u003E: Does the member like that one?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001327\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EAnother idea that has just been handed to me\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001328\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225e8285c6ec6345afafa32df83eaa35ad\u0022\u003EHon Maryan Street\u003C/span\u003E: No, it\u2019s your own.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001329\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226b19cbe9c1d142058410569df11d6a89\u0022\u003ECARMEL SEPULONI\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014I have been told it is my own\u2014is the \u201CHolidays (Wake up your Ideas) Bill\u201D or the \u201CHolidays are for Wusses Bill\u201D. Those are great ideas that I just came up with! Let us consider them, the \u201CHolidays (Wake up your Ideas) Bill\u201D and the \u201CHolidays are for Wusses Bill\u201D. They are both great because they illustrate the general sentiment behind the bill that we are now considering. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cc9c47c0-4409-44ca-ad2f-498707f27d69\u0022 data-id=\u0022434dd11ee4614ae6b3c9ccf0c7e08af1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001330\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cc9c47c0-4409-44ca-ad2f-498707f27d69\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022434dd11ee4614ae6b3c9ccf0c7e08af1\u0022\u003EJONATHAN YOUNG (National\u2014New Plymouth):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001331\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a670eeca58374002b596a90e1d76195a\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: The title clauses are usually a summing up, but I have not heard a lot of summing up at this stage. I will take one more call in the hope that I get some fresh material.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022 data-id=\u002277657b22bd194a8f95060b7c4dbf6128\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001332\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002277657b22bd194a8f95060b7c4dbf6128\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I am happy to talk on the title clause, because the title does not reflect the content of the bill as we come to the end of the Committee stage. I believe we need to amend the title in order to better reflect the debates we have had, the amendments that have passed, the amendments that have failed, and where we are at. The title \u201CHolidays Amendment Bill\u201D simply does not adequately reflect that. I think an adequate reflection of the debate would be to call the bill the \u201CHolidays (This is Nothing About Choice) Amendment Bill\u201D, or maybe the \u201CHolidays (Working People Living on the Breadline Have No Choice) Amendment Bill\u201D. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001333\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EWe discovered during the Committee stage that the National and ACT members genuinely believe that working people who are facing incredible cost of living increases and wage freezes and who cannot afford to pay their bills have some kind of choice when it comes to whether they cash in a holiday. National and ACT think those people have a genuine choice and that they would rather have the money than have another week with their families, rejuvenating and refreshing themselves so that they can be more productive in their work. We know from the debate during the Committee stage that that simply is not the case. Perhaps this bill could be called the \u201CHolidays (This Government is so Out of Touch it is Unbelievable) Amendment Bill\u201D. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001334\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EThe other thing we heard a lot about during the Committee stage was that this bill is about property rights, because the workers own their holidays. Maybe the bill could be the called the \u201CHolidays (We Argue About Property Rights When it Suits Our Cause) Amendment Bill\u201D. I remember a debate in the House about accident compensation. The Government decided it would take workers\u2019 holidays off them if they were entitled to accident compensation. The Minister for ACC, Nick Smith, said that if they had holidays, they should have to take those holidays first. Let us look at an example where two workers in exactly the same situation have an accident and are entitled to accident compensation, but one has already used up all their holidays and the other has not. The worker who has used up their holidays will get accident compensation, but the worker who has not used all their holidays will have to use those holidays first. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001335\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EWhere was the respect for property rights when that legislation went through the House? Those holidays belonged to that worker. It was an entitlement that had already been earned. We have heard that this bill is about property rights, but where was the respect for property rights then? Perhaps this bill should be called the \u201CHolidays (Where was the Respect for Property Rights When They Were Taken Off Workers Under ACC Legislation) Amendment Bill\u201D. This Government is at sixes and sevens. It is contradictory. It uses the arguments only when they suit, and when they do not suit it completely abandons them. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001336\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EWe have also talked about the sick leave entitlements in this bill. I think the bill could be called the \u201CHolidays (Using a Sledgehammer to Crack a Non-existent Walnut) Amendment Bill\u201D. As we found out in the Committee stage, there is absolutely no evidence that there are any problems happening in this area. There is no evidence that workers are rorting sick days. The Government has no evidence to back this up. As we found out during the Committee stage, if an employer has reasonable grounds to believe that an employee is rorting sick days, the employer can demand a medical certificate\u2014which is absolutely right and proper\u2014but they have to have reasonable grounds. If, for example, someone is constantly taking Fridays or Mondays off, or if the boss sees that person on TV at the rugby, then there are definitely reasonable grounds for demanding a medical certificate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001337\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EBut with this bill, which could be called the \u201CHolidays (National and ACT Believe That All Workers are Rorters When it Comes to Sick Days) Amendment Bill\u201D, the Government is saying that it has very little trust in workers. It is saying that a worker\u2019s default position is to rort the system, as opposed to believing that that is the exception rather than the rule. The Government wants to make every single worker produce a medical certificate for being sick for one day if their employer says they need to. They have to spend money even if it is something a doctor cannot do anything about. And they may not be able to get an appointment to see a doctor. This requirement goes against all the evidence the Government was shown, which is that New Zealand workers, on average, do not take a lot of sick days compared with other countries. The evidence also shows that the biggest cost for New Zealand businesses when it comes to sick leave is not the cost of workers taking sick leave. The biggest cost is the loss of productivity caused by workers going to work when they are sick and making others sick. That is where the big loss occurs. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022 data-id=\u00222521b9fe09594c91a8dea4e563abb186\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001338\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222521b9fe09594c91a8dea4e563abb186\u0022\u003ELOUISE UPSTON (National\u2014Taup\u014D):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022621e375a984b459a8bec5d8bfffbc2cd\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 51\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001339\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e2faf7cd88e247b09b4d7778b0f2d972\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: We now come to clause 1 and the question that it stand part. There are nine amendments in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard to the title. Each of these is ruled out of order as it is not an objective description of the bill, as provided for in Speakers\u2019 rulings 112/4. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002253c0a40420244fb8a3fd17a7c0d96488\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That clause 1 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 51\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 1 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001340\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard to clause 2 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001341\u0022\u003Eto omit from subclause (2) \u201C1 April 2011\u201D and substitute \u201C30 September 2011\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022f141812aabcc46aaaa3527bd4d04ea37\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 51\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 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=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001342\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022505da58dac964f8489dc4ae00b543849\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: The remaining amendments in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard to clause 2 are ruled out of order as they are substantially the same as the amendment already negatived by the Committee. The substantiality rule applies and they are out of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00228d49be897bcb4eac8a365010b483e95c\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That clause 2 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 51\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 2 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001343\u0022\u003EThe result corrected after originally being announced as Ayes 69, Noes 49.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022ff60468f2f314f44afe3a0675aa275f4\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That clause 3 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 51\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 3 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001344\u0022\u003EHouse resumed.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001345\u0022\u003EBill reported with amendment.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022 data-id=\u002234a32d4ab4dd45559c4217a024163881\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001346\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002234a32d4ab4dd45559c4217a024163881\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, That the report be adopted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022cb55a1640b6940e8b6b9cffa8354b2d7\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 report be adopted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 51\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EReport adopted.\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=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001347\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022f9c0b93aa0c243849880bec963a9e101\u0022\u003ELocal Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001348\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002235eb78cf1f474bb0977424f95fe0fc82\u0022\u003ESecond Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022 data-id=\u0022aef0aefcb48d4fe2b584f0630bc9016a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001349\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022aef0aefcb48d4fe2b584f0630bc9016a\u0022\u003EHon RODNEY HIDE (Leader\u2014ACT):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill be now read a second time. This bill aims to improve financial management, transparency, and accountability in local government. It will also remove unnecessary consultation requirements and level the playing field for private sector participation in providing local government services.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001350\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003EFirst, I refer to the provisions to improve financial management in local government. The bill requires councils to develop a financial strategy that includes limits on rates and debt levels. Critics suggest that the strategy will stop councils from responding to community needs. This is incorrect. Councils set their own rates and debt limits and can exceed those if necessary. If disaster strikes, the bill will not prevent a council from responding. The financial strategy will encourage councils to be rigorous in prioritising spending proposals and to provide clearer accountability over expenditure and funding. Councils need not fear ratepayer scrutiny if decisions are made wisely.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001351\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003EPrudent financial management for any organisation includes sticking to core businesses. These are the services that local government must pay particular attention to, because they are fundamental to what a community is. This bill requires councils to have particular regard to the contribution of those services to their communities. It does not direct them to be provided, but reminds councils to consider these services during planning and decision making.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001352\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003ENormal financial reporting practices allow much variation on how councils report their affairs. This bill will make council accounts more transparent and allows regulations to be made for standardisation of some accounting disclosures. It also introduces an additional accounting statement that councils must produce, which is a funding impact statement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001353\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003EIt promotes transparency in the management of council infrastructure. Providing roads, water services, stormwater disposal, and flood protection are core local government activities and take the greatest part of council investment funds. If councils neglect infrastructure the future cost of restoring those services would be huge. The bill requires councils to show each service separately in plans and reports, with clear information on planned and actual capital expenditure. This gives ratepayers a clearer idea of how prudently councils manage assets on their behalf.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001354\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003EIt is important that ratepayers can compare services offered by the council with those offered by others. Developing standard performance measures enables that comparison. This is not a ploy for central government to tell local government what level of service to provide; each council will still determine its performance targets. The select committee recommended changes to clarify this provision\u2014thank you. The result should be a simple set of measures that informs ratepayers about the major aspect of each service, whether it is provided by a council or a council-controlled organisation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001355\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003EThe bill proposes that councils produce a pre-election report before local authority elections to give candidates and voters important information at a time when elected members can be held to account. The select committee recommended two changes to this provision. One slightly narrows the report\u2019s scope so that the chief executive\u2019s responsibility is limited to statements of fact. The other provides an alternative reporting option for small councils, which have limited reporting capacity at this busy time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001356\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003EThe bill proposes substantial changes to the Act\u2019s community outcome process. Councils should not have to coordinate wide-ranging community debate about services they have no direct responsibility to deliver or fund. This makes them appear accountable for things that they have no control over. The bill also changes some of the Act\u2019s provisions on public consultation, such as repealing councils\u2019 requirements to consider the views of affected and interested people four times during decision making. The courts have interpreted this provision strictly. This is leading to repeated and meaningless consultation. Although councils must still consider the views of such people, the when and the how is for them to determine.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001357\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003EThe bill repeals section 88 of the Act relating to proposals to contract out activities. This means only that councils need not consult ratepayers about changes in how a service is delivered. Proposals to change the quality or quantity of service still require consultation. We doubt ratepayers greatly care who mows the council\u2019s sportsgrounds as long as they are mown in the most cost-effective manner. The section 88 consultation requirement is unnecessary, and repealing it allows councils to get on and manage their services.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001358\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003EFinally, I want to raise the proposals on water services. Local government should have the option to use the private sector to develop new water services investments. Choosing that option is a decision for each council. An example, which was established before the 2002 Act, is Wellington\u2019s sewage treatment plant. It was built and is operated by a private company. The arrangement works adequately, and I doubt that most Wellingtonians know, or indeed care, that the plant is privately operated. We cannot see why other councils should not have that option. The bill is clear that councils cannot sell existing water service assets to private companies, unless it is incidental to, and desirable for, the proposal\u2019s success. If a private company were building a new treatment plant, the council could sell the land on which it was to be sited but not the rest of the network. The bill as reported back also clearly prohibits concession arrangements like that currently operating in Papakura. This bill is not about privatising water services. Local authorities will remain responsible for providing water services, but may contract private partners to assist them to do that, and they should be able to do so.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001359\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003EI thank the Local Government and Environment Committee for its excellent work on this bill, and particularly the chair of the select committee, Mr Chris Auchinvole, who has done an outstanding job and a great service to the people of New Zealand, particularly those in his own district. The committee has been attentive to submitters, and its changes will aid significantly in achieving the bill\u2019s intentions. I commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022 data-id=\u00220a108ef7b3214a529bb98050fc9eecdb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001360\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220a108ef7b3214a529bb98050fc9eecdb\u0022\u003EPHIL TWYFORD (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I preface my comments by congratulating the Minister of Local Government, the Hon Rodney Hide, on announcing to New Zealand today his impending nuptials and impending addition to his family. I warmly express best wishes to the Minister, and all happiness for his family.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001361\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EWhat is the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill? It is the bedraggled and washed-up remains of Rodney Hide\u2019s nutty Business Roundtable - inspired agenda to remake local government. He set off around the country last year with his TAFM paper, otherwise known as the paper on the transparency, accountability and financial management of local government. That paper contained a number of elements that alarmed New Zealanders. It contained his proposal for a list of core services that councils would be required to limit their activities to. It contained his rate-capping agenda. It contained proposals for mandatory referenda. If councils wanted to stray from his arbitrarily prescribed list of core services, or if they were going to deviate from previously established limits on rates, they would have to put that proposal to a referendum. It also contained an agenda for the deregulation of municipal water, which the Minister followed up by recommending to Cabinet the total liberalisation of the ownership of municipal water. That would have led to a sweeping away of every single control that exists currently in legislation for the public ownership of municipal water. It is a recipe for small government and an extreme right-wing prescription that really lives only in the imaginations of the members of the ACT Party.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001362\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EThe Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill bears little resemblance to the mad agenda that Rodney Hide trotted around the country last year. One word explains the difference between these two things: Auckland. Auckland became for Rodney Hide and this Government a political disaster zone. His stewardship of the Auckland super-city reforms seriously dented the Government\u2019s political standing with voters in Auckland, which holds one-third of the population of New Zealand. His principles and policies to corporatise local government and open up assets for privatisation alarmed Aucklanders so much that a solid 50 percent of them registered serious concerns about his Auckland policies for the last year. Those concerns contributed, I believe, to the election of a mayor and a council who utterly rejected Rodney Hide\u2019s policy prescription for local government. There was a massive public backlash against his policies: the over-centralisation of power, the corporatisation of three-quarters of local government in Auckland, and the total lack of consultation and democratic process with which he proceeded to implement the Auckland super-city.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001363\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003ESo I ask what remains in this bill of Rodney Hide\u2019s agenda. Well, there are the provisions for water privatisation, which will allow a council to contract the private sector to deliver water supply services for periods of up to 35 years\u201435 years. That is 11 electoral cycles; that is a contract one or perhaps two generations long. This bill legislates for private sector contractors to be able to own water infrastructure for the duration of those contracts. What is worse than the fact that a council will be able to contract out water services for 35 years is the fact that\u2014and this alarms New Zealanders even more\u2014 it can do it in the dead of night without consulting anybody. It can contract those services without saying a damn thing to ratepayers, who have paid for those assets and whose parents have paid for them with their rates over generations. We will be talking more about the provisions that allow private ownership of treatment plants, dams, pipelines\u2014private ownership of water infrastructure\u2014during 35-year contracts.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001364\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EWhat else is in here? There is a raft of cuts to the current statutory requirements for councils to consult their citizens. For example, if a council wants to contract out public services to the private sector, it can do so without saying a thing to its ratepayers and citizens. If a council wants to transfer services to a council-controlled organisation, a council-owned company, it can do that under this bill without saying a thing to its citizens\u2014without consulting the public.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001365\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EThe bill contains the provision for core services, albeit in a watered-down form. Clause 5 introduces a narrow, arbitrary list of core services that councils must pay particular regard to. We believe\u2014and many, many submitters to the Local Government and Environment Committee believe\u2014that the list will tilt the playing field in favour of the listed core services and make it more difficult for councils to do many of the things that New Zealanders consider to be very important functions. Mr Hide\u2019s list of core services does not mention environmental protection, economic development, or social development, like, for instance, pensioner housing. We see in here a watered-down remnant of Mr Hide\u2019s desire to have a rate-capping mechanism to stop councils increasing their rates, and we see also that the financial strategy binds councils to limit rates increases and budget expenditure. We will discuss that some more in the Committee stage.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001366\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EA number of other issues, which are probably the least offensive provisions in this bill, relate to financial transparency: the requirement of a financial strategy, a pre-election report, and a funding impact statement. We are in general support of these provisions, with some exceptions, but I note that the preponderance of submitters to the select committee was lukewarm at best about them, and the overwhelming verdict of the local government sector was that the provisions would have very little consequence, if any. A number of the councils said that the main result of the provisions would be a whole lot of extra compliance requirements and significant extra cost to the ratepayer. That will be one of the significant legacies that Rodney Hide\u2014the \u201CMinister of Ratepayers\u201D, as he likes to call himself\u2014delivers to New Zealand ratepayers through this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001367\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EWhat did the select committee make of all this, and what did the people think? Overwhelmingly, people submitted against the bill. By my count, there were 414 submissions in total; 360 of those 414 submissions were expressly against the water privatisation provisions\u2014360 out of 414. I think that is a damning indictment of Rodney Hide\u2019s policies.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001368\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ddbda5f58edd44e19b2327e6f3da8201\u0022\u003ELouise Upston\u003C/span\u003E: How many of them were form submissions, Phil?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001369\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dbfacfa98ddf4b2bb354f9c4a0cebca9\u0022\u003EPHIL TWYFORD\u003C/span\u003E: Almost none of them\u2014almost none of them were form submissions. The member might like to go back and check the pile of submissions, and she will find that very, very few\u2014probably only a handful of them\u2014were form submissions. There was overwhelming public opposition to the water privatisation provisions in this bill. No one except the Local Government Forum, which is the Business Roundtable with its local government hat on, thought that the core services idea was sensible. Hardly anyone had a good thing to say about it. I am amazed that the Government has seen fit to leave the core services provision in the bill, because no one had a good word to say about it. I do not understand that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001370\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EThe great majority of individuals who submitted on the bill thought that the cuts to consultation were appalling. As I said, the main verdict on the transparency provisions and financial reporting was that it was going to lead to a significant increase in cost to the ratepayer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001371\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EThe most galling thing about this process is that this bill is the latest bill that Rodney Hide has brought to this House that takes away the democratic rights of New Zealanders in local government. What do we see? Yet again he is pushing through a bill under urgency that weakens our democratic process and our public institutions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022 data-id=\u002250cdc99d0a5a4827a1678faa99cf86a2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001372\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002250cdc99d0a5a4827a1678faa99cf86a2\u0022\u003ECHRIS AUCHINVOLE (National\u2014West Coast - Tasman):\u003C/span\u003E I am delighted to stand before the House today to support the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill in its second reading. All one can say with regard to the previous speaker, Phil Twyford, is \u201CWhat about the bill, Phil?\u201D. We heard an awful lot of criticism of what the bill might do, and we heard how Phil felt, but we did not hear much about the bill itself. I know that in his heart of hearts Phil thought that parts of it were not too bad at all.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001373\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003EAs the chair of the Local Government and Environment Committee I am very cognisant of the need for this bill to be passed into law and of the issues surrounding it. I would like to thank the select committee for working so tirelessly\u2014all members\u2014on making the bill the bill it is. I think we have got the balance just right. If I may, I would like to commend the Minister of Local Government for introducing the bill and bringing these things into good order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001374\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003EIn spite of what we have heard from the previous speaker, I found, and I continue to find, that local government is supportive of the thrust of this bill. It is supportive of it. When we think about it, we realise that local government really is a business. Businesses like to be accountable to their shareholders. They like a good relationship. This bill will help local government to have a better relationship with its ratepayers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001375\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003EThe general purpose of the bill is to make local authority decision-making more transparent and more accountable. There is really only one question that needs to be asked\u2014only one question. Does the bill do that? The answer is yes, it does. The bill also reflects the principle that local authorities should focus on core services and operate within a defined fiscal envelope. Members on the other side of the House should think of those people who are on fixed incomes; when they see rates going up, it is a bit overwhelming for them. This bill defines the activities. It will simplify the decision-making process and level the playing field to better enable the private sector to deliver council services. That will improve the financial management of local Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001376\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003EBut let us look first at the issue of transparency and accountability. I would like to acknowledge the minority view of the Opposition\u2014so roundly expressed, as detailed in the select committee report\u2014that this bill would do the opposite of what it intends to do. Let us see what those members say, to explain how misguided their view is. Labour and the Greens believe that by removing some consultation requirements, the bill could undermine transparency and accountability. I would like to assuage their fears: this will not be the case. One must remember that the proposals in the bill have been considered and designed in terms of the broader decision-making framework of the Act. We have only to ask builders, contractors\u2014people who are dependent on work from councils\u2014whether they would like to have available to them this sort of future planning, and they will say yes. The majority of the provisions that allow local people to continue to be involved in council decisions and to be consulted on important issues are retained in the Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001377\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003EThe Act also contains several principles relating to local authorities requiring them, for example, to conduct their business in an open, transparent, and democratically accountable manner. I do not know of many council officers who, if we asked them whether they are happy to do that, would tell us otherwise. They are already required to give regard to community opinions. This bill will provide councils with greater flexibility and discretion to determine how to give effect to this principle. It seeks to simplify council decision-making processes and remove some of the more prescriptive elements of the Act, so that consultation is not merely a quick tick-box exercise.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001378\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222832829d12eb4a1583b94711468854fe\u0022\u003EPhil Twyford\u003C/span\u003E: Speak from the heart.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001379\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002281649543fb8942c0b95ff540729a560a\u0022\u003ECHRIS AUCHINVOLE\u003C/span\u003E: Very well, if the member wishes. Phil Twyford has asked me to speak from the heart. Well, I was not really going to do it, I say to Phil, but, honestly, his point about privatisation of water could not be further from the truth or further from the mark. The member is completely wrong on that one. I look forward to the various parts of this bill being read, and I think we will have fun with that one. No council will be compelled to use private services to extend its water. Members should think about it from a business point of view\u2014but maybe people on that side of the House are not particularly familiar with a business approach. If we are to limit the amount of time that a private service is extended, I ask my colleagues on this side of the House what that will do to the price. It will take it up. If one extends it over a longer period, one can spread one\u2019s overheads over a longer period. One can reduce one\u2019s profits because one has a longer-term income, and that is the way it works.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001380\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003EThe bill\u2019s new provisions will give ratepayers better information about their council, so that they are in a stronger position to participate when consultation does occur.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001381\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003EThe provision for a financial strategy will provide transparency for the overall effect of the proposals on services, rates, debt, and investment, and this is a very, very important thing. We had a presentation from the Deputy Auditor-General. He talked about the debt levels that councils have. He talked about the need to foresee how much is being spent by councils. He talked about the need for transparency of future funding, and this is very important.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001382\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003EProvision is made for a pre-election report to be produced by the chief executive of each local authority. This, in effect, will be a summary of key financial information about each council, covering both the past and the coming 3 years, as well as details of planned projects. It will include a statement that compares rates, rate increases, borrowing, and returns on investment with the targets set in the financial strategy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001383\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003EWith this bill, ratepayers will have greater confidence in local government. I must say that I am very pleased to have been part of the planning process. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022 data-id=\u0022c911b4d301ab4016a6e0b71481be1339\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001384\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c911b4d301ab4016a6e0b71481be1339\u0022\u003EHon SHANE JONES (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E Kia ora an\u014D t\u0101tou. T\u0113n\u0101 koe, Mr Assistant Speaker, i t\u0113nei p\u014D. For a mercifully short period of time I remained on the Local Government and Environment Committee, enduring its chairing by the member who has just resumed his seat, Chris Auchinvole. I can tell members that since my departure, the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill has not improved. That is reflected, no doubt, in the powers of attention that were directed to it, at the instigation of Rodney Hide, by our colleagues over there. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001385\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022\u003ELabour opposes this bill. The reason that we oppose the bill lies in its very secretive and clandestine agenda. It avoids the challenge of how the community will pay for the underlying costs of the infrastructure that local government has a stewardship role in providing to its citizens. That debate is buried, because the democratically elected representatives will no longer be under a statutory duty to seek out the views of the people who actually own those assets. They are assets that have been paid for over many generations. The long-term capital plan, which has been deeply eroded as a consequence of this legislation, played a very important role. The Auditor-General\u2019s staff came to the select committee on numerous occasions, and no doubt I was one of the few people who paid attention on that particular day. The staff came, and they reminded us that local government had to seek, if not the consent, then a mandate from the rate-paying community, as it sought to commit the rate-paying community to a capital strategy. That is the long-term capital plan, which is being gutted as a consequence of this wretched legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001386\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022\u003EThe long-term capital plan, at a very deep level, was designed for families, firms, and communities to have their say, through the long-term capital plan provisions, as to priorities and their costs and benefits, and which services might be cut or expanded. We should allow that debate to take place, rather than its having to be abandoned because of the ideological innovations brought forward by Mr Rodney Hide. He seems to think that ratepayers are suffering a growing burden of pain through the cost of local government, because local authorities are splitting out into more extraneous activities. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001387\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022\u003EThe truth of the matter is that there is a rising tide of cost associated with the development of infrastructure. Indeed, the rate at which the cost of infrastructure has risen actually goes beyond the rate of inflation. That is the real problem that this bill ought to deal with, but it tries to leave local government people with the obligation that they have no real duties to the communities that they purport to represent. They can monetise and they can privatise. There is nothing wrong with economising, but when one is going to privatise one should seek the informed consent of the owners of those community assets. One should not use a piece of legislation that, under the camouflage of Rodney Hide\u2019s language, is designed to strip every single member of the community of the ability to stop these furtive transfers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001388\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022\u003EWater treatment assets, water harvesting assets\u2014whatever the asset is, the real damage being done here is being done by the fear on that side of the House of going out to seek a mandate. It is a rather novel concept, in their view of democracy, to have to get the informed consent of families and ratepayers as to whether they think it is a good idea for a 33-year period of a property right to be handed out to preferred and favoured interests. They want to do that without seeking meaningful community input, or without seeking the community\u2019s imprimatur. That is really what is going on here. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001389\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022\u003EWe had the organisation that represents all regional and local government in New Zealand come and make a submission to the Local Government and Environment Committee. My colleague Mr Twyford has already referred to its contribution. It came and said this bill will have the effect of worsening red tape. This bill, it said, will have the effect of adding layer upon layer of more paperwork and more material\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001390\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002243e6a4a672c2435297366b38fbe81833\u0022\u003EPhil Twyford\u003C/span\u003E: But he\u2019s the \u201CMinister of Red Tape\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001391\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f1ae30e8d070477ebd7e08240f92344a\u0022\u003EHon SHANE JONES\u003C/span\u003E: I know it sounds ridiculous that this bill comes from the man who purports to be the destroyer of red tape. That is just one of the many contradictions that adhere within Rodney Hide\u2019s psyche, but that is another matter for another time. We have the most authoritative voice on behalf of all local and regional government actually saying that the impact of this bill is to worsen the dead-weight effect of Rodney Hide\u2019s hand upon the affairs of local government. That is what will happen here. It is hard to imagine anyone more important than the organisation that represents all local government, when it came to see us. We should pay particular attention to the fact that although it made quite a strong attempt to avoid alienating anyone on the select committee in particular, anyone skilled in understanding bureaucratese would know that its contribution was a stream of disdain for Mr Hide\u2019s very narrow and wretched ideas about how local government should be restructured. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001392\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022\u003EThe pith of this bill is an attempt to turn local government for community purposes into corporatised local and regional governance. That member, aided by his colleagues over there, has lost confidence in the ability of democratically mandated organisations, and, indeed, democratic communities, to chart a course as to where they are to go. Nowhere is that more evident than in the very clumsy language that is employed in this bill in relation to those responsible for delivering on outcomes. Communities own outcomes. Communities embrace them, and they have to live with the consequences of them, whether they are successes or failures. This legislation, by constraining the opportunities for communities to be consulted, actually allows the decision makers within councils to arrogate all the power and authority in order to quietly and secretly dispose of assets, without bringing that power back to the people, who represent not only current generations but future generations. Fortunately, after 2011 help will be on the way. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001393\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022\u003EPerhaps the final point that I should round up on, in this brief but nevertheless important contribution, lies in the fact that community consultation, which was the hallmark of Labour\u2019s style of governance in relation to local government, has been both abandoned and stigmatised in this legislation. Members on the Government side of the House are endeavouring to treat community consultation as an unbearable cost and threat to the financial viability of ratepayers in their capacity to contribute to local government. Consultation with the community gives legitimacy to local government. If we remove local government from the community, it is no longer local. It then grows into something akin to a Gordon Gekko creature, more at home in the Wall Street marae than in the halls and the community centres, etc., of local government. That is why we do not support this bill and we certainly do not support a single thing that that member over there is bringing forward for local government. But we will provide and make allowances for the lost members on the Government side of the House. Kia ora t\u0101tou.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022 data-id=\u0022e8b9c61f270f42da9e4b3cbd9ebafe71\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001394\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e8b9c61f270f42da9e4b3cbd9ebafe71\u0022\u003ESUE KEDGLEY (Green):\u003C/span\u003E Here we are once again in the dead of night, at almost midnight, debating under urgency another sinister bill, the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill, which implements the radical agenda of ACT and the Business Roundtable\u2014what I call Rogernomics part 2\u2014to reduce democracy in local government, gut local government consultation requirements, and corporatise or privatise as much of local government\u2019s commercial activities as possible, including water. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001395\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EI have a copy of ACT\u2019s local government policy. It states: \u201CLocal Government will be required to shed its commercial activity. \u2026 Roads and piped water will be supplied on a fully commercial basis.\u201D Council services will be contracted out, and councils will be required to focus on their core activities. This, of course, is exactly what this bill does. It may not go as far as Rodney Hide\u2019s extreme agenda, which he released last year, but it implements this policy\u2014the ACT local government policy. It removes the consultation requirements of local government. It allows councils to get rid of their strategic assets or to enter into 35-year contracts with private water companies without the inconvenience and the nuisance of having to consult their local residents first. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001396\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EIt sends a signal to the world that New Zealand is now open to water privatisation. It makes water privatisation extremely attractive to global water companies, which are on the prowl for new markets. Now in New Zealand they can own as well as manage and control water infrastructure for 35 years.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001397\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EThe bill requires councils to focus on a narrow range of so-called core activities. When Rodney Hide introduced this bill he said: \u201Cit gives councils a clear indication, first, that they need to do core services well before they engage in any other services,\u201D. The narrow and arbitrary range of core services listed in this bill is supposed to become the No. 1 priority of local government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001398\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EIt is the water privatisation provisions that are most alarming, because once a private corporation has taken over the management and ownership of local water supplies, its focus will not be on protecting the public interest or ensuring everyone has access to clean, fresh water, but on maximising profits for its shareholders. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001399\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EWe know from the experience of water privatisation around the world that there are three ways that water corporations maximise their profits once they get their hands on a local water supply. The first thing they do is sack most of the staff that run the water services, and reduce their working conditions. The second thing they do is charge more for water. The price of water soars and becomes unaffordable for large numbers of people, who then have their water cut off because they cannot afford to pay their water bills. Thirdly, they allow the water infrastructure to be run down, just as Fay and Richwhite ran down our rail network. They do not bother to fix the leaks or invest in basic infrastructure; instead they siphon off the profits for their shareholders. That is what has happened wherever water has been privatised: higher prices for water; huge profits for the corporations; more and more people being disconnected; no incentive to conserve water, because it is in the interests of the company to sell more water to maximise their profits; and no incentive, either, to address long-term health problems associated with water. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001400\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EThe United Kingdom is a case study of what happens when water is privatised. When Margaret Thatcher introduced water privatisation into the United Kingdom the water industry fired 25 percent of the workforce and increased the price of water by 50 percent in the next 4 years. Then it cut its investment programme and used the increased dividends to pay huge salaries and bonuses to the directors of the water companies. While customers were faced with continual price hikes and the number of people having their water supply cut off tripled, company profits soared by 142 percent in the first 8 years. What happened in the United Kingdom is what will happen here\u2014mark my words\u2014if we go down the path of water privatisation that the Minister of Local Government is desperate to take us all down. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001401\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EAnother problem with the long-term contracting out of water supplies is that once a private corporation owns or manages the water supply for 35 years, the public and its elected representatives, their councillors, will have very little input into, or say on, water supplies for the next generation. The long-term contracts that are negotiated will inevitably be commercial-in-confidence\u2014that is, secret\u2014so ratepayers will be completely in the dark about the deal their local council has struck with their water company. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001402\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EMany contracts have guaranteed rates of return for the company, regardless of its performance. Chile had to guarantee a profit margin of 33 percent to Suez, as a World Bank condition, regardless of its performance, and in Argentina Suez pulled out when it could not get a guaranteed rate of return. It said that the contract was not profitable enough, and it just pulled out, leaving an incredible mess behind. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001403\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EAnother thing is that once councils are locked into the 35-year contracts, they cannot get out of them, even if the circumstances change radically, or unforeseen circumstances arise. What happens, pray tell, if a company goes bankrupt or is unable or unwilling to deliver on its water services? What happens then? Many councils, especially smaller ones, do not have the expertise to negotiate contracts for water services with large, private multinational corporations. The United Water contract in Auckland, for example, was negotiated by local solicitors. It did not include any conditions on customer service. There is a clause in the contract that states the contract can be extended by an additional 20 years, and that is not even linked to performance. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001404\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EWater privatisation has a terrible track record around the world, and there is a huge backlash against it. Communities are fighting back against water privatisation, and more and more councils and Governments are trying to get out of contracts they have entered into with private corporations. In France more than 40 towns and cities have taken back their water services into public hands, and in June this year Paris took back its water service after huge controversy. Other countries such as Uruguay have brought water back into the hands of the State at a national level, because privatisation has been such a fiasco and caused such problems. In Bolivia hundreds of thousands of people lost their connections when their water was privatised, and thousands of people took to the streets until the Government finally backed down and told the company to leave. Is that what we want here in New Zealand? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001405\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EWater is a precious resource. It is one of the life-support systems of the planet. It is really the ultimate public good, and it should be controlled in the public interest, not handed over to the private sector to make profits out of. Water is simply too important to our health and well-being, and to the environment, to be handed over to the private sector. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001406\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EAs water has become scarce around the world, global corporations are seeking to take advantage of the water crisis by trying to take over water supplies. They are lobbying Governments all around the world, and the Business Roundtable here in New Zealand is frantically lobbying to privatise our water supplies. Those lobbyists must be rubbing their hands together with joy, as tonight this Parliament agrees to allow water privatisation here in New Zealand. Some of them will try to argue, and the National Party will too, that it is not water privatisation, but I can assure any listeners that contracting out, owning, and managing water for 35 years is precisely that\u2014water privatisation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022ec266512-9fe8-47da-883e-48f046ee5059\u0022 data-id=\u00226e10fce31ad644018915d97a7dbcec61\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001407\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ec266512-9fe8-47da-883e-48f046ee5059\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226e10fce31ad644018915d97a7dbcec61\u0022\u003ETE URUROA FLAVELL (M\u0101ori Party\u2014Waiariki):\u003C/span\u003E T\u0113n\u0101 koe, Mr Deputy Speaker, kia ora t\u0101tou katoa i t\u0113nei p\u014D. Kua t\u016B ake me te \u0101hua \u0101wangawanga o te ng\u0101kau m\u014D te \u0101huatanga o t\u0113nei pire. An\u0101, n\u0101 runga i te aha? N\u0101 runga i te mea ko taua \u0101hua n\u014D r\u0101, me k\u012B, m\u014D t\u0113nei momo k\u0101wanatanga, me k\u012B, ar\u0101, kua whakakorengia ko ng\u0101 whakaaro o te hunga k\u0101inga, o te tangata whenua, ka mutu, kua whakakorengia \u014D r\u0101tou t\u016Bmanako, \u014D t\u0101tou t\u016Bmanako o roto i ng\u0101 whiriwhiringa o te komiti.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001408\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ec266512-9fe8-47da-883e-48f046ee5059\u0022\u003E[Greetings to you, Mr Deputy Speaker, and to us all tonight. I rise, but with some misgivings about the context of this bill\u2014and for what reason? Simply because of the supposition once again, shall we say, in the context of local government, where it appears the views of the home people, their aspirations and ours, have been largely discounted in committee deliberations.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001409\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ec266512-9fe8-47da-883e-48f046ee5059\u0022\u003EI rise to speak to the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill with some considerable discomfort in the sense that, yet again, we come to the context of local government and find that the views of tangata whenua have been largely minimised and discounted, and the challenges laid out in submissions largely ignored by the majority of the Local Government and Environment Committee. It was for that reason that the M\u0101ori Party made the decision to submit a minority report alongside the views of others on committee. In that report I noted that there are some key areas in respect of the Local Government Act 2002 that must be addressed, but none more so than that of tangata whenua participation and involvement at local government level. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001410\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ec266512-9fe8-47da-883e-48f046ee5059\u0022\u003EIn light of the views of mana whenua being silenced from the record, I will bring some of the key points from the submissions back into the discussion and the debate. This House must take note of the words of Te Ora o Manukau. It stated that if public participation is marginalised in local authority decision-making, the utilisation of Treaty of Waitangi models of maintaining effective working relationships, as well as Government aspirations of effective community engagement, will be further undermined by this bill. The analysis by Te Ora o Manukau states: \u201CThis bill is a lost opportunity, in that it does not make any proposals that will result in improved M\u0101ori health. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001411\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ec266512-9fe8-47da-883e-48f046ee5059\u0022\u003EIndeed, the proposals restrict participation overall in the local Government processes.\u201D We in the M\u0101ori Party do, of course, acknowledge that there are some local authorities that engage with tangata whenua in positive ways. But there are also some local authorities that distinctly lag behind. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001412\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ec266512-9fe8-47da-883e-48f046ee5059\u0022\u003ENg\u0101ti Hau\u0101 tangata whenua and other Whanganui River tribes gave a very strong message that the implications of this bill will directly impact on the lives of M\u0101ori. I quote from their submission: \u201CThe Bill removes the means whereby Whanganui M\u0101ori continue to hold customary rights to the Whanganui River and its tributaries \u2026 and other Taonga.\u201D Ng\u0101ti Hau\u0101 and Whanganui river tribes were united in their concerns about the way the legislation addresses the matter of water management, and, in particular, how that will impinge on their claim for the Whanganui River. It was their view that the Crown must acknowledge its Treaty obligations to consult on any activities that may impact on Treaty claims. Ng\u0101ti Hau\u0101 and the Whanganui River tribes were concerned that at no stage were they consulted on the impacts of the proposals of this bill on their claim to the Whanganui River. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001413\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ec266512-9fe8-47da-883e-48f046ee5059\u0022\u003EConcerns permeate about the water services provisions of this bill, and they were raised by a number of submitters. Colleagues from across the board have also mentioned some of them in the debate tonight. We take into account the points raised by Te Wai M\u0101ori that local government cannot deal with fresh water in isolation from M\u0101ori, and that M\u0101ori have an ownership right of water, which is subject to this bill. A major concern about this bill is that it proposes actions that, in the opinion of Te Wai M\u0101ori, will serve to privatise water services. The increase in the terms of contracts from 15 to 35 years and the delegation of management illustrate the creation of a form of privatisation that is often described as a public-private partnership. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001414\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ec266512-9fe8-47da-883e-48f046ee5059\u0022\u003EWakat\u016B Incorporation also had a very clear view and concern about the provision of water services. Wakat\u016B Incorporation is based in Nelson and is a key M\u0101ori enterprise within Te Tai Tonga electorate. It is driven by the aspirations of shareholders and wh\u0101nau members from four tribes: Ngati K\u014Data, Ngati R\u0101rua, Ngati Tama and Te \u0100tiawa. I give this background merely to provide some justification for the fact that when Wakat\u016B Incorporation makes a statement to a select committee, we in the M\u0101ori Party pay particular attention to its advice. In its submission it stated: \u201CWe disagree with the Bill\u2019s intention to relax restrictions on private sector involvement in the delivery of water services. We think this proposal needs much more debate and consideration at the community and national level, taking into account tangata whenua views about the ownership and management of water.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001415\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ec266512-9fe8-47da-883e-48f046ee5059\u0022\u003EI could go on a little bit longer about the concerns that iwi and M\u0101ori organisations raised about this bill. Suffice it to say that the underlying theme of those submissions is that tangata whenua do not have adequate, comprehensive, and mandatory representation at the local government decision-making table.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001416\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ca10a702855b4414be95c1889df0e7cd\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I notice that the acting Opposition whips are attempting to telephone the acting Government whips, but the member concerned appears to be asleep. I wonder whether you could draw attention to that; it would be helpful for the phone call to be put through. I think they are very keen to speak to them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001417\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f6c0205d6f2241ccb964390ffb8d91f7\u0022\u003EMr DEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I guess at this hour of the night that is to be expected. I am sure one can communicate without having to use the phone\u2014that is just interrupting the member.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001418\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ec266512-9fe8-47da-883e-48f046ee5059\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cb1dee4746a84b90bed3af8f81c45954\u0022\u003ETE URUROA FLAVELL\u003C/span\u003E: As I was saying before I was rudely interrupted, the underlying theme is the desire of M\u0101ori to be involved in decision-making processes. But from all accounts from the submissions provided, that is pretty much missing in this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001419\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ec266512-9fe8-47da-883e-48f046ee5059\u0022\u003EIt is acknowledged by almost everyone, except, perhaps, the Minister of Local Government, that at the local government level tangata whenua have been unfairly, inequitably, and disproportionately underrepresented across selected councils. In general, less than 5 percent of elected local councillors in any term of local government have been M\u0101ori. I repeat\u2014less than 5 percent. The M\u0101ori Party had hoped that serious consideration might be extended to the concept of M\u0101ori participation and engagement at the local government level. Although there are established processes to maintain tangata whenua participation at the local government level, including through iwi management plans, ultimately there is a lack of M\u0101ori enfranchisement in local government. So it was ultimately extremely disheartening that M\u0101ori participation in local government was not given more thought by the committee. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001420\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ec266512-9fe8-47da-883e-48f046ee5059\u0022\u003EWe have raised three serious and longstanding concerns. We raised them during the first reading and during the select committee\u2019s consideration of the bill, and we want to revisit them. The first is the issue of the lost opportunity to improve relationships with M\u0101ori at the local government level. I have given the background to that\u2014there is no more to be said. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001421\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ec266512-9fe8-47da-883e-48f046ee5059\u0022\u003EThe second is the issue of the provision of water services. Although major concerns were raised in submissions about the provision of water services, they have for the most part been ignored. Only one further amendment was made to those provisions. This amendment will prohibit the sale of existing local government infrastructure to a private partner, except when a local government organisation reasonably believes that the sale was related to the joint arrangement and is desirable for the success of the arrangement. That appears to bring with it a level of looseness that will not provide any assurance to M\u0101ori submitters that their rights to Treaty-based processes have been respected. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001422\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ec266512-9fe8-47da-883e-48f046ee5059\u0022\u003EThe third issue is about the broader context of community outcomes. As a result of this legislation there will be a new definition of community outcomes. Under the new definition community outcomes are \u201Cthose a local authority aims to achieve\u201D, replacing the definition in the Local Government Act of community outcomes as \u201Cthe outcomes for that district or region that are identified as priorities \u2026\u201D It should also be noted that periodical reporting on community outcomes is removed. Both of these decisions are, in our view, disastrous in the context of community development and provide us with considerable concern. In light of all those issues the M\u0101ori Party has no alternative but to vote against this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002292824476-4e66-4052-8435-b049833d8b83\u0022 data-id=\u0022e3861f4531f144a8888f70b5182c075c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001423\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002292824476-4e66-4052-8435-b049833d8b83\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e3861f4531f144a8888f70b5182c075c\u0022\u003ENICKY WAGNER (National):\u003C/span\u003E I rise to support the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill. This bill is all about better transparency, more accountability, and improved financial management of local government. There has been much concern among ratepayers that rates are rising continually and dramatically and that they can do nothing about it. In response to this concern, this bill makes amendments that will allow ratepayers to assert greater influence on the work of their councils. It is aimed at providing ratepayers and residents with better information about council costs, rates, and activities, and at encouraging them to understand and to play their part in influencing planning and decision-making processes. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001424\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002292824476-4e66-4052-8435-b049833d8b83\u0022\u003EThe bill supports standardised and plain English financial reporting, and it introduces pre-election reports. Both these measures are to ensure that residents and ratepayers can know more about their council, how it operates, and what they are paying for. The pre-election reports are designed to stimulate informed debate amongst voters before council elections. Too often we see innuendo and misinformation in local body campaigns. The pre-election reports will provide a factual base for any debate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001425\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002292824476-4e66-4052-8435-b049833d8b83\u0022\u003EThe Local Government and Environment Committee was aware that we needed to find a balance between the cost of providing information and the benefits of that information to the community. We realised that providing a pre-election report increased costs to councils, and for that reason we have lessened the requirements for councils with fewer than 20,000 constituents, the idea being that the smaller the community is, the more transparent it automatically is. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001426\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002292824476-4e66-4052-8435-b049833d8b83\u0022\u003EThe amendments are also designed to simplify long-term planning processes and to give them a more strategic focus. There has been concern from a number of submitters that some consultation requirements have been removed in this bill, and that is true. However, the proposals in the bill need to be considered as part of the broader decision-making framework of the Local Government Act 2002. The vast majority of provisions in that Act that enable local people to be involved in council decisions are retained, and consultation requirements on significant issues are untouched. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001427\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002292824476-4e66-4052-8435-b049833d8b83\u0022\u003EA huge amount of consultation is still required. Public consultation is required to make changes to the level of service of any significant activity. It is required to start or to end a significant activity, and to change the way a service is funded. Public consultation is necessary to establish a council-controlled organisation, and consultation is required to transfer ownership or control of a strategic asset. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001428\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002292824476-4e66-4052-8435-b049833d8b83\u0022\u003ESue Kedgley said that the consultation processes are being gutted; that is nonsense. In fact, 24 provisions of the original Act remain, only five are repealed, and one has been added. The principal Act also requires local authorities to conduct their business in an open, transparent, and democratically accountable manner. Councils are already required to be aware of, and to have regard to, the views of communities. Several submitters, including the Wellington City Council, said that they would consult on issues even if they were not required to do so under the Act. We also heard from some councils that, in meeting the requirements of the present Act, were actually paying people to come and give their opinion. In many cases we heard that the ordinary public has consultation fatigue. It is a costly waste of time and energy to go through the process just to tick the boxes to say that it has been done. Everyone agrees with and supports the need for meaningful consultation, and the amended Act requires consultation on significant matters, but we do not want expensive consultation processes merely for the sake of consultation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001429\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002292824476-4e66-4052-8435-b049833d8b83\u0022\u003EFinally, the amended bill gives councils more flexibility to choose effective and efficient delivery methods of water and other services. Again I say it was interesting to hear from the Wellington City Council, which has very successfully contracted out its waste-water treatment system. The Government believes that the changes in this bill represent significant progress towards better, more effective local government, and that they will make it easier for ratepayers and residents to participate in the important activities and decisions of local councils. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022 data-id=\u002297731a340e4d4c46a56e41bf6e285433\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001430\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002297731a340e4d4c46a56e41bf6e285433\u0022\u003ESU\u2019A WILLIAM SIO (Labour\u2014M\u0101ngere):\u003C/span\u003E The Manukau City Council made a submission on the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill and opposed it. I will give members some reflection on why. When Mr Hide became the Minister of Local Government, it was believed by many in Manukau that he had the National Government firmly on a leash, and that he took that leash, led the National Government, and designed for the Auckland region a structure that would create local government in Auckland as a business unit. It was designed to gut local government. It was designed to break up the income-flowing assets of that region and put them into council-controlled organisations. Again, Mr Hide led this Government by the leash and told the people of Auckland that it would be good for them. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001431\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022\u003EThe people of Auckland reacted, and poll after poll told us that they did not want to sell their assets. That was reaffirmed last month when Len Brown won a resounding victory over the National-backed candidate in the local body elections. Mr Brown won by a majority of more than 63,000 votes. The win of Len Brown in the Auckland super-city election was a resounding response from the people of Auckland\u2014they do not want to sell their assets. That mood has not changed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001432\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022\u003EThe people of Auckland are again up in arms. They are angry and outraged that this bill\u2014which, again, was introduced by this Government, led by the leash by Mr Hide\u2014is designed to do away with the valuable water assets of the region. Tomorrow at 9 a.m. a protest is being held outside United Water, at 116 Great South Road, Papakura. This has been organised by the community, which is angry and outraged about the way this Government is rushing this bill through. People do not want their water assets to be readily available to multinational water companies so that they can strip the profits from water companies that are owned by, formed by, organised by, and paid for by ratepayers throughout this country. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001433\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022\u003EA lot of people are asking whether Kiwis along the length and breadth of New Zealand can say with confidence and with hand on heart that they can trust the Minister who is driving the changes in local government today. A lot of them are wondering whether the changes being introduced in this bill will make things better for ratepayers throughout New Zealand. Will this bill reduce rates over the next 3, 6, 9, 15, or 35 years? After all, this is the same Minister who once told the people of Auckland that he would help cut their rates. Can Kiwis have confidence in a Minister from a minority party that received a mere 3.65 percent of the vote in the 2008 general election? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001434\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002220922ad0a9334dada69cc561777ac2b3\u0022\u003EHon Member\u003C/span\u003E: And dropping.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001435\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224ae3886c74dd4f509c97256f413022a5\u0022\u003ESU\u2019A WILLIAM SIO\u003C/span\u003E: Yep, and dropping. This is the party that has been dubbed by many as the \u201C1 Percent Party\u201D, yet despite its low percentage of the vote and despite its low polling, this Minister has been given the power to simply lead the National Government on a leash. Mr Hide leads the Government on a leash, just as a master leads his prized dog. Winston Peters\u2019 party, New Zealand First, got more votes than Mr Hide\u2019s party, yet Mr Peters is out of Parliament. Mr Hide\u2019s party, despite getting fewer votes than New Zealand First, is not only in Parliament but is in Parliament with five MPs, and Mr Hide is the Minister of Local Government, leading the National Government on a leash. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001436\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022\u003EIf the New Zealand public can say with hand on heart that they can trust this Minister and this Government, then my speech is concluded, and this country has gone to the dogs. But if the New Zealand public can, with confidence and without compulsion, say that they cannot trust this Minister and this Government, then believe me when I say that the New Zealand public is absolutely correct. Practically every piece of legislation Mr Rodney Hide has introduced into this House as the Minister of Local Government has been passed under urgency, with the exception of one bill. How Mr Hide can claim that ratepayers want greater transparency and accountability in local government when he ignores that principle in Parliament? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001437\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022\u003EAlthough this bill purports to improve transparency and accountability in local government, it will do the opposite. The bill aims to weaken local democracy. It strips away the key consultation provisions that the public and the community currently have. It forces councils to focus on a narrow range of core activities, and it will allow councils to privatise water supplies for 35 years. Despite the Government\u2019s weasel-word rhetoric, this bill does not increase transparency and accountability in local government. It will not increase transparency and accountability no matter how many times the Government says it will.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001438\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022\u003EThis bill will undermine transparency. It will undermine public accountability by local government. It will undermine the participation of local communities. This bill will remove the right of local communities to participate in consultative processes. It will remove the right of local communities to influence the activities of local government. It undermines transparency and accountability by removing the rights of local communities to participate in reaching outcomes that benefit the well-being of local communities. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001439\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022\u003EMore important, and of major significance, this bill removes the current requirement that councils must consult if they intend to sell key strategic assets, such as water services, or change their method of delivery. This bill will force council water supplies to be contracted out for 35 years. A ratepayer who is 70 years old today will be dead before they can have a say in respect of the water they have paid for. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001440\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022\u003EThe number of submissions on this bill totalled about 414. Of those submissions, 360 were expressly against water privatisation. I want to quote from two submitters, because they were significant submitters form the Auckland region. The first submission is from the Auckland District Council of Social Services, an umbrella organisation covering the Auckland isthmus area, which opposed this bill overall. Its submission states that it is opposed to this bill because: \u201Cit will undesirably reduce democratic accountability; reduce consultation with, and responsiveness to, local communities; tend to privatise strategic assets and basic services including water supply; and reduce the range of services provided by local authorities to a narrower list than communities actually want local authorities to continue to deliver for them.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001441\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022\u003EThe final submission I want to quote is from the Auckland City Council Community Board Chairs Forum. Again, this is a significant group from the Auckland region. It is a committee made up of chairs of all the community boards across the Auckland City region. Its submission states that \u201Cthe current legislation is delivering transparency and accountability for ratepayers and that the proposals set out in the legislation are unnecessary and anti-democratic. We believe that there is always room for improvement within Local Government however this can be achieved by best practise guidelines to councils and policy changes within councils.\u201D In other words, this bill is unnecessary, and the big ado about accountability and transparency just will not wash with the people of Auckland. I suspect that next year they will treat this Government in the same way that they responded when they voted for Len Brown as the super-city mayor in an overwhelming defeat of the National candidate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022\u003EDebate interrupted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001443\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022b6cdb5af837847f8ac562ac3d75f0d4c\u0022\u003EVoting\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001444\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022eb0cdf4b028e4a4ba3380765db0439b3\u0022\u003ECorrection\u2014Holidays Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022 data-id=\u002210c463a508184afbad4c976c1f7572dc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001445\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002210c463a508184afbad4c976c1f7572dc\u0022\u003EMr DEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The result of the vote in the Committee of the whole House on the Holidays Amendment Bill, on the question that clause 2 be agreed to, was incorrectly announced as the Ayes 69 and the Noes 49. The correct result is Ayes 69 and Noes 51. The record will be corrected.\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=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001446\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022ca242bd5e63848c795238de6fd477a00\u0022\u003ELocal Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001447\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00223858ef092e6f46c1b0abc45719ba52bb\u0022\u003ESecond Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001448\u0022\u003EDebate resumed.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022 data-id=\u0022afb7e5c7aaba4a9087e78be086664425\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001449\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022afb7e5c7aaba4a9087e78be086664425\u0022\u003ELOUISE UPSTON (National\u2014Taup\u014D):\u003C/span\u003E This Government knows that good, strong local government leads to strong communities. This is a Government and a Minister of Local Government that are listening to ratepayers. We listen to ratepayers when they tell us about their ongoing concern about the constant increase in rates, and when they tell us that they want better information in local government elections, which they will get in their pre-election report. They want better information so that they can influence what happens in their community. That is why it is called local government. This is a Government that will keep the \u201Clocal\u201D in local government. We are listening to what ratepayers want and delivering what they want. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001450\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003EI will touch on a few things, and I know there will be plenty of opportunity to do so tomorrow as we move into the more detailed Committee stage. We have heard a lot from the Opposition benches but not anything that has any credibility. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001451\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003EThis bill delivers choice for ratepayers and, more important, choice for local government. We recognise that councils across the country are different and that, therefore, they need the ability to make decisions that suit their community. One thing that I will leave members to dwell on is the fact that local communities and local councils should have the ability to choose how, where, and for how long they contract their services. I will leave it on that note. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001452\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003EThis bill is about choice. This bill is about listening to our ratepayers and removing the burden of rates\u2014the increase in the collection of taxes that the guys opposite think is totally acceptable. Well, we do not.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022 data-id=\u0022efcd1abf14514d84a1273f4c859e751b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001453\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022efcd1abf14514d84a1273f4c859e751b\u0022\u003EDAVID SHEARER (Labour\u2014Mt Albert):\u003C/span\u003E I am not a member of the Auckland Governance Legislation Committee, but I happened to sit on it for a full day in Auckland and listen to the submissions of the people who came in front of us. There was overwhelming opposition to this bill. There were 414 submissions on this bill. More than 80 percent of them opposed it, of which 36 were from councils. A huge number were from local community boards. If Louise Upston is really serious about listening to ratepayers, she should listen to councils and the local boards elected by ratepayers and what they think about this bill, because they do not want it. That includes the Mayor of Auckland, who came before us and spoke out against the provisions in this legislation, including the idea that we need to have a pre-election report. When we asked him what the pre-election report was needed for, and how much it would cost, he, along with other councillors, said that they would probably have to devote at least one or two extra people in their council to that in order to be able to put it together. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001454\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003EThis bill will increase red tape. It will increase the amount of bureaucracy and administrative costs. We are sitting here today in urgency\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001455\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ae94eea7-ba5f-4303-bf71-49e708bc9888\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b9a8aebec63143b69b56f8139b90ac2a\u0022\u003EJohn Hayes\u003C/span\u003E: You\u2019re standing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001456\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a34823e363e14068b01bc7a6e4da3e67\u0022\u003EDAVID SHEARER\u003C/span\u003E: I thank Mr Hayes. I am standing, in urgency, once again talking about local government or a bill about Auckland. Three out of the four local government or super-city bills have been brought in under urgency. It is a paradox that we come in here to do this under urgency, and we are talking about more transparency, more democracy, and more ability for people out there to have a say. This legislation removes a lot of the consultation. It is interesting that some of the people who came before us believed that some of the consultation should have been streamlined. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001457\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003EThe key aspect of this bill is that it removes the obligation to consult, particularly when there will be some ability to privatise, or certainly put something into the influence of a council-controlled organisation. It also means, as a number of speakers have said, that water can, effectively, be privatised. It will be taken from a 15-year to a 35-year lease under this legislation. Effectively, that is privatisation. If we think about that, 35 years is half a lifetime. It is nearly two generations. I am open to discussing this. I am open to looking at the evidence that this will make our water more accessible, of a higher quality, and cheaper for people. But I have not seen the evidence of that. As Sue Kedgley pointed out this evening, all around the world this process has made water more expensive, of a poorer quality, and less available to people. The evidence is overwhelming. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001458\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003EWhy are we trying to do it here? I can only suggest that it is part of an ideology that is being pushed through this legislation. It is not a bill, it is not a plan, and it is not a piece of legislation. This Government does not have a plan, and it does not have a strategy. This bill is a piece of ideology, being shoved through without any real evidence or analysis. It is focused, obviously, on funding. Again, there is not one person on this side of the House who would say that increasing rates is necessarily a good thing. But as the Local Government Commission pointed out to us in its submissions, overall, in relation to GDP, rates have not gone up. That is the evidence. This comes back to my key point. Let us put legislation through with evidence to support it, with the right sort of back-up, with the right sort of analysis, and maybe with a semblance of a strategy or a plan. But there is no plan, no strategy, no analysis, and no evidence. There is overwhelming opposition from the local people who have been elected into local government, telling us what to do. That point raises a very interesting question, and I am talking about Auckland in particular. How will our local body politicians interact with the National Government, in this case? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001459\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003EI turn to clause 5, which talks about transport. Transport is one of the core services that comes under this bill. Let me give members one example of this. Under the previous Labour Government, we took enormous steps to improve rail transport in Auckland. Mr Joyce has made it his business to turn up to every railway station opening throughout the Auckland region to get the kudos for something that he did not even have the imagination to put into place. What he has the imagination to do is to run a brand-new highway up to Warkworth, inside the new Auckland boundaries as part of the new super-city, so that his mates can have better access to the beaches up in \u014Cmaha. This is a travesty. You will be spending nearly $2 billion, and for every $1 that you spend on this highway, less than $1 will be returned.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001460\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fdc62e458bcb49ea9b5aaa6b55f5ec4a\u0022\u003EMr DEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I will not be spending anything.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001461\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002209e9db882a4b440d824fb52a7dbc7ce5\u0022\u003EDAVID SHEARER\u003C/span\u003E: I get carried away, just like Sir Roger Douglas did earlier, but I will not stoop to what he called the Chair in that outburst. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001462\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003EThis will mean that the real opportunities for infrastructure development under clause 5\u2014the real core services and the inner-city loop\u2014are threatened in terms of being implemented. This will make an enormous difference to Auckland. Railway patronage in Auckland has doubled in 5 years, and when the railway is electrified\u2014again, something the previous Labour Government brought into being\u2014we will see a massive spike once again in patronage. It will not be able to cope with that, and we will need an inner-city loop. There has been a lot of talk from our mayor, Len Brown. He was supportive of this, along with John Banks, the other mayoral candidate, Christine Fletcher, and a number of the other Auckland councillors. What is this Government saying? We need to think about ways of paying for it. Actually, there was a way of paying for it before: it was called the regional fuel levy. That was taken away by this Government. Why? Because it did not want local government to have a real say in its own planning. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001463\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003EThe Minister of Local Government might want to take a note of this. Why does he not get in behind Auckland and support something like a regional fuel tax, which might have enabled Auckland to get on and fund its own infrastructure programmes, alongside National Government funding? This is a narrow, stingy bill that is based on ideology. It is not based on anything but ideology. It is completely unnecessary, as my colleague said. It takes out the obligation for community consultation and effectively privatises our key assets, such as water. It increases the administrative costs in this pre-election report, which will enable our local government to cost more, rather than less. It is an ideology looking for a strategy and a plan. It is certainly an unnecessary waste of time, at 5 to 12 on a Wednesday night. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022 data-id=\u00228c94237511fa4081ab5c8e77f53ce870\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001464\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228c94237511fa4081ab5c8e77f53ce870\u0022\u003EDr CAM CALDER (National):\u003C/span\u003E It is great to see passionate debate, as the previous speaker pointed out, at five to 12 in the evening. There has been passionate debate, there has been some informed passionate debate, and there has been some debate that has been alarmist and extremist.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001465\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022\u003EI must say I have enjoyed the contributions from Mr Jones, which were somewhat hyperbolic in nature. He seemed at times to be speaking on another bill completely, as did some of the other contributors. However, it is always a pleasure to hear his rounded tones and demi-basso profundo voice. We miss him in the Local Government and Environment Committee\u2014come back, Mr Jones. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001466\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022\u003EThe Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill will be welcomed by the vast majority of ratepayers. I look forward to talking about it further in the Committee stage. I commend the bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022 data-id=\u00222d7c0299ed4244848a2a95dd3bff60bf\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001467\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002277ec6495-df45-43ac-aaa1-a03b5dd4c128\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222d7c0299ed4244848a2a95dd3bff60bf\u0022\u003EHon JOHN BOSCAWEN (Deputy Leader\u2014ACT):\u003C/span\u003E The Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill is a great bill, and the ACT Party will be supporting it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00223e3f6bc0e2c14fcdaddad8afbf0c3cf2\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 Local Government and Environment Committee by majority be agreed to. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 63\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 4; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\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=\u002243b700f0dc28497d89f53406efd97a4b\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill be now read a second time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 63\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 4; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill read a second time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00221aa719077c0b424d97d88612d6a47488\u0022\u003EIn Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001469\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022e8a60d8ae7ce4efe98511f366a615352\u0022\u003EPart 1  Amendments to principal Act\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022 data-id=\u00227ecba536cb6d469d8c29be6d02fdbe20\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001470\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227ecba536cb6d469d8c29be6d02fdbe20\u0022\u003EPHIL TWYFORD (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I am very happy to take what I think will be a fairly brief call.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001471\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EDebate interrupted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001472\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003ESitting suspended from 12 midnight to 9 a.m. (Thursday)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20101116e45be083c7574dbb8b0f118e8e8fec69001473\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003E\u003Cbr\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000001\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022643b8f0f3ebb4d6bab03abd6ca4ba1fd\u0022\u003ETuesday, 16 November 2010\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000002\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002233ba8333d30f4a5083fb3467dab18bd1\u0022\u003E(continued on Thursday, 18 November 2010)\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=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000003\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00222b265e4f51864918a7ac83c69a9b8046\u0022\u003ELocal Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000004\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022ba3ad08d4c7a426b917ad503a8a53c0e\u0022\u003EIn Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000005\u0022\u003EDebate resumed.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000006\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022aaa1af9be25043f881197dd725125767\u0022\u003EPart 1  Amendments to principal Act (continued)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022 data-id=\u0022423a90804a9042e3b9d95d2e8ef76e1f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000007\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022423a90804a9042e3b9d95d2e8ef76e1f\u0022\u003EPHIL TWYFORD (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I say good morning to the Committee, and good morning to New Zealanders, who may be a little nonplussed that we are considering some fairly fundamental changes to our system of local government here at 9 o\u2019clock on a Thursday morning, under urgency.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000008\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002210dbdc46d42a4fafb82aa078aadb0c0c\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: Again.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000009\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002227e7e5010f9843639bf9d222a1a7d103\u0022\u003EPHIL TWYFORD\u003C/span\u003E: Again, the Minister of Local Government has brought a bill to the House that takes away the democratic rights of New Zealanders in local government and, again, it is being pushed through the House under urgency. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000010\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EThere is plenty to talk about in this bill, and I am looking forward to some detailed debate at the Committee stage on the provisions of the bill. I will start by explaining one of the reasons why Labour is voting against this bill in its entirety. This bill, through a number of its provisions, seeks to open up local government services, assets, resources, and systems to the private sector, and it does that in a number of ways. Principally, it removes the democratic safeguards that exist in the law currently that give citizens and communities all over New Zealand the chance to be informed and notified of changes in the way that assets are owned or managed and in the way that services are delivered. Citizens have the opportunity to consider that and to give input\u2014to be consulted as part of the democratic process. This bill takes away those rights.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000011\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EI will go through some of the clauses in more detail. Clause 11 repeals section 88 of the Local Government Act 2002. The effect of that repeal is to take away the right that citizens in this country currently have to be consulted thoroughly when a public service currently delivered by the council is corporatised, transferred over to a council-owned company, or contracted out to the private sector. There is a reason why section 88 is currently there, which is that, whether a service is delivered by the private sector or whether it is delivered in an open, transparent way managed in the interests of the public good by our local authorities, it is a matter of legitimate public interest. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000012\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EI would have thought that after the last year and a half in Auckland, the Hon Rodney Hide would discern that the public actually care about this stuff. The public backlash that he faced in Auckland because of his corporatisation agenda for the new Auckland Council, where he has essentially consigned three-quarters of local government services into council-controlled organisations, caused a storm of public concern from the New Zealand Herald and right across the city, including all the elected mayors. There was massive public opposition, and the corporatisation agenda that he rammed through in Auckland is one of the reasons why not only his own personal stakes but also the Government\u2019s standing took a real hit in Auckland over the super-city. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000013\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f62c94ff7fdc44a99f3ad504586f8875\u0022\u003EHon Member\u003C/span\u003E: And their mayoral candidate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000014\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228a2a0592c9704fe393c081420f74325d\u0022\u003EPHIL TWYFORD\u003C/span\u003E: That is right. Surely that is demonstration enough that people care about this issue. The reason people were concerned was that the council-controlled organisation model is deliberately designed to keep the business of local government away from the sunlight of transparency and democracy. It is designed to keep the public out. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000015\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EThe storm of public opposition to the Minister\u2019s agenda in Auckland forced some real concessions that made the Auckland council-controlled organisations far more responsive and transparent than otherwise, but those concessions will not apply to the rest of the country. They do not. So under this bill, councils around the country can transfer services to a council-controlled organisation without consulting their ratepayers, without telling them what is going on. Once those services and assets are in council-controlled organisations, a whole lot of other democratic safeguards do not apply. They can dispose of assets more easily without having to consult the community, and their meetings are no longer open to the public. They do not have to publish agendas or minutes. All of the normal conventions of accountable government that we take for granted in local government do not apply under the council-controlled organisation model. That is why the current law says that communities should have the right to be consulted before the services, assets, and resources of local government are transferred across. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000016\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EIf we look at the transport council-controlled organisation in Auckland, we see that Mr Hide, against the advice of four Government departments, advised that the transport agency should be corporatised. Nowhere else in New Zealand is transport run as a council-controlled organisation\u2014as a corporate entity. But there was a huge public outcry about that, because people do not necessarily want their local government services to be run by a corporate entity. People like to have access to the meetings and to hold their politicians to account. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000017\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EThis bill undermines those rights. Nothing in this bill would prevent a council from transferring its libraries to a council-controlled organisation, its parks to a council-controlled organisation, or its transport operation to a council-controlled organisation. A council could do those things\u2014[Interruption] Members opposite ask why they would do that. Well, I ask them why the Minister in the chair, the Minister of Local Government, transferred three-quarters of Auckland local government services to a council-controlled organisation, against the wishes of Auckland\u2014against the wishes of Auckland\u2019s elected politicians and against the wishes of the public. That is a perfect example of a politician choosing to do that. He never gave the people of Auckland a say, and this bill reflects that exact same political style. The citizens of Auckland would not be given a say as to why their services would be corporatised. Why members opposite cannot get that into their heads, I just do not understand. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000018\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EThe Government claims that this bill will make local government more transparent and more accountable. Well, we will look at a whole series of examples as we go through the clauses of this bill, but clause 11, in particular, which repeals section 88 of the Local Government Act 2002, is a classic example of how this legislation will make local government less transparent, less responsive, and less accountable. It is all because of the ideological blinkers of this Government and this Minister of Local Government, who brazenly want to encourage the privatisation and corporatisation of our local government system. They are taking away the democratic safeguards that New Zealanders expect and rely on. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000019\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EThere is an important philosophical difference between National and ACT, on one hand, and Labour and the Greens, on the other. Members on this side of the Chamber believe in the importance of public ownership and public control as part of our democratic system of government. It is so that our communities, and their resources and assets, are managed for the public good, in the public interest, and in a transparent and accountable way. But what does this Minister of Local Government believe in? What do members opposite believe in? They are quite happy to shovel our resources and our assets, which generations of ratepayers have paid for through their rates, into corporate entities where business can be done behind closed doors, with no transparency and no accountability. Those members do not care, because they are totally happy for our cities and our communities to be run by an oligarchy of private interests. That is the system they are setting up. It is the system that Rodney Hide has been setting up in Auckland. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000020\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EThis bill severely undermines the democratic processes of local government. Labour does not believe in it, we will not stand for it, and we will denounce it and call it what it is. This Government, with the help of this Minister, who is currently polling at about 2 percent in the polls, is undermining our public institutions and our system of government by taking away the right of people to be informed about their resources. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000021\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EI would have thought that with the experience of the last couple of years, this Government would realise that people actually notice and care about issues of public ownership and public control. The fiasco that this Minister presided over in Auckland is a classic example of that. We could look back to when the forces of the right tried to privatise the Ports of Auckland and provoked massive opposition.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022 data-id=\u00223cafd7dda079419eab9d09d64137e71f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223cafd7dda079419eab9d09d64137e71f\u0022\u003EHon RODNEY HIDE (Minister of Local Government):\u003C/span\u003E I thought I would do something novel and speak to Part 1 of the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill. It is clear to me that Mr Phil Twyford is traumatised by the success of Auckland and cannot bring himself to talk on this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000023\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003EPart 1 inserts several new provisions so that local authorities will be required, firstly, to have particular regard to the contribution made by particular core services; secondly, to assess the risks and returns of commercial investments, which I thought would be a good thing; thirdly, to develop a financial strategy and include this in the authority\u2019s long-term plan\u2014again, I would have thought that that was a good thing\u2014and, in particular, fourthly, to publish a pre-election report. These provisions are under clause 16. The information that will be included in the pre-election report for members is set out in schedule 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000024\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003EBy the way, I should say that Part 1 contains the bulk of the substance of this bill. Part 1 also provides for more consistent financial reporting and the disclosure of infrastructure service information. For example, it enables regulations to be made that prescribe that forms for funding impact statements are included in long-term plans, annual plans, and annual reports in schedule 1. It also enables a Secretary for Local Government to make rules specifying standard performance measures for five groups of activities, and sets out the purpose and criteria for doing so. These performance measures will be included in long-term plans and annual plans, which are intended to take effect from 2014. The part amends the definition of \u201Ccommunity outcomes\u201D, in clause 4, so that it is about the outcomes a local authority aims to achieve for its community.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000025\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002295133ad0bc364c26984462ee7a939a67\u0022\u003EChris Auchinvole\u003C/span\u003E: Is this the hidden, evil bit?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000026\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223552280b496e438a84fd07aaaabe3028\u0022\u003EHon RODNEY HIDE\u003C/span\u003E: Maybe. The part also repeals requirements for local authorities to carry out separate processes for identifying, monitoring, and reporting on community outcomes, under clause 12. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000027\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003EPart 1 repeals requirements for local authorities, firstly, to consider the views of interested or affected persons at four specified stages in the decision-making process.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000028\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002213a31549167e4141ad8c36f728da5397\u0022\u003EDr Cam Calder\u003C/span\u003E: How many is that?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000029\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223e13d6695f0d4ed3945973744726a5d7\u0022\u003EHon RODNEY HIDE\u003C/span\u003E: Four. It will be up to the council to decide how many times it will consult. Secondly, the part repeals requirements for local authorities to consult on proposals to change the mode of the service delivery of a significant activity from a local authority to a council-controlled organisation or other body, under clause 11. The council can still decide to do it; it is not a legal requirement. Thirdly, the part includes certain proposals, decisions, and long-term plans. These include proposals to construct, replace, or abandon a strategic asset, in clause 14, and proposals for the sale or exchange of endowment land, in clause 33. I have to say that these provisions have been overwhelmingly received by the local government sector. Part 1 removes most funding and financial policies from long-term plans, while requiring separate consultation on some of those policies. That is set out in clauses 18 to 26.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000030\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003ERegarding the provision of water services, Part 1 gives local authorities and their communities more options for providing and financing their water services, so that they can decide for themselves what is in their best interests. That will help to facilitate private sector investment in water infrastructure. The provisions in clauses 31 and 32 extend permitted time limits on water service contracts and joint arrangements with the private sector from 15 to 35 years, which makes those arrangements more workable. I do not understand the position of Labour members. They were happy for the term to be 15 years, but somehow 35 years is suddenly the end of Western democracy as we know it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000031\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f9a021a9a8c04f35bf52536d442c3963\u0022\u003EPhil Twyford\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s private ownership.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000032\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a6c2cfe8b31a4fc181d293ee824fc8c4\u0022\u003EHon RODNEY HIDE\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Twyford keeps yelling out. I think he should concentrate on finding somewhere in Auckland where the Labour Party would like him to stand; that would be a positive thing. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000033\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003EThis part also enables councils to build, own, and operate transfer schemes, by allowing a private partner to open new infrastructure during the contract period. The public would have to be consulted on these proposals, and on any other kind of joint arrangement. The bill does not require any changes to be made, and does not privatise water services. For example, it does not enable permanent ownership by, or the transfer of council water services to, the private sector. Local government would remain legally responsible for providing water services, and for pricing and policy decisions. Customers would continue to have a direct relationship with the local government organisation, which would be accountable to those customers. The bill prohibits arrangements in which the private partner has the right to revenue from the water service, such as concessions or other franchise agreements. It also prohibits the sale or transfer of the ownership of existing infrastructure\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000034\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220f25c9542c8f49848485eb5b9a52176f\u0022\u003EChris Auchinvole\u003C/span\u003E: Could you say that again\u2014inhibits the sale?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000035\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002232a3bb23a72c4267885a77f9b46f68a9\u0022\u003EHon RODNEY HIDE\u003C/span\u003E: I will say it again because I know Mr Auchinvole is interested.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000036\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221d26e9cb838b4c558d17e2268225ebef\u0022\u003EChris Auchinvole\u003C/span\u003E: Did you say it prohibits the sale?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000037\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002288ae57e3e1e3484fb744ae053ae1ae83\u0022\u003EHon RODNEY HIDE\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, Part 1 prohibits the sale or transfer of ownership of existing infrastructure, unless that is incidental to, and desirable for, the success of the joint arrangement. Again, the public would be consulted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000038\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d5150bd6b5d74747bd70efe75c733515\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: He was a celebrity once; now his fan base is Chris Auchinvole.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000039\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002266c1d65021de4cfaa1bd01de5deaee6b\u0022\u003EHon RODNEY HIDE\u003C/span\u003E: It is so interesting, is it not? We have Mr Darren Hughes, who I think lost his seat at the last election. We have Mr Twyford, who cannot\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000040\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022703086e4f7cf4212811e898e72b09c8d\u0022\u003EPhil Twyford\u003C/span\u003E: How\u2019s your polling in Epsom, Rodney?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000041\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022645e05dcaa3b4a38a30f1275aae04d8c\u0022\u003EHon RODNEY HIDE\u003C/span\u003E: Actually, it is very good. Mr Twyford cannot even convince his own Labour Party to let him have a crack at a seat.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000042\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003EWe will also have a Supplementary Order Paper to make minor drafting amendments to Part 1 of the bill\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225845a64346c04168a5fecdf023a948bb\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: Don\u2019t show off about victories.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000044\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223ab39e023fe14db6b4a1b0b9ac74759b\u0022\u003EHon RODNEY HIDE\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014and I know that Mr Hughes will be interested in that Supplementary Order Paper. Clause 16 is amended to clarify that the provision will relate to a local authority \u201Creferred to in subsection 1A\u201D. Clauses 25 and 26 are amended to fix cross-reference errors. Clause 32(4) is amended to fix the amending terminology used in the provision. I am looking forward to the Labour Party actually addressing Part 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022 data-id=\u0022a29ef58f6a304b8cae923167fd5492a5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000045\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a29ef58f6a304b8cae923167fd5492a5\u0022\u003EBRENDON BURNS (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central):\u003C/span\u003E I am very please to speak in the Committee stage of the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill. What is very clearly behind this bill is a very specific agenda\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000046\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223a26afeb93de4632a8b13bde72102391\u0022\u003EHon Members\u003C/span\u003E: Ah!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000047\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cdba6bf85c5d44a3bffe292876035785\u0022\u003EBRENDON BURNS\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, it is a very specific agenda for the privatisation of New Zealand\u2019s water assets, and I will give the Committee two examples, one of which is relevant to those noisy members from Canterbury. I will quote from a Canterbury District Health Board document that warns about the consequences of this bill. I will also quote from another document that is not so public from the Minister of Health in respect of this privatisation agenda, because this bill raises very serious concerns about not only the loss of local New Zealand control of ownership of our water supplies but also very major risks to public health.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000048\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003EI specifically refer to clauses 28, 29, and 30, in Part 1. The Local Government and Environment Committee received commentary from the Canterbury District Health Board on those clauses. I have to say that in 25-plus years of being in and around public life I have never seen a submission so strongly made in such language explicit with warning to a Government as this submission, which was written by the Canterbury District Health Board\u2019s manager of healthy physical environments. In it he warns that \u201CDeletion of sections 125-129 of the LGA effectively removes the specific regulations pertaining to water and sanitary services overseen by an (independent) Medical Officer of Health.\u201D The actions of the Government in taking away the Ministry of Health\u2019s oversight of water schemes, as this bill does, are, as the Canterbury District Health Board states explicitly in its submission, precisely the type of action that played a significant part in the Walkerton tragedy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000049\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003EWalkerton is a small dairy-farming area in the Ontario province of Canada. A new Government came in promising to sweep away the red tape and the horrendous regulations that were squeezing the lifeblood out of business. It did that. It took away the red tape. The consequence of its actions, which included the removal of health department oversight of water schemes, was a serious outbreak of E. coli in 2000, which saw seven people die and two and a half thousand people get sick, and which cost an estimated $200 million in direct and indirect costs to that province of Canada. Seven people died\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000050\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d74bdd59d1794a5b83e3a15e43554843\u0022\u003EHon Member\u003C/span\u003E: What?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000051\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ebebacd36f9d46aaa32eebeb0f95dcb0\u0022\u003EBRENDON BURNS\u003C/span\u003E: Seven people died, and two and a half thousand people got sick because a Government came in and said it would sweep away the red tape, the regulatory restraint, which was strangling the lifeblood of business. The consequence of that was to take away health department oversight of the management of water supplies in that part of Canada. That is precisely what will happen here.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000052\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003EI invite the Canterbury member opposite Nicky Wagner to stand up, challenge her district health board\u2014which she likes to snuggle up to sometimes\u2014and tell it that it is wrong, and to put it on the record today, so that when this happens in Canterbury, under this bill, she can stand by her record and can tell the board that she was right. Here it is, in black and white: the Canterbury District Health Board is telling this Parliament and telling this Government that this bill, in removing Ministry of Health oversight of water schemes, in a blatant attempt to privatise our water supplies\u2014to put in the profit motive\u2014will lead to a tragedy. It is saying that taking away regulatory oversight of water schemes will put this nation at extraordinary risk. They are not my words; they are the words of the medical officer of health of the Canterbury District Health Board, and his team, who currently have a role in the oversight of drinking water. My goodness, that district health board already has a struggle going on in trying to make sure that our drinking water is safe. It has a Minister of Health\u2014[Interruption] Mr Chair! Mr Chair! Mr Chair!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000053\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002265ad6a1ee11f4cf1907ad97a24358b8a\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: I will give you the call, but we are not going to have a barrage of calls. I am quite aware when people are seeking the call, and I am not going to have any member yelling at me. If someone continues to do that, that member is not likely to get a repeat call.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000054\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226cde1be7c30747b5956d8ae95c069932\u0022\u003EBRENDON BURNS\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chairperson; my apologies for the volume. This is an issue that deserves to excite the interests of members of the Committee, because there are very, very pronounced risks for New Zealanders under this bill in terms of the safety of their water. A submission from the Canterbury District Health Board to the committee explicitly states that there are very real risks in taking away the medical and health oversight of water schemes and handing it across, in 35-year terms, to the private sector. In doing so we will risk doing exactly what happened in Walkerton, Ontario. We are risking the lives of New Zealanders by taking away that health oversight.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000055\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003EAllied to that, just a few weeks ago I was able to discover that the Minister of Health has taken an action that I think is involved in, and linked to, this issue. Until very recently the Ministry of Health had a team that was responsible for oversight of our drinking-water schemes. That has now virtually ended. From a team of five 2 years ago, there is now one staffer left in the Ministry of Health providing oversight of drinking water. Instead, the Government has awarded a $2.25 million contract\u2014$2.25 million of our taxpayers\u2019 money\u2014to a consortium led by a company called Allen and Clarke, which National members opposite were describing 5 years ago as cronies. They were saying that rampant cronyism was at work involving this company. But that has not stopped them from awarding a $2.25 million contract to a consortium led by Allen and Clarke to provide oversight of our core public health function, the safety of our water. I see a very strong linkage between that and what we have seen in this bill in respect of taking away, at a local level, Ministry of Health oversight of drinking water.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000056\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003EIf we put those two things together, where are we going? We are going into a system where contracts will be handed over to the private sector for 35 years, without, at a local level, health input and oversight of drinking-water schemes. At a national level, as a result of the Minister of Health\u2019s intervention and the awarding of a $2.25 million contract to a consortium led by Allen and Clarke, we now have a contracted-out responsibility for what is a very clear public health function. If there is one thing that we as a First World nation should be able to do, it is to have some belief that water is safe to drink, and currently fewer than one in five New Zealanders are able to be given that assurance. Fewer than one in five New Zealanders are able to be told explicitly that water is safe to drink. That is the statistic in the latest Ministry of Health report\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000057\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002292824476-4e66-4052-8435-b049833d8b83\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a9bcea402b404b0aa53c21d716fb312b\u0022\u003ENicky Wagner\u003C/span\u003E: That is not\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000058\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221bbd855859e3437f81578bb9fbd10cac\u0022\u003EBRENDON BURNS\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, it is. The 2008-09 Ministry of Health annual survey shows that 80 percent of New Zealanders are drinking water that is assured to be safe\u2014down from 83 percent in the previous year\u2014but one in five, or 20 percent of New Zealanders, are not given that assurance and do not know that their water is safe, because their water either is not tested or, when it is tested, is found not to be safe. That is the result.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000059\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002292824476-4e66-4052-8435-b049833d8b83\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222349384232b44e6aa6a1768ce83d0328\u0022\u003ENicky Wagner\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s scaremongering.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000060\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002269d7a430ef314ca3a9fb01be9ff9ffcf\u0022\u003EBRENDON BURNS\u003C/span\u003E: No, it is not scaremongering. We saw what happened in Walkerton, Ontario under precisely the sort of regime that this bill is leading to\u2014precisely. They are not my words. There is the member from Rangitata. You stand up and take a call\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000061\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fcadcc14f96f43169f595202c6195957\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: Order!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000062\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002206101f35f4904feeaa9aed6c02a70f25\u0022\u003EBRENDON BURNS\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014and deny what your local district health board is saying. It was an explicit warning. You go on the record and say this is a nonsense\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000063\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bb5e201207bd411e8befeba008b9e35f\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: Order!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000064\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022174820d9e72f4912be63cef3076276ca\u0022\u003EBRENDON BURNS\u003C/span\u003E: My apologies, Mr Chairperson. The member for Rangitata, not the Chairperson, should take a call to make sure that the constituents she is currently the member for\u2014somebody else might be their member shortly\u2014hear her put on the record that what the Canterbury District Health Board is saying is a nonsense. She should then put on the record\u2014and I would like to hear the Minister of Health say this, as well\u2014that it is her view that it is appropriate to take away the Ministry of Health\u2019s role and hand it to a consortium, at a cost of $2.25 million of taxpayers\u2019 funds.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000065\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003EThis consortium includes an outfit called Parsons Brinckerhoff, which is an American engineering conglomerate. My supposition is that it is here not just to play a role in the oversight of water through that contract but to line itself up for some nice, juicy contracts that will emanate from this bill as we see the creation of 35-year contracts. A generation of ownership is provided for under this bill for our water schemes, for our basic right to enjoy safe drinking-water, which should be a core public health function.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022 data-id=\u0022325305a80281489bb693978ba0ca9f03\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000066\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022325305a80281489bb693978ba0ca9f03\u0022\u003ELOUISE UPSTON (National\u2014Taup\u014D):\u003C/span\u003E I will take us back to the focus and intent of the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill, because we have not heard very much about that, unfortunately, in this debate so far. We have heard from the members opposite a lot of alarmist talk and scaremongering, and emotive extremism that has actually bordered on histrionics at times. But I want to talk about the bill, because that is what this debate is about. I say it is about the bill, in case some members have forgotten that. I actually do not think many members opposite know what the bill is all about, so I will take members through the background\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000067\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cc9c47c0-4409-44ca-ad2f-498707f27d69\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002292970c270d0646d5b5e0774812f587d1\u0022\u003EJonathan Young\u003C/span\u003E: They weren\u2019t on the committee, anyway.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000068\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227e0009ca326b46e188705d5c590db99a\u0022\u003ELOUISE UPSTON\u003C/span\u003E: That is right, and those who were did not show up all the time. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000069\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003EThis bill is actually about sharpening up the local government debate and making sure that we achieve in local government. It is very important to have effective local government, because we know that builds strong communities. Strong communities are empowered by local government, and they have influence, they have a say, and they have access to transparent information so that they are in a better position to influence the decisions of those who represent them. That is why I want to spend a bit of time talking about what the council is involved with, and the transparency around that, and about actually being able to provide good information back from a council on how it has been doing, with some consistent performance measures. Also, what most people would expect is a financial strategy as to how ratepayers\u2019 money will be spent, and then a report back as to whether that was done. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000070\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003EOne of the issues that came up from time to time in the submissions comes up a lot for me as an electorate MP. I am not sure how many members opposite are electorate MPs, but a lot of constituents who come through my door talk about the fact that their greatest concern is the ever-increasing burden of rates increases on their fixed income. Measures in this bill will provide those people with the ability to look at, and have a say on, what local government is doing. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000071\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003ELet us have a look at a couple of those measures\u2014for example, core services. We have heard a diatribe from members opposite about core services, and I want to set the record straight on the intention behind the statement of core services. That statement actually enables councils to have a focus on core services, but nowhere is it stated\u2014and it never has been stated\u2014that a council is restricted to those core services. Instead, the statement is about creating a priority for those activities, and then allowing debate by the people who live within a council boundary to decide which other activities should occur. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000072\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003EFor example, economic development was mentioned several times, and that is an important activity to touch on. If I look at the Taup\u014D electorate, I see that economic development occurs quite differently in Waip\u0101 from south Waikato and from Taup\u014D. Not one of those councils is stopped from doing economic development, but the priority is different, based on the needs of those communities. This bill provides the flexibility for each council to work towards meeting the needs and demands of its communities. If a particular community wants to invest significantly in economic development, then local ratepayers get to make that call, which is exactly how it should be. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000073\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003EIn terms of core services though, we would not want to have a situation where some non-core activities took priority over the building of roads, for example. Every ratepayer has a certain expectation about roads to drive on and water to drink. That is exactly what we have in terms of core services. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000074\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003EDespite some random comments from members opposite, this bill is about communities making decisions around the activities in their communities. More important, in activities like the pre-election report the community gets to see how the council has been going with regard to the decisions that the community has had input into. At local body elections\u2014and we have just had one\u2014voters will be able to rely on solid information rather than just electioneering material. The previous speaker talked about democracy. I am not sure why members opposite cannot understand that pre-election reports allow for more information to be provided, to enable voters to make informed decisions about whom they will vote for. Yet, members opposite say this bill takes away democracy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022 data-id=\u0022932ff27b6a0e46aa92ed1a93e48a721d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000075\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022932ff27b6a0e46aa92ed1a93e48a721d\u0022\u003ECHRIS HIPKINS (Labour\u2014Rimutaka):\u003C/span\u003E One has to hand it to the National Party and the ACT Party. At the last election they promised New Zealanders that they would not privatise any public services in their first term, and of course they did not mention anything about local government services. Local government services are what this bill is all about. It is about privatising local government services and, contrary to the previous speaker\u2019s comments, the bill is all about removing the ability of local communities to determine what shape of local government they want. Under current law it is up to local communities to decide what type of local government they want and what sorts of services they want their local councils to provide. Communities have the ultimate say, but this bill is all about watering down their ability to determine what they want their local councils to provide. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000076\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EI particularly want to talk about core services, and that is what the previous speaker Louise Upston\u2014a single-term MP for Taup\u014D\u2014was talking about. I will talk about how councils will define a core activity, because a core activity in one area will not necessarily be a core activity in another area. A core activity now might not be a core activity in the future. If I had been writing the Canterbury council\u2019s list of core activities 6 months ago I am not sure that I would have put \u201Cearthquake recovery\u201D on that list of core activities, though I imagine that Canterbury local authorities are quite actively involved in that at the moment. These things change. The needs of communities change, and councils need to be able to respond. Not a single submitter to the Local Government and Environment Committee thought that defining core services was a good idea. Can any members opposite name a single local authority that said that was a good idea?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000077\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228a05120e677c434db29ea102a745fb81\u0022\u003EDr Cam Calder\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, I can and I have the piece of paper. Would you like me to table it, Mr Chair?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000078\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002293b57780958947e5916f4ee947c47e50\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: Order!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000079\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226bebba148ce24ec9abcaa7195fce8d4f\u0022\u003ECHRIS HIPKINS\u003C/span\u003E: Give me the name.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000080\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227154186abe46493b981f2ba8580d591c\u0022\u003EDr Cam Calder\u003C/span\u003E: Wellington City Council; I have the document in front of me.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000081\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022605d673aa4d648a1bfd0c57a38c541a7\u0022\u003ECHRIS HIPKINS\u003C/span\u003E: Rubbish! The Wellington City Council did not argue that way. I sat through that council\u2019s submission, and it opposed the definition of core services. Not a single local authority thought that defining core services was a good idea. I sat through the hearings, and none of the councils argued that it was a good idea to define core services. In fact, the Government\u2019s vision of what core services should be and Rodney Hide\u2019s definition of what core services should be cut out a whole lot of stuff that local authorities currently work on. For example, employment creation, job creation, and economic development are not part of this Government\u2019s vision for the role of local government. I think that local government could play a larger role in these types of activities. The Mayors Task Force for Jobs, for example, was very successful but there is no accommodation for something like that within the definition of established core services. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000082\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EOne of the reasons they say we have to shrink the size of local government is rates increases, yet the Department of Internal Affairs advice to the select committee was that 97 percent of council expenditure was on the things that they list as being core services for local authorities. There is absolutely no need to define core services in legislation. All that will do is unnecessarily tie the hands of local authorities and make them less responsive to their local communities. They want to take the \u201Clocal\u201D out of local government. Local government should be about local communities saying that \u201CThese are the services that we want you to provide.\u201D They need to be able to change. They need to be able to adapt to different situations. I am very concerned about this idea of local authorities having their hands tied. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000083\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EI want to talk also about the financial strategy that councils will need to put in place, because potentially that will also constrain councils\u2019 abilities to respond to local community needs. I support having a financial strategy, but I am concerned that it will require councils effectively to cap the level of rates they will be able to charge. It is very popular to promise lower rate increases and therefore defer to future generations the costs of very necessary infrastructure upgrades and very necessary expenditure. In 10 years\u2019 time, or 20 years\u2019 time, when the plumbing stops working, the water stops coming out of the taps, and the roads are full of potholes, the councils of 10 or 20 years ago will not be the ones that have to deal with the problems. Those problems will be faced by councils in the future. So 20 years ago those councils may have kept their rates low, but future generations are the ones who will end up having to deal with the legacy that that will create; they will have to worry about that legacy. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EOverall, the idea of a financial strategy for local authorities is a good one. We have a financial strategy for central government finances, so having a similar mechanism for local government is perfectly acceptable. But I am concerned about putting an arbitrary cap on the level of rates. We do not do that for central government taxation. We do not say we will cap at a certain rate the amount of revenue that central government can earn, and thereby everything else has to fall within that cap. Central government has the ability to raise taxes as it requires, in order to fund the activities that it deems necessary and on which it goes out and campaigns for a mandate. Why should local authorities be subject to a different standard? Why should they be prevented from delivering the things they promised to their local communities in an election, because there is an arbitrary cap on the amount of revenue they can create? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000085\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EIf local communities want local authorities to provide certain services and they vote for local authorities to provide certain services, then the local authorities need to be able to raise the revenue in order to deliver them. If the local people do not like it and are unhappy with the level of rates being charged, then there is a mechanism they can adopt in order to deal with that\u2014they can elect a different council. It is the same with central government. If people are not happy about the level of tax they pay, they can elect a different Government. If they are not happy with the services provided by central government, they can elect a different Government. Why should local authorities be any different? Why should central government be tying the hands of local authorities and preventing them from delivering on the services that local communities are demanding of them? They are effectively short-circuiting the local democratic process by saying that the local communities might say that that is what they want, but that we in this Parliament know better. Actually, we do not; the local communities should be able to determine what they want to have delivered. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000086\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EAs I mentioned before, putting an arbitrary cap on the revenue that local authorities can raise also constrains a council\u2019s ability to deal with unforeseen issues that may arise from time to time, and again I come back to natural disasters, for example, Canterbury\u2019s earthquake. Why would we want to constrain the ability of local authorities to adapt to things that are unforeseen? The Canterbury earthquake is at the extreme end of the scale; I am talking about smaller-scale natural disasters. The Hutt Valley, where I come from, is prone to regular flooding. In the last 10 years or so there have been three or four reasonably significant floods. They are not the types of floods where every home in the Hutt Valley is flooded, but ones where significant numbers of homes and businesses end up being flooded. Local authorities need to have the flexibility to respond to those disasters and to raise the revenue that they need in order to respond to those disasters, without this idea of an arbitrary cap on them. If we put an arbitrary cap on the level of rates that councils can charge, again what we are doing is encouraging local authorities to defer the burden of providing adequate infrastructure on to future generations. I think some of our local authorities already have an infrastructure deficit, whereby the replacement of core pipelines and so on has not taken place because those local authorities have been striving to keep their rates down. As a result, at some point a future generation will end up having to front up and pay an awful lot more in order just to keep the basics operating. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EWhy should we place this constraint on councils? Why should we place this overriding objective on councils that keeping rates low is the ultimate objective, no matter what the consequences? Ultimately we will get what we pay for. If we pay for a cheap, shoddy water system and a cheap, shoddy sewerage system, that is what we will get. But if we are willing to invest in it now, then we will be catering properly for future generations. I am concerned about that desire to cut down the role of councils by restricting them to what Rodney Hide thinks local authorities should be providing, rather than what the local communities think they should be providing and, by putting this arbitrary cap on the level of rates, thereby restricting the ability of local authorities to raise the revenue for the services that local people want their local authorities to provide. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000088\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003EThose are two things that I am particularly concerned about in this legislation. I know that the Minister has indicated that he will take the next call, so I am quite looking forward to hearing his response to those two particular issues.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022 data-id=\u00225dc631c2404f4d17b14926ea4a64e058\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000089\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225dc631c2404f4d17b14926ea4a64e058\u0022\u003EHon RODNEY HIDE (Minister of Local Government):\u003C/span\u003E I want to correct some of the statements that have been made by Labour members.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000090\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ccf779b120a94f91a2d3263f2aa0e40c\u0022\u003EChris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: They\u2019re factual.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000091\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002217dcbd7d3a95429e9ee7e717ce24601b\u0022\u003EHon RODNEY HIDE\u003C/span\u003E: No, I am sorry, they are false. First of all, Mr Twyford said that no council supported the clause on core services. This is simply untrue. For example, Rangit\u012Bkei District Council officials advised me that the council thinks it is helpful to highlight in legislation those core services that councils must have particular regard for. I am sorry, but the Labour members must have been asleep during discussion on that one. Indeed, Wellington\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000092\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cc3914affbea423ea394e45fe513f0df\u0022\u003EPhil Twyford\u003C/span\u003E: How many supported it?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000093\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227d036add6e834079acac829f83c1a510\u0022\u003EHon RODNEY HIDE\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Twyford now changes the debate. He said none earlier, and he misled Parliament. When we come to Wellington City Council I am advised that the council supported the clause in its current form. I think it would be helpful for this debate on the important area of local government if Labour actually concentrated on some accuracy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022 data-id=\u002211a2fad24a7e438fbea2d8513571aa8d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000094\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002211a2fad24a7e438fbea2d8513571aa8d\u0022\u003EDr CAM CALDER (National):\u003C/span\u003E I thank the Minister in the chair, Rodney Hide, for what he pointed out, because I think the previous Opposition contribution showcased the problem we face in this debate: there is a lot of extremism, there is a lot of alarmism, there is scaremongering, and a lot of it boils down to the presentation of positions on behalf of other bodies, which are fundamentally wrong. As another example, which I think the Minister briefly touched on, may I please read what the Wellington City Council said? One of the pleasures of being on the Local Government and Environment Committee was receiving the high quality of feedback from local government and from members of the public on this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000095\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e24fa74b90e54bd1a4057cc2679bbd6a\u0022\u003EChris Auchinvole\u003C/span\u003E: What did they say?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000096\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226c618fde15004b13b529aff93d35553b\u0022\u003EDr CAM CALDER\u003C/span\u003E: They said a number of things, and we listened very closely. I have to acknowledge at this stage the inclusive chairmanship of chairman Auchinvole and the contribution of people from all sides of the House\u2014all sides of the House\u2014which may not be apparent in this debate when we hear some of the comments being made. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000097\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022\u003EAs well as being on the select committee I had the pleasure of visiting a number of local and regional councils in the south in the last couple of weeks. It has to be said that there were few, if any, concerns about this legislation\u2014few, if any, concerns. Let me address the previous query as to whether we could possibly mention any councils that support the core services provision. Yes, we can.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000098\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022feba1991eaf14eb3bb59ae3d1f298d84\u0022\u003EChris Auchinvole\u003C/span\u003E: Can we do that?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000099\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f1176780c5464ba5b99f0a172588e38c\u0022\u003EDr CAM CALDER\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, we can. New section 11A, inserted by clause 5, introduces a list of core services and the requirement that local authorities have particular regard to the contribution of those services to communities. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000100\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022\u003EIt has to be said that many communities expressed some concerns about this. They said they were small rural communities and they would obviously have things that they wanted to do that were different from large urban communities. We understand that. The select committee took that on board, and the Minister has alluded to the fact that we understand that. The list of core services does not prevent a local authority from carrying out anything that it sees necessary in its community. As we know, there are numerous clauses in this bill that require consultation with the community by the council and for the community to be able to make its views heard, despite what we have heard from Opposition members. I will very briefly speak further to this, and answer the member Chris Hipkins\u2019 earlier interjection to name a council. I would like to name Wellington City Council, in addition to Rangit\u012Bkei District Council, which I believe the Minister mentioned. The council wrote: \u201CIn our view the clause is intended to ensure that councils have duly considered how the listed services contribute to the well-being of their communities. Wellington City Council considers it will be able to demonstrate that the council has had particular regard to the contribution that specified core services have made to our community. Wellington City Council supports this clause in its current form.\u201D Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022 data-id=\u00223a6e9d8e404c4c1d8837d4c1285457f3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000101\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223a6e9d8e404c4c1d8837d4c1285457f3\u0022\u003ESUE KEDGLEY (Green):\u003C/span\u003E George Orwell coined a language that he called doublespeak. It is a language that makes the bad seem good and the inappropriate seem appropriate. But I have never\u2014or seldom\u2014heard so much doublespeak coming from Government and ACT members as in this Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill. We have a bill that they say is all about increasing openness and transparency. Then we read the fine print and we discover that the bill is about gutting the consultation procedures in the local government legislation so that openness and transparency will be reduced or taken away. The bill will remove the requirement that councils have to make the decisions that will significantly affect the capacity of local government. It will remove the requirement to consult the public if councils want to contract out their water or other services. It will remove the requirement to consult the community when councils construct, abandon, or replace strategic assets. Can members believe it? Government members are saying that this will increase the openness and transparency of local government; the only word to describe it is Orwellian.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EThe other thing is that Government members are trying to pretend that allowing a private water company to own water infrastructure, and to manage it for 35 years, is not water privatisation. What a joke! That is using all the best Orwellian language in the world, because the truth is that this bill is all about allowing private water companies to come in and take over our water supplies for 35 years: to own them, to manage them, and to control them. Water privatisation, as I was saying yesterday, has a terrible record right around the world. The reason for that is that once private water companies take over a local water supply, the whole goal is to maximise profits for the water companies, not to protect the public interest.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000103\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EHow do such companies maximise their profits? They do three things. Immediately they shed the workforce\u2014about 25 percent to 50 percent of the workforce in most cases is immediately shed\u2014and they reduce working conditions. The second thing companies do to increase their profits is increase the price of water, and I will refer to what they did in the United Kingdom. The third thing they do is under-invest in the asset; they do not bother to fix the leaks. They do what Fay and Richwhite did to our railway network: they just run it down. Instead of investing in upgrading water infrastructure, they siphon off all of that money into the profits of the shareholders. That is what has happened all around the world, wherever Governments have allowed the privatisation of water. When the United Kingdom fired 25 percent of staff, the price of water increased by 50 percent in the first 4 years, and the number of people having their water supply cut off tripled, because those people could not afford the price of water. In the meantime, the huge bonuses and salaries paid to the management and directors of the water companies, and the profits of the water companies, soared by 142 percent in the first 8 years.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000104\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003ELet us be under no illusions: that is what this bill is about. I think the private water corporations must be popping champagne as this bill goes through the House. They must be rubbing their hands together with excitement. They are being booted out of countries all around the world because of water privatisation\u2019s terrible track record. Forty cities and towns in France are booting out private water companies. Paris has just booted out a private water company and put back the city\u2019s water supply into public ownership. In Uruguay in Latin America, and all around the world, people are so outraged at what has happened to their water supplies under privatisation that they are booting out the water companies. Just across the Tasman in Adelaide, the biggest water company in the world, Veolia Water\u2014which, by the way, owns the Wellington and Papakura water supplies\u2014has not had its 15-year contract to run the city\u2019s water supply extended. The water supply is going back into public ownership.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000105\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EAll around the world the opportunities to take over water supplies are being reduced; private water companies are being booted out of countries around the world because people have seen what has happened under water privatisation. Yet water companies must be rubbing their hands together with glee: just as they are being booted out from everywhere else, we are passing legislation, yet again under urgency, to tell them to come to New Zealand as we are now open for water privatisation. Here we are!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000106\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EI just wonder what water companies have had to do to get this water legislation through. Their wildest dreams are being fulfilled by this legislation. I know that when we were discussing alcohol legislation, Mr Anderton asked whether liquor companies contributed money to the National Party. It would be interesting to know, for the public record\u2014and eventually we will find out\u2014whether water companies have contributed any money to the National Party. The beauty for the water companies is not only that they can get 35-year contracts to own our water supplies but that they will no longer have to consult the public. That will all be able to be sneaked through from now on. Councils will be able to contract out their water supplies for 35 years, or give their water infrastructure to a private corporation to own for 35 years, and they will not have to bother to tell the public. They will be able to sneak provisions through in the dark of night, just as we are doing under urgency here today, because with this bill we have removed all of the consultation requirements. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000107\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EThe ACT Party will also be popping champagne after this bill goes through, because today we are seeing the implementation of what I call Rogernomics part 2: the corporatisation and the privatisation of as much of local government as possible. It is all set out in the ACT Party\u2019s local government policy, which I have here. The whole idea is that local government will shed its ownership of commercial activities; it will be confined to core activities. Piped water will be supplied on a fully commercial basis, and the contracting out of services will be encouraged. That is ACT\u2019s local government policy, and it is being implemented today in this bill. The ACT Party, as well as all the private water companies around the world, will be popping champagne; they will be rubbing their hands together will glee. They will be asking how they could have pulled off this one. Not only will they now be able to take ownership of all the water supplies in New Zealand but they will be able to do it secretly in the dead of night. They will not have to go through messy consultation. They know how New Zealanders feel about water privatisation, and they know there might be a lot of opposition, so they have managed to do it without allowing for public consultation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000108\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EThe Business Roundtable has been lobbying for just that for years. I have all of the papers here by Roger Kerr, going back over many years, about privatising water supplies. In one he says: \u201CPrivate companies that build, own and operate water systems around the world now have annual revenues of around US$300 billion, excluding revenues for the sale of bottled water.\u201D He goes on and talks about how the World Bank is pushing privatisation initiatives. He has been lobbying for 20 years to have happen what is happening today\u2014to allow water privatisation to take place in New Zealand. That is what the Government is doing. It is implementing the objectives of the Business Roundtable, of ACT, and of the Rogernomics part 2 agenda\u2014and Roger is sitting there. That is what he came back to Parliament to do\u2014to oversee Rogernomics part 2, the gutting and the commercialisation of local government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000109\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229bf6f95ed6c84421863746bf2d5f4f75\u0022\u003EChris Auchinvole\u003C/span\u003E: Gutting?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000110\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226ccfe24b69f34423a37b366d0aca9e80\u0022\u003ESUE KEDGLEY\u003C/span\u003E: Someone mentioned the word \u201Cgutting\u201D; it is a gutting of the consultation requirements.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022 data-id=\u0022861969eb04ba45daba232d912ab4b78a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000111\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022861969eb04ba45daba232d912ab4b78a\u0022\u003EHon JOHN CARTER (Associate Minister of Local Government):\u003C/span\u003E Let us get one thing very, very clear: this Government is not privatising water. Let us get that really clear on the floor of the House. This Government is not privatising water. What we are allowing is what has been happening for many years.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000112\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a012c55bdb5040bcac8a5c0840a421ef\u0022\u003EDr Rajen Prasad\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s a monopoly. Why do it?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000113\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b2923d560fa94a78a6d9f783f47f0288\u0022\u003EHon JOHN CARTER\u003C/span\u003E: I will just explain to the member, if the member will listen. I will put a very cogent argument and point of view as to what is happening. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000114\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022\u003EThe fact is that for many, many years local government has had the opportunity, if they wish, to have their water supplies managed by the private sector for 15 years. They have come to us and said that they think there is a very good reason why it may be prudent to extend that beyond 15 years. So in this legislation we have said OK. The system has worked well for many, many years, and we have allowed the management\u2014not the ownership and not the privatisation, but the management\u2014of water by the private sector for 15 years. Local government is saying to us that it would not mind if it was extended a bit more, so we will allow them\u2014the local authorities, which are democratically elected by their community to represent their community\u2014to decide whether they might want to have their water supplies managed by the private sector for up to 35 years, if they decide that is prudent. It is up to local government to make that decision. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000115\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022\u003EI just say to the Committee that I am not certain of the number, but I suspect that 30, 40, or even more private water supplies managed by the private sector already exist in this country. I dare the Opposition and Sue Kedgley to go to one of those people who are the recipients of water supplied by the private sector and ask why they do not stop doing that, and hand the supplying of water back to the local authority. I can tell members what the answer would be, and there would be a quick march out the door. I have asked many of those water suppliers. The member Kelvin Davis knows of one just up in Taip\u0101, for example, up on the East Coast. There is a privately managed water supply there. I ask that member to ask those people whether they think it would be a good idea if Wayne Brown and the Far North District Council took over the supply of water. I know what the member\u2019s response would be if he asked that question. I have asked that question, and I have to tell him\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000116\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227b416fcb637945e0a54e7798f576d4c9\u0022\u003EDr Cam Calder\u003C/span\u003E: What was it?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000117\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226e82e1e34c734e68a88fcdf7f707e71a\u0022\u003EHon JOHN CARTER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, it was not a very good response, I have to say. It was commented that if I even suggested that happen, that I might lose some local support. So I did not even make that comment. The point is that those people are very happy with the way their water is supplied. They can turn on their taps, they get the water, they pay the bill, there are no extra huge charges, they are very happy with the rate at which water is charged, so it works. The point is that it has been working for years and years, and it will continue to work, because that is what that community wants. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000118\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022\u003EThe other thing that might be useful is for the member George Hawkins to take a call to tell us what happened when he was Mayor of Papakura. I tell members that this might come as a surprise to the left, but one of their members, who was a former mayor, instigated allowing the private sector to run the Papakura water supply. What happened? Well, the local people kept turning on the taps and getting water out of the taps\u2014it did not stop\u2014and it ended up that they had the cheapest water supply in the Auckland area. Goodness, we should not let that happen, should we? No, maybe we should change this bill and not allow that to happen! But I dare anyone to ask the people of Papakura whether they think this Government should stop allowing that to happen. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000119\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022\u003EAll we are doing is applying what one might call a modicum of common sense to a practice that has been happening in New Zealand for a long time. It allows locally elected, democratically elected councils to make a decision as to whether they think it is in the best interests of their community.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000120\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221cd6aa772e044b4ebd226ff935efe769\u0022\u003EPhil Twyford\u003C/span\u003E: But they don\u2019t have to consult the community.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000121\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ad20c98aaef045cea62dfb3fc4d5eaa7\u0022\u003EHon JOHN CARTER\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, they have to consult the community\u2014that is a lot of hogwash. Councils have to put it in their long-term council community plan. Councils have to tell the people that they think it is not a bad idea to extend the provision out, and give them the reasons why. Councils will get feedback from their people. What will happen is that in 3 years\u2019 time, if the public do not like it\u2014because it is going through the long-term council community plan and all the consultation procedures\u2014they will not vote for the council, will they? Is it not that simple? I cannot understand this objection to our extending something that is already working so well in New Zealand. We have plenty of examples where the supply of water is cheaper. I know that is a dreadful thing that the Opposition might not like to think about.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000122\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bb958b74330a4eb49da17c8e4803eab3\u0022\u003EDr Cam Calder\u003C/span\u003E: They do not think about money.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000123\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e369387c53304207aa6479d8705ac669\u0022\u003EHon JOHN CARTER\u003C/span\u003E: That is true. It is unfortunately sad. But in this case there is a very good reason why this should happen. There is a very good reason why we want to give local communities the opportunity to make the decision. Parliament is not making the decision; all we are doing is providing the opportunity. It is up to each community to make the decision. To suggest that this Government is privatising the supply of water is silly. What we are doing is allowing for prudent management, if that is what the community decides. There are many good examples across\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000124\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224459719e9545442d81f1484cfb9d48f3\u0022\u003EPhil Twyford\u003C/span\u003E: Ownership of assets.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000125\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227cabadc8449642af9a4080441edf3163\u0022\u003EHon JOHN CARTER\u003C/span\u003E: I say to Mr Twyford that there are many good examples across New Zealand where it happens well. As I said, if that member suggested to those communities that it should not do this, I tell him that we might go out and say that Labour is suggesting to the private sector suppliers that it wants them to come back into local government control. That might not be a bad policy, actually.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000126\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ea9f6b992b714aecb315e433b7151da3\u0022\u003EPhil Twyford\u003C/span\u003E: But you wouldn\u2019t be telling the truth, would you?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000127\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022453e4b31f197460aad47e1965fc1f43c\u0022\u003EHon JOHN CARTER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, that is true. I say to Mr Twyford that if he thinks it is so bad, why are the Labour Opposition and the Greens not going around saying that it should be taken back into local government control? I will tell him why. It is because he knows that they would not get support for that policy. If they tried to unstitch what is happening now, they would get a negative view, and it would not help them in their endeavours to become the next Government, which of course will fail. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000128\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022\u003EThe fact is that this system works; it works well across the community. We are putting the responsibility and the opportunity back to local communities to make decisions about their own destiny, and why would we not do that? We should allow local communities to have that opportunity. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022 data-id=\u00223bb77667bfe3489c9f6700390ed60774\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000129\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223bb77667bfe3489c9f6700390ed60774\u0022\u003EKELVIN DAVIS (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E He t\u012Bmatanga k\u014Drero m\u0101ku, Mr Chair, ka mihi atu ahau ki t\u0113r\u0101 kura k\u0101tahi an\u014D ka tau mai ki raro o te tuanui o t\u0113nei Whare i te r\u0101 nei, Te Kura Kaupapa M\u0101ori o Taum\u0101rere. Kua puta k\u0113 r\u0101tou i te Whare nei engari, e mihi kau ana ki a r\u0101tou. K\u0101tahi r\u0101tou ka tau ki Te Whanga-nui-a-Tara. N\u0101 reira, mihi kau ana ki a r\u0101tou.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000130\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022\u003E[Mr Chair, I would like to begin by welcoming that M\u0101ori medium school of Taum\u0101rere today. It is their first time under the roof of this House. They have left this House now, but I really acknowledge their presence. The visit to Wellington is a first for them, as well. To them, I say well done.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000131\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022\u003EFirstly, I acknowledge the school that was up in the gallery a few minutes ago, Te Kura Kaupapa M\u0101ori o Taum\u0101rere. They have come down from the very far north; some of those kids have flown in an aeroplane for the first time. They are here to see democracy in action. Unfortunately for them, they saw democracy being bulldozed through, under the cloak of urgency. I acknowledge them. The mother of one of the children up there in the gallery was a pupil in a class I taught back in the early 1990s. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000132\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022\u003EI return to the bill. I will talk about new section 11A, in clause 5, which describes the core services that local authorities will perform. The list consists of \u201C(a) network infrastructure: (b) public transport services: (c) solid waste collection and disposal: (d) the avoidance or mitigation of natural hazards: (e) libraries, museums, reserves, recreational facilities, and other community infrastructure.\u201D My concern, speaking as Labour\u2019s tourism spokesperson, is that tourism is not considered to be a core activity. I want to know where the Prime Minister\u2014who is also the Minister of Tourism\u2014is right now and why he allowed this bill to go through with his blessing even though tourism has been omitted as a core service. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000133\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022\u003EMany people will say that it is more important to build roads and to build pipes to take drinking water here, there, and everywhere, but let me read to the Chamber what the Tourism Industry Association thinks about this bill. The Tourism Industry Association is the collective that is basically the go-to group for the Prime Minister. Its news release states: \u201CLocal authorities play a critical role in the tourism industry, through their investment in public amenities used by both residents and visitors, like water, sewerage, toilets and roads. \u2026 Tourism is a core activity for most communities around the country and councils can help provide the best possible experiences to visitors. By helping attract visitors to the region and encouraging them to stay for longer, councils are boosting the economic contribution from the tourism sector.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000134\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022\u003EThis bill reinforces what the tourism sector believes of local government, and that is that local government just does not get tourism\u2014it just does not understand the economic contribution that tourism makes to local communities. The association went on to state: \u201Cmost tourism businesses are small and operate on low margins,\u201D. This Government says it is there for businesses, but it is neglecting small to medium sized enterprises by not investing in them or making sure that tourism is one of the core services in this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000135\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022\u003ECouncils earn a good return on their investment in tourism as visitors spend millions of dollars in the regions. Let me give members an idea of the sort of return we get when we invest in tourism. If we invest just a single dollar in the United Kingdom, marketing New Zealand to the United Kingdom, we get an $11 return. From investing $1 in the United States we get a $16 return. If we invest $1 in Australia we get $26 back. Why would local government not want to invest in tourism and get that sort of return? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000136\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022\u003EThe benefits of tourism go beyond the accommodation, hospitality, and attraction sectors. The benefits of tourism provide employment and business activity indirectly to many sectors of the community, including shops, supermarkets, cafes, taxis, and food producers. What is it that this Government does not get about the contribution tourism makes to local economies? Why would local government not want to invest in it? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000137\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002292824476-4e66-4052-8435-b049833d8b83\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fcaa6b3d81d749fb9a3c7bd18ab5a588\u0022\u003ENicky Wagner\u003C/span\u003E: There\u2019s nothing stopping them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000138\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221666addde8334e81bb96df6d406c618d\u0022\u003EKELVIN DAVIS\u003C/span\u003E: As the member correctly says, there is nothing in the bill to stop local government from investing in tourism. But because tourism is not mentioned as a core service, there is a legal basis, or a legal foundation, that tells local bodies that they do not have to invest in tourism\u2014they do not have to. The bill concentrates the core services in an arbitrary list designed by the Government. If Government members could look just a bit wider than the shoebox they reside in, they would see that there are massive benefits to be made by local government investing in tourism. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022 data-id=\u002218db6289e4824d2d825a5780e27a9990\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000139\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002218db6289e4824d2d825a5780e27a9990\u0022\u003EKEVIN HAGUE (Green):\u003C/span\u003E I take a call to talk about some other aspects of Part 1 of the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill that have not received much discussion so far. I draw on the Canterbury District Health Board\u2019s submission on the bill, in which it talked about some of the inadvertent consequences of exactly this type of approach to water in the town of Walkerton in Ontario, Canada. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000140\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003EIn the town of Walkerton in 2000 an outbreak of gastrointestinal disease occurred through contamination of the water supply. In that outbreak, seven people died and half the town of 5,000 people became ill. The committee of inquiry into the Walkerton outbreak of disease found that \u201Cthe Government of Ontario had made commitments to cut Government barriers to job creation, investment, and economic growth.\u201D\u2014it sounds familiar, does it not? The committee\u2019s report went on to state: \u201CIt had also made a commitment to reduce the size of Government, and to provide the people of Ontario with better for less. In carrying out these commitments, the new Government elected in 1985 promised to eliminate red tape, and to reduce the regulatory burden for businesses and institutions.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003EThe Canterbury District Health Board has made the point that that is precisely the justification that this Government has given for this bill, in which the objectives are to remove unnecessary barriers to water infrastructure development, and to provide councils with an increased range of options for the provision and management of water services. The district health board has pointed out that under new section 136 of the principal Act, which is inserted by clause 31, the bill will remove some of the important safeguards in relation to water contracts from the existing legislation, in terms of the requirements that currently pertain to local bodies, and will introduce some unnecessary lack of clarity. The district health board has said we need to ensure that elements such as public consultation, quality control, reporting, auditing, performance review, and evaluation are included. It has made the point that the bill is unclear about who will have the legal responsibility for that, because the term \u201Cwater supplier\u201D that is used is unclear. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000142\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003EThe district health board has also drawn attention to the amendment to section 125 in clause 28 of the bill and the repeal of sections 126 to 129 in clause 29. It has made the point that those sections repeal the prescribed process for undertaking assessments of water and sanitary services. That provision removes the requirement to consult, and consider the comments of, the medical officer of health. That will compromise the ability of the medical officer of health, an independent statutory officer, to effectively assess and review local authority activities in regard to water and sanitary services. The district health board has said that is precisely what occurred in Walkerton. In Walkerton, the Government of Ontario set out to create a looser regulatory regime, to ease the costs of business, to cut out red tape, and to do all of the things that National and ACT, in this debate over this bill, have been saying are precisely the kinds of things that local government requires. But the district health board has made the point that some of this red tape is in place exactly to ensure public safety, and to ensure that when we consume drinking water we are consuming a product that we know to be of high quality and to be safe. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000143\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003EThe role of the medical officer of health is crucial in that area. The district health board has said that role is particularly important for protecting public health when a local authority may be driven solely or in part by fiscal or political concerns, which is precisely the case that we believe will be in place if this bill goes ahead unamended. The district health board has made the point that the medical officer of health can be utilised as an independent expert and trusted source of information, with proven value in communicating issues associated with public health risks to communities. But that requirement is being removed by this bill, by the repeal of those sections. In the Government\u2019s headlong rush to free up the regulations that apply to local government in relation to water, to facilitate this process\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002292824476-4e66-4052-8435-b049833d8b83\u0022 data-id=\u00224595c7742ccf46038fb8d22507d41952\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000144\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002292824476-4e66-4052-8435-b049833d8b83\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224595c7742ccf46038fb8d22507d41952\u0022\u003ENICKY WAGNER (National):\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=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022 data-id=\u00223cc26798922740898125f30f5f84ff1d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000145\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223cc26798922740898125f30f5f84ff1d\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I cannot believe that National is trying to move a closure motion already. I wish to speak to four clauses, three of which have not really been discussed at all so far, and one of which is\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000146\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d83e0078f9cf488f92ef3064e1d9253b\u0022\u003EJo Goodhew\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s because a whole lot on your side haven\u2019t talked about the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000147\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220b512ef9bd204ac185566cb8f8df79b3\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I am talking about the bill now, I tell Miss Goodhew; I thank her very much. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000148\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EThe first clause I will talk about is clause 24, \u201CPolicy on remission and postponement of rates on M\u0101ori freehold land\u201D. I was flicking through the bill and this caught my eye, because I remember the debate on the Local Government Act in 2002. I alert the Minister in the chair, the Associate Minister of Local Government, to comments made by his colleague the Hon Dr Nick Smith, who is a Cabinet Minister in the current National Government and was a Cabinet Minister in the previous National Government. He said about this policy\u2014and I would like to know whether this is still National\u2019s position\u2014\u201CThen we come to [this clause]. This is nothing less than apartheid.\u201D That clause has been carried over into the current bill with some minor changes. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000149\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003ESection 102(4) of the Local Government Act 2002 states: \u201CA local authority must adopt\u2014 \u2026 (f) a policy on the remission and postponement of rates on M\u0101ori freehold land.\u201D Nick Smith stated: \u201CI ask the Minister to tell me why councils must have a policy on remitting rates on M\u0101ori land, but may remit rates on other land. I want some member in this Chamber\u2014maybe Parekura Horomia\u2014to provide me with an explanation. Why must a council develop rates remission policies for your cuzzy bros and not for mine? It is a fair and reasonable question.\u201D He then went on to state: \u201CThis damn law that we are being required to pass is nothing less than apartheid, and I cannot believe that members opposite want to impose this sort of obscene provision. It offends against National\u2019s principle of one standard of citizenship.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000150\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EI would genuinely like to hear from the Minister in the chair about whether the Hon Dr Nick Smith\u2019s stated position on the provision put by Labour in the Local Government Act 2002 that local authorities have a policy on the remission and postponement of rates on M\u0101ori freehold land\u2014a provision that has been carried over into this legislation\u2014still stands. I would very much like to hear from the Minister in the chair on that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000151\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EThe second clause I will address is clause 22, regarding the policy on development contributions. As Labour\u2019s spokesperson on housing, obviously I have a great deal of interest in this issue. I note that under clause 8 of this legislation, the community is losing the right to consultation. The community that elects the council is having consultation processes stripped from it. But I ask why developers are suddenly having extra consultation procedures put in for them so that they can continue to oppose and challenge councils that have applied development contributions to ensure that there is some public and community benefit from those developments. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000152\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EWe have a housing crisis in New Zealand. It would be useful if new developments could contain, for example, a proportion of affordable or social housing, given the length that councils often have to go to in order to provide amenities to those communities. Why not say that something should come back in return? That is what happens everywhere else in the world. This Government repealed Labour\u2019s legislation that made it legally clear that councils were entitled to do that, given the legal problems that councils like Queenstown Lakes District Council have had in putting a policy in place for the inclusion of social and affordable housing in private developments and then being dragged through the courts by developers who say they do not have the right to do that. Labour put that into law; National repealed it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000153\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EBut here we are again, and I ask the Minister again why communities are having consultation procedures taken away from them under this law but developers are getting extra ones. I ask how that is fair to those ratepayers and councils. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000154\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EWhen I look at clause 8 on community consultation, I think of Environment Bay of Plenty, which is also known as the Bay of Plenty Regional Council, and of how a number of years ago, in 2004, it resolved that it would shift its headquarters from Whakat\u0101ne to Tauranga. That came completely out of the blue for the Eastern Bay of Plenty. Consultation procedures were not followed. I tell members that a community that has gone through an experience like that one understands the importance of having strict community consultation procedures\u2014robust and genuine community consultation procedures. That decision was devastating for the Eastern Bay of Plenty. It was completely ridiculous, and it made no sense. Whakat\u0101ne is in the centre of the Bay of Plenty. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222aa0b524-c38d-45aa-bd5b-99c5927085f4\u0022 data-id=\u00225b877200fce140ddb85f84fd99df3680\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000155\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222aa0b524-c38d-45aa-bd5b-99c5927085f4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225b877200fce140ddb85f84fd99df3680\u0022\u003ECLARE CURRAN (Labour\u2014Dunedin South):\u003C/span\u003E My colleague Moana Mackey has got right to the nub of one of the most important things I see in the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill, and that is the issue of community consultation, which I want to talk about today. The bill is truly sorry and scary legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000156\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002272605fc3fc30479f9c0e4dced559db69\u0022\u003EHon Members\u003C/span\u003E: Oh!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000157\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222aa0b524-c38d-45aa-bd5b-99c5927085f4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223b605eff21494a04bdd1d5b8e3285c05\u0022\u003ECLARE CURRAN\u003C/span\u003E: It is, I say to members opposite. Last night I said that the Government was screwing our workforce by trading away a precious week\u2019s holiday. I said it was like being in a horror film, and today the horror continues. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000158\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022517c0760435f4af8a0be0efc265b5917\u0022\u003EDr Cam Calder\u003C/span\u003E: Ha, ha!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000159\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222aa0b524-c38d-45aa-bd5b-99c5927085f4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022af5c9654ac1e479e998a128ffa2be9ae\u0022\u003ECLARE CURRAN\u003C/span\u003E: Members opposite might laugh and think it is funny, but the horror is really for the people of New Zealand in the watering down of their ability to have a say in how their ratepayers\u2019 money is spent, and that gets to the heart of what our democracy is all about. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000160\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222aa0b524-c38d-45aa-bd5b-99c5927085f4\u0022\u003EToday the horror is continuing under urgency and we are rushing through the final stages of this bill. At least the public did get to have a say on this bill, even though the Government is taking no notice of the vast majority of the submissions. Instead we are seeing further attacks on our democracy through this bill, under the guise of more code words used by this Government to mask its real intentions, such as \u201Ctransparency\u201D and \u201Caccountability\u201D. Sue Kedgley from the Greens got it completely right when she talked about Orwellian language, and I will talk about that, too. The use of the words \u201Ctransparency\u201D and \u201Caccountability\u201D is rubbish. The Hon John Carter said that this bill is not about privatisation of water, when it clearly is. It is about the privatisation of local government services, allowing them to be run on a commercial basis, and removing\u2014and this is what I want to talk about\u2014the requirement for local authorities to consult with the community if it wishes to contract out services to the private sector, or corporatise them by transferring them to a council-controlled organisation. All those things run counter to transparency and accountability. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000161\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222aa0b524-c38d-45aa-bd5b-99c5927085f4\u0022\u003EThis Government is all about saying one thing and doing another. As Sue Kedgley pointed out, that describes Orwellian language, and she gave a definition, but I want to give the definition from Wikipedia, which describes it as \u201Can attitude and a policy of control by propaganda \u2026 misinformation, denial of truth, and manipulation of the past,\u201D. Orwellian language can also be defined as saying one thing and doing the opposite, or rhetoric versus reality.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000162\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222aa0b524-c38d-45aa-bd5b-99c5927085f4\u0022\u003EThere were 414 submissions on this bill: 360 were expressly against water privatisation, 17 were in favour, 36 submissions were made by councils against the bill, and countless submissions were made by community boards and other organisations. The Government is essentially ignoring the mood of the people, which has been shown recently across this country in the local government elections, particularly with the election of Len Brown in Auckland\u2014an outcome that was not in the plan of Rodney Hide or John Key\u2014and the outcomes of the elections in Wellington and Dunedin.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000163\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222aa0b524-c38d-45aa-bd5b-99c5927085f4\u0022\u003EI will talk about clauses 11 and 8. Currently, under section 88 of the Local Government Act, any proposal to contract out or corporatise council activities requires consultation. Clause 11 repeals that section so that local authorities can transfer core activities to council-controlled organisations or the private sector, as I have said, without having to consult the community. I tell members that this Government will rue the day it introduces that clause. Right across New Zealand, except perhaps in Christchurch, people voted in local government elections with an express desire to have more consultation and to be more of a part of the process. In Dunedin we have a new mayor, Dave Cull, who is a very good bloke, and I am really looking forward to working with him. The last mayor, Peter Chin, was also a good bloke. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022 data-id=\u00223b40c64dcc784854a3d597141a6b03e5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000164\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223b40c64dcc784854a3d597141a6b03e5\u0022\u003ECHRIS AUCHINVOLE (National\u2014West Coast - Tasman):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000165\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f6816f0aa6494942883bde35c02bd124\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker)\u003C/span\u003E: I will just say that most members have been focused on the bill, and this is the most substantial part of it. I am prepared to let this debate go on a little longer, but Part 2, which follows, is much more narrow, and there will be a narrower debate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022 data-id=\u002207a5dbff50754de8b73995bed5b936e2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000166\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002207a5dbff50754de8b73995bed5b936e2\u0022\u003ESU\u2019A WILLIAM SIO (Labour\u2014M\u0101ngere):\u003C/span\u003E You are absolutely right, Mr Chairperson: Part 1 is the most substantial part, and I want to focus my remarks on clauses 4, 5, and 8. Just before getting into those clauses I reflect to the Minister in the chair, the Associate Minister of Local Government, some thoughts about his comments earlier. He was absolutely correct in what he said about George Hawkins when he was Mayor of Papakura, but if the Minister were to talk to the Hon George Hawkins today, George might well say that he has had second thoughts and that he has learnt from his bad mistakes. I tell the Minister that, because George would also say that his actions were based on community consultation. There was a protest in Papakura early this morning by the community, which has itself changed its mind. People of that community now realise the truth; they realise that they have been fooled all these years by this right-wing ideology, and they now recognise that they should have never sold their water asset. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000167\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022\u003EI also say to the Minister that I totally disagree with him when he says that things are getting cheaper. Things are not getting cheaper. If he were to spend time talking to a mother or a father who is on the minimum wage, earning about $400 or $500 a week, and spending $300 on rent, he would find that those people are saying that things are not getting cheaper but are getting more and more expensive under this Government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000168\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022\u003EI turn to clause 4, which, unfortunately, changes the whole community perception in terms of how communities use their local governments to achieve outcomes. That clause changes the definition of community outcomes. I would say that the public will not be happy about that particular clause. Today the public are able to define for themselves, by engaging with their local councils, what community outcomes they seek. Those outcomes can differ from community to community. This clause proposes that local governments dictate to the community what outcomes the community should receive. In many ways it is as though this Government is saying: \u201CWe know better, and we will tell the people what they need and deserve.\u201D That is such arrogance. [Interruption] I agree with my friend here, Dr Ashraf Choudhary, that \u201Carrogant Tory\u201D is probably the catchcry that will go from north to south when this Government forces this bill through, despite the protest happening in Papakura at this very moment. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022\u003EI turn to clause 5, which covers core services. The Government is saying in this particular clause that there are only certain activities that local governments should focus on. Again, this is the old catchcry that local government should focus only on roads, rats, rates, and rubbish. That is the ideology of old local governments. But that is no longer the case. It has not been the case since 2000, and it is now 2010. In that period, communities themselves have determined what core services are. I say to members that one core service that is prevalent in many of our communities in Manukau is events. Events bring communities together. Events help to liven up a place. They help to bring vibrancy to communities. Events rely on local government for support\u2014not only financial support but also manpower and a range of other things required to make those events happen. This Government now says that clause 5 will define for the community what core services are, and it gives a list of those things. Again, that emphasises the arrogance of this particular Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022 data-id=\u00227c7a72695eb54895bddc9e1011c0d6bb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000170\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227c7a72695eb54895bddc9e1011c0d6bb\u0022\u003EDr RAJEN PRASAD (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E It is very clear that the views on this side of the Chamber and those on that side are quite different. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000171\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228bae7970303c4a058839424d9ddab91d\u0022\u003EChris Auchinvole\u003C/span\u003E: We\u2019ve read the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000172\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002207750c56ca09469e8786cdddf85fe035\u0022\u003EDr RAJEN PRASAD\u003C/span\u003E: I want to address clauses 8, 9, and 10 of the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill. If the member Mr Auchinvole would like to listen, I shall address those clauses, and I hope the member will keep on listening.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000173\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003EEssentially, the way in which the Government has constructed clauses 8, 9, and 10 shows that it thinks that councils know best, and that the community does not need to be involved. Actually, that attitude is endemic through all of the local government legislation that the ACT-National Government has imposed on New Zealand since it came into power. It has used the particular style of the Hon John Carter. The Hon John Carter has become the salesperson for this way of thinking throughout the local government reform legislation. He is the placater, and he does that with some style, I will give him that. But he couches the Government\u2019s ideology, which is privatisation and no community involvement, in a particular form. The particular phrase John Carter used today was \u201CWhat\u2019s the harm in that?\u201D. Well, I can apply that phrase to a whole series of changes in the social area over the last 25 years that went past that particular Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000174\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003ECommunity consultation is the hallmark of best practice in the 21st century. Many, many methods are being designed internationally now to make it possible for communities to participate in the systems that organise their own lives. That is the hallmark of best practice. International models have been developed. Let us look at the Canadian example. They are world-beaters when it comes to community engagement and community consultation. Australia is a country that this Government wants to catch up to. Well, we will be far behind when it comes to community consultation and community engagement, to involving people in those things that matter. Somehow, this Government thinks business can do it better, can do everything better, and that is it. In this particular bill, the community is taken out of far too many things. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000175\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bd92bac3addb459faa8f18522d2be380\u0022\u003EChris Auchinvole\u003C/span\u003E: Here we go again! He was all right until he went off sideways.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000176\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228cd099ce5e774d479f50b8ec3abe27dc\u0022\u003EDr RAJEN PRASAD\u003C/span\u003E: There is growing demand, I say to Mr Auchinvole, from our communities to be involved, but Mr Auchinvole and his Government turn a deaf ear to that. They are not interested, yet many jurisdictions are addressing it in very, very powerful ways.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000177\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003EIn this bill there really is a general desire to limit community participation and consultation. Clause 8 repeals section 78(2) of the principal Act. Section 78(2) is a very powerful section. This amendment makes it possible for local authorities to undertake perfunctory community consultation. It enables a tick-the-box approach. Councils can virtually do what they like, call it community consultation, and that is what it will be. Labour members agree that section 78(2) could be streamlined, and an amendment on Supplementary Order Paper 180, which we have put forward, does just that. But repealing section 78(2) enables local authorities to engage in perfunctory community consultation. Maybe that is what the ACT Party wants and maybe that is what National wants, but it certainly is not what this side of the Chamber wants. It brands us quite differently. Those who have been listening to this debate over the last 2 days ought to know very clearly that there is a fundamental difference between what this side of the Chamber does, which is take the community seriously and consult it, and what that side of the Chamber is doing. Members opposite cannot deny that repealing section 78(2) is a major change.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000178\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002292824476-4e66-4052-8435-b049833d8b83\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f25bbb38122343cba30aab2b8fa7d052\u0022\u003ENicky Wagner\u003C/span\u003E: No, it\u2019s not major.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000179\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002281ccccac40594a039994fae9f9a70996\u0022\u003EDr RAJEN PRASAD\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, it is. The member does not realise what it means. There is far too much perfunctory community consultation, and that is what this change will do. And it runs contrary to public expectation. The expectation is for meaningful consultation. The member has not read the original provision. I invite the member to read the original provision. That is precisely what it does, and repealing it runs contrary to the expectations of the community. Members on this side of the Chamber take the community very, very seriously. That side of the House is used to doing the opposite and no doubt will continue to do so.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022 data-id=\u00226d1a4212f1ca42e4a26bc96ea34228b0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000180\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226d1a4212f1ca42e4a26bc96ea34228b0\u0022\u003EPHIL TWYFORD (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I thank my colleagues Su\u2019a William Sio and others, who have raised the issue of community outcomes. I will make some comments about clauses 4 and 12 of the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000181\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EClause 4 restricts the definition of \u201Ccommunity outcomes\u201D, the high-level goals that are set in the long-term plans of local authorities. It restricts them to things that only the council itself can deliver. The Government justifies this move by saying it is part of its streamlining efforts. The problem is that it is important to many of our communities to be able to call on their councils and their local authorities to take leadership in tackling some of the most important issues in their communities, even if the council itself cannot deliver the whole solution. In many cases\u2014and I will give a few examples\u2014councils can through leadership, advocacy, and coordination help the community respond to community demand to tackle some of these big problems. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000182\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EOne example I can think of is the failure of infrastructure. In Auckland we have had an ongoing series of problems with infrastructure failure in the electricity network. Most recently, in the summer of 2008, we had a problem with the \u014Ct\u0101huhu substation. The cable went down and the city was without electricity for some time. This is a major issue that affects the economic viability of our city. The people of Auckland expect their local authorities to help to sort that problem out. It is not a problem just for central government; people expect councils to take a leadership role on questions of infrastructure, which is so important to the success of the city and those communities. People expect councils to ensure there is a timely and adequate response to that problem. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000183\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EOne of the other issues that many councils take up is the issue of community safety. I think there is a real mood of concern at the moment about things like binge drinking, crime on our streets, and the social impacts of gambling and boy racers. These are all matters of concern to our communities. Councils do not necessarily have the ability to solve the problem and deliver the solutions, but people expect their elected representatives to provide leadership, respond to their concerns, and take up those matters. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000184\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EThere is no reason that the community cannot require that those pressing problems be identified as the high-level goals or community outcomes in the long-term plan. That is an entirely reasonable part of our democratic process, but, unfortunately, this bill will take that part away and apply an unduly narrow approach by saying that community outcomes must be things that only the council itself can deliver. That is a real shame and a real problem with this bill. Labour has tabled a Supplementary Order Paper in my name to omit that provision and continue to allow communities to identify their high-level goals and not be restricted in this way. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000185\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EThe other thing that I want to say about the community outcomes relates to clause 12. We acknowledge that the current process in the legislation is a little too prescriptive in setting out the process by which councils identify their community outcomes. We agree that the process is too heavy, and it could be lightened up. But the effect of clause 12 is to completely remove any principle-based approach to saying how councils should identify their community outcomes. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000186\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EUnder this bill a council could just sit down around a table themselves and pull community outcomes out of the air, and say that the high-level goals for the long-term plan will be whatever pops into their head on the day. There is no requirement in here that councils have a consultation process with their community or that they give their citizens the right to be part of a transparent and open discussion in identifying community outcomes. Although we acknowledge that the current law is too prescriptive, we believe that there should be some principle-based requirement that citizens be involved in the development of the process of community outcomes. Otherwise there are plenty of councils who could just say what they think, or what someone said to a member in the supermarket the other day or in a dairy\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000187\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223faa01074bc04935a33413c3069474a5\u0022\u003EMoana Mackey\u003C/span\u003E: Or one of their funders.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000188\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225aa48b304f3b41179c2300dd5b90a5d5\u0022\u003EPHIL TWYFORD\u003C/span\u003E: Yes\u2014or what one of their funders, donors, mates, fellow board directors, or whoever said to them. Councils could basically make it up and set the community outcomes in a way that would be undemocratic and would shut people out of the democratic process.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022 data-id=\u002255b76c3ff84241acbd6909297bbd5456\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000189\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002255b76c3ff84241acbd6909297bbd5456\u0022\u003EDr CAM CALDER (National):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022a303149a5b3e45558e0fbe419b0931fb\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000190\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 180 in the name of Phil Twyford to clause 4 be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022bbb8cc75b3674d9c99497a9529694627\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 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 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=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000191\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 180 in the name of Phil Twyford to omit clause 5 be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002216c670f81b0c46ecb0d12ff31676cba5\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 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 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=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000192\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 181 in the name of Gareth Hughes to clause 5 be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022facbeb16b88a4709b897be3347d93017\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 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 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=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000193\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 182 in the name of Sue Kedgley to clause 5 be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022f5ac2881717f47bfacae90d184881c7f\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 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 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=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000194\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 182 in the name of Sue Kedgley to clause 6 be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002297fb4b35df524d039148385027d83093\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 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 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=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000195\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 180 in the name of Phil Twyford to clause 8 be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00225f387880555e4d4981eb4bee20ddc7d8\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 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 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=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000196\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 182 in the name of Sue Kedgley to omit clause 8 be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00227e8cf1022d4d4eac81052e1c8f92ea9d\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 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 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=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000197\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 180 in the name of Phil Twyford to omit clause 11 be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00220fbd04a39be645489aa7df832406e562\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 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 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=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000198\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 180 in the name of Phil Twyford to omit clause 12 be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002287b6bacef9974644a5a5e14e8c0d3619\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 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 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=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000199\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 180 in the name of Phil Twyford to omit clause 14 be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00226a516706a08c4810b374dd1c9d84ff40\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 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 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=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000200\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 180 in the name of Phil Twyford to clause 17 be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00227ffc82cd18c94e39b9d51200be7f346f\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 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 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=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000201\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 180 in the name of Phil Twyford to omit clause 23 be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00221e6a7e0c3d564d8d98b4296f9beed6f8\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 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 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=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000202\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 182 in the name of Sue Kedgley to clause 23 be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002285476b3fdb9e46e19279df7a15f49ac0\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 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 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=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000203\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 182 in the name of Sue Kedgley to omit clause 29 be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022d1a47bc845174d78a8258e1b06dd577f\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 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 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=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000204\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 180 in the name of Phil Twyford to omit clause 31 be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022afe0a926fd5741febec94b567d4e3efd\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 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Progressive 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=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000205\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 182 in the name of Sue Kedgley to clause 31 be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002268ddbcc39188471393bd5902debac2ec\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 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 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=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000206\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 180 in the name of Phil Twyford to omit clause 32 be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022c6fecce06c5e46b9b0240904978332a3\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 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 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=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000207\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 180 in the name of Phil Twyford to omit clause 33 be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002204539c7f439f45eab4f524b9745ff1a5\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 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 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=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000208\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 175 in the name of the Hon Rodney Hide to clauses 16, 25, 26, and 32, and the following amendment in his name to clause 41, be agreed to:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000209\u0022\u003Eto omit \u201Cmay\u201D and substitute \u201Cmust\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00227d23db053b264d9daa78d1a3c6395e9c\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendments be agreed to. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022d0a99b9aefaa42ccab63f4e5bfef1c16\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That Part 1 as amended be agreed to. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 1 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000210\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022b048280600ca4058aca9061b64bf358e\u0022\u003EPart 2  Consequential amendments and transitional provisions\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022 data-id=\u002281bf77a0320f4ba2907dc0ae532f4473\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000211\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002281bf77a0320f4ba2907dc0ae532f4473\u0022\u003EPHIL TWYFORD (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E Much of what is contained in schedule 1 pertains to what goes into the long-term plan, and I think that that is something worth discussing. It brings us back to the question of community outcomes, which we can see in Part 1 of new schedule 10, substituted in schedule 1. Community outcomes are the key thing that should be contained in a long-term plan, and, in fact, are the high-level goals. I just reiterate the concern that we have already expressed this morning about what this bill does to the whole process around community outcomes. The bill takes away the requirement that councils must consult citizens in the development of those high-level goals, and it undermines the very democratic basis of the whole structure of having long-term plans. I think that that is a real shame. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000212\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EAs well as taking away the requirement for councils to consult their citizens, this legislation also restricts the definition of community outcomes far too narrowly, I think. It says that the community outcomes, as the high-level goals of the long-term plan, can be the things that only the council itself can deliver. Setting aside any number of important issues that communities feel strongly about\u2014they could be boy racers, alcohol, or the effect of gambling in the community\u2014none of those things will be completely controlled by local councils themselves; it requires leadership, advocacy, and coordination. It is perfectly legitimate for communities to ask their councils, and their elected representatives in local government, to take up these matters, and it is perfectly reasonable that these issues could be identified as community outcomes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000213\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EThe other thing I wanted to say about the long-term plan in relation to schedule 1 is that the kinds of things that go into the long-term plan are any substantial changes in the level of service that is being provided, or the sale, construction, or replacement of an asset. Those things are typically the kinds of things that go into a long-term plan. Yet this bill removes the obligation of councils to consult the people in their communities on these kinds of issues.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000214\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EI will give one example that happened recently in Auckland. The council, well-meaning and wanting to promote public transport and bus patronage, proposed a four-lane highway to run down Dominion Road, which is one of the main arterial routes on the Auckland isthmus. Basically, it was to provide faster bus passage through, and in and out of, the central city. The impact of that proposal, when the council started to consult the community, was that the local community was horrified. Dominion Road is home to a couple of wonderful urban villages with really vibrant shopping communities, a lot of pedestrian traffic, and fantastic local restaurants. A lot of new migrant communities, particularly Chinese communities, have made Dominion Road their home. It is a really great part of Auckland. The effect of the council\u2019s proposal to put a four-lane highway in, and no parking down either side of, Dominion Road for several kilometres would have been a disaster for these vibrant urban villages, but only the requirement on the council to consult on this matter would have gone into the long-term plan. Only the requirement to consult the community thoroughly allowed what was a well-meaning but misconceived transport plan to be debated and discussed; ultimately, it was thrown out. That is a vindication of the kind of community consultation processes that this bill is weakening and undermining. As a result of the long-term plan set out in schedule 1, those processes will be greatly weakened.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022 data-id=\u0022eecdc26be56949c8804c829325f70471\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000215\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022eecdc26be56949c8804c829325f70471\u0022\u003ESUE KEDGLEY (Green):\u003C/span\u003E First, I would like to record my disappointment that the debate on a bill as significant as the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill has been so truncated that I did not have time to put forward any of my amendments to the last part we debated, Part 1. This bill is about a major change in New Zealand. It allows the privatisation of our water supplies. It allows ownership of our water supplies by private multinational corporations for 35 years, yet we are having a very truncated debate. This bill is being rammed through under urgency. The public has a right to expect that members of Parliament will at least have a say about this far-reaching bill and be able to introduce amendments. So I would like to record my disappointment at the truncated nature of the debate on this hugely significant bill before us. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000216\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EI am quite certain that Roger Kerr from the Business Roundtable is listening with mounting satisfaction as we debate all the parts of this bill. Roger Kerr, the Business Roundtable, and the New Zealand Council for Infrastructure Development have been lobbying since the 1990s for the Government to allow the privatisation of our water supplies. I have here a number of policy statements and articles that Roger Kerr has written. They point out that private water companies have annual revenue of $300 billion, and they beg us to allow private corporations to take over our water supplies. Roger Kerr has achieved his wildest dreams. For 30 years he has been lobbying for this day, and he and others will be listening to this debate with huge satisfaction. Finally, their lobbying efforts have paid off, and from now on multinational corporations will be able to take over our water supplies for 35 years. They will be able to own them, control them, and manage them for 35 years. What a coup! I know Roger will be listening, and he must be enormously satisfied. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000217\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EThe provisions we are dealing with now are about long-term plans and financial strategy. The key thing is that the consultation requirements in the long-term plans and in other parts of local government have been absolutely gutted by this legislation. Now when councils consult on the long-term plan, they will not even have to mention that they have an intention to privatise their water supplies for 35 years or that they have an intention to hand those supplies over to a private corporation to own for 35 years. They will not have to mention this. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000218\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EThere will be no need any longer to bother to consult communities about such a significant thing. That is the real coup of this bill, and that is why Roger Kerr, the Business Roundtable, and the water infrastructure companies will be rubbing their hands with glee. I predict that there will be parties all weekend for the water companies that have been booted out of communities and countries all round the world, because, now, when they close down their operations in Latin America and even in Adelaide in Australia\u2014they have just been kicked out of Adelaide\u2014they can pick up the pieces, come across to New Zealand, and seek to privatise our water supply. There will be parties all weekend. One of the main things the private water companies will be celebrating is the fact that they will be able to sneak privatisation in. Councils will not have to consult citizens, because there is no longer a requirement to mention in a long-term plan that the water supply is about to be privatised. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000219\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EThis bill also deals with the financial strategy. One of the many clever little things Rodney Hide has managed to get into this bill is an innocuous-sounding clause that basically requires a cap on rates. It is based on finance and expenditure limits we have seen in America, in places like Colorado, where they set a cap on spending. In Colorado, under legislation similar to this, they are not allowed to increase their budget. The aim, of course, is to reduce spending, make us all resent paying our rates, and drive down the resources of local government to the point where it becomes bankrupt. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000220\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EWhat happened in Colorado when they implemented the sorts of rate-capping provisions that are in this bill? Well, as a result of the grand experiment, which this bill is trying to implement, the Colorado budget will have a shortfall of $28 million this year, which is 10 percent of its budget. It has been brought about by the strangulating effects of this sort of cap. One-third of Colorado Springs\u2019 24,000 streetlights were turned off earlier this year to save about $1 million in expenditure. Residents can adopt a streetlight\u2014they are encouraged to pay $100 a year if they want a light in their street. In the meantime, taxi drivers are trying to do the work of police because the police are so overstretched by cuts. Park budgets have been slashed by 25 percent. Grass is now mown monthly, not weekly. Buses have been sold and bus services no longer operate in the evenings and weekends. The fire and police budgets lost $5.5 million.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000221\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EIs that what we want here in New Zealand? I am sure the people of New Zealand do not want that, but that is what is being sneaked through under urgency, along with all the other sinister provisions in this bill, which is, of course, all about seeking to implement Rogernomics Part 2. The battleground for the agenda of the Government and Rodney Hide to corporatise and privatise as many assets as possible has shifted to local government in this term of office, because the Government has had to rule out national privatisations. This bill is a triumph for them. It is the culmination of years of lobbying, and it allows local government to corporatise most of its assets, to contract out, and to privatise water supplies. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000222\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EThe Government is hoping that by sneaking this bill in under urgency the people of New Zealand will not notice. It is also hoping we will think that allowing a private multinational corporation to own water supplies for 35 years does not amount to water privatisation\u2014that is what the National Government, in its Orwellian double-speak, is claiming. Members should not believe that New Zealanders will be fooled. New Zealanders need to be aware of what the rate-capping provision in the financial strategy section is intended to do. It is intended to reduce spending in local government to the point where local government is more and more short of money, it eventually goes bankrupt, and then\u2014as has happened in Colorado and other places\u2014it is required to contract out and to privatise not just the water supplies for 35 years but all of the other services. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000223\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EThis is the agenda of this part of the bill and other parts, and that is why private water companies will be rubbing their hands with glee. Twenty years of lobbying by Roger Kerr has finally paid off. He and the water companies finally have their goal\u2014allowing them to get their hands on our water supplies, and deregulation of the whole water supply industry in New Zealand. It is way beyond their wildest dreams. Already two of the major global water companies, Veolia Water and Suez Environment, have 39 contracts between them in Australia and New Zealand, including ownership of United Water in Auckland and the privatisation of the water programme here in New Zealand. Its name has changed about three times because the ownership of that company has changed over three times in the last decade or so. But Veolia Water, this private water corporation, owns the water in Wellington and in Auckland already, and now, under this bill, it will be able to get its hands on the rest of the water supplies in New Zealand, and it will not even have to consult people in its long-term community plans. That is the beauty of this bill for the private water companies.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022 data-id=\u00223baa771fbe994afaa9bb8eebaaf2e657\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000224\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223baa771fbe994afaa9bb8eebaaf2e657\u0022\u003ECARMEL SEPULONI (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E Looking at schedule 2 of the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill, the thing that stands out to me that I am concerned about\u2014I know members on this side of the Chamber are concerned about it, and I know the Greens are concerned about it\u2014is the way in which the term \u201Ccouncil community\u201D is omitted the whole way through schedule 2. That highlights the point of difference between this side of the Committee and that side of the Committee. To us, community should be the focus\u2014a sense of community and ensuring that the community has a say in what happens in any council\u2014whereas on that side of the Committee it is all about ensuring that the democratic ability to have a voice is shut out. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000225\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EA good example of this difference is the recent local body election that we had in Auckland. There were two very different main mayoral candidates: one was all about the corporates\u2014and he was supported by the Government side of the Committee\u2014and one was all about the community. That was Len Brown, who went on to win, and he was supported by this side of the Committee. I can imagine that a mayor who is all about community will struggle with legislation like this, which excludes the community and undermines its ability to have a say in what is happening. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000226\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EEvery community has the right to hold its council to account and expect transparency in decision making, so any ratepayer and any person who is part of the city should be up in arms about this bill, because it will undermine their ability to hold their council to account and expect that transparency. I know that the Minister of Local Government, Mr Hide, is one of those people who do not think communities should have a voice, which is why we see this legislation coming through this Parliament. That is unfortunate, given that most Aucklanders recently voted for a mayor who promised them an inclusive city\u2014a mayor who promised them that community would be at the centre of everything for that city, the biggest city in New Zealand, Auckland City. Yet here a National Government is voting for a bill that undermines communities\u2019 ability in that respect. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000227\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EI say it again: Auckland City voted for a mayor who was all about community, not for the mayor who was all about the corporate. Yet the Government does not listen to that, the National Party does not listen to that, and the ACT Party does not listen to that, because they think they know better, even though the overwhelming majority of people who voted about a month back decided that the most important thing for them was community. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000228\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EI point out again that the Government is attempting through schedule 2 to omit the requirement that the council consult its community\u2014the requirement that the community have a voice in council decision-making. We are very concerned about what that will mean. When we look at the aspects of the bill in relation to that provision, we can see very clearly, with regard to the corporate agenda versus the community agenda, what the Government is trying to do. This bill puts into place the ability for the private sector to own water infrastructure for up to 35 years, which is effectively privatisation. Again, that fits into that corporate model that the Government side of the Committee is ideologically in support of. It goes against everything that we believe to be right with regard to the community having a say in what is happening. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000229\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EAlthough we support the move of this bill to increase financial accountability and transparency, we oppose the imposition of arbitrary core services and cuts to the requirements for councils to consult their communities. At the end of the day, how can we guarantee accountability and transparency when we are legislating so that the council no longer has to consult the community about its views? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000230\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EWith regard to community, I just point out that we have seen the merger of a number of cities in Auckland, some of which were very community-focused.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022 data-id=\u002217ff2851eef84bc6987245813ef8eb13\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000231\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002217ff2851eef84bc6987245813ef8eb13\u0022\u003EHon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Labour\u2014Waimakariri):\u003C/span\u003E I will carry on from my colleague Carmel Sepuloni on the theme of this legislation, especially in respect of schedule 1, \u201CLong-term plans, annual plans, and annual reports\u201D, of reducing the requirement on a local authority to consult its community. I raise a couple of practical examples from down my way in Christchurch. I note in passing that the author of this bill, the Hon Rodney Hide\u2014the man who preaches openness, transparency, and accountability, except when it comes to his own wallet, his own air tickets, and a few other things that he has been less than open and transparent about\u2014brings a bill in here that is couched as though it will make councils more accountable and more transparent to their communities. Buried in this, of course, is a reduced requirement on those local authorities to consult on things like goals and community outcomes. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000232\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003EWell, if we are to give councils the ability to arbitrarily set goals for community outcomes and basically make it up as they go along, the question I have asks how a council can be in touch with its community and know what it wants, what the goals and the outcomes are, if it is not prepared\u2014and it should be compelled by this House and this legislation\u2014to consult those communities. I will give the Committee a \u201Cfor instance\u2019; a real one. In the Christchurch City Council there was a move\u2014before the election\u2014to put market rents on early childhood education centres. I say this for the benefit of Kate Wilkinson who says that in my electorate the Government\u2019s cuts to early childhood education funding will be only\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000233\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e6f1a18ccf724c5fa212ea6c617cee91\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: Order!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000234\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e943bb9ed2f4403b9e4660a681dd5444\u0022\u003EHon CLAYTON COSGROVE\u003C/span\u003E: I come back to the bill, Mr Chair, but I am sure you are interested in that. If it were the case, as it was with the local authority in Christchurch that did not impose cuts on an early childhood education centre of $29,500 but put forward a measure for those centres that were on council-owned land to require them\u2014after 20, 30, or 40 years\u2014to pay market rents, it would have put those early childhood education centres out of business. I know that Ms Wilkinson is quite supportive of change, even though Swannanoa Preschool, an early childhood education centre in Waimakariri District, has said publicly that it will have a $100,000 cut this year. I tell colleagues that the centre happens to be a few hundred metres down the road from where Ms Wilkinson lives. She would have known that, if she had knocked on its door. The Minister asks where I get my facts from. I tell her to try visiting an early childhood education centre a couple of hundred metres down the road from where she lives. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000235\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003EIf it were the case, as it was at the Christchurch City Council, that a local authority wanted to put early childhood education centres that were on council land on to market rents, as it proposed, then under this legislation there would be very limited, if any, opportunity formally to consult that community. What happened in the Christchurch case was that the community was up in arms and said: \u201CNo way.\u201D There were meetings, there were protests, and the council backed down. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000236\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003EThat is called democracy. That is called listening. This bill should be about transparency and accountability. There should be a requirement in this legislation that councils are compelled\u2014I repeat, compelled\u2014to consult their community. There should be no option; they should consult. We know, of course, that this Government is not in favour of consultation, because the community might say that it does not like it. The community, hey presto, may say: \u201CWe\u2019re not going to allow the local authority to steamroll over our public opinion and do whatever the hell it likes.\u201D There is no reference to Mr Finlayson in that quote. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000237\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003EI say that this bill is a sham and these schedules are a sham. The bill purports to be holding councils to account, bringing councils closer to their community, and aiding democracy. What it really does, in these schedules and in other parts of the legislation, is reduce the absolute requirement on councils to consult their community. Some members of Parliament in this Chamber are so out of touch with their community. One sits on the opposite side of the Chamber\u2014Ms Wilkinson. She cannot even understand how an early childhood education centre is funded, either by local government in terms of its property management or the fact that 34 out of 54 of them will be subject to a cut of $700,000 to $800,000 a year, thanks to her Government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000238\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003EThe early childhood centre down the road from where that member resides has a cut this year of $100,000, but she goes to the media and says: \u201CI\u2019ve been told that 22 of them will have $29,500 total in cuts.\u201D That shows how out of touch that member is, and she has been caned in the media today. That is quite good, because it shows how out of touch she is. I tell the Minister to walk a hundred metres down Tram Road, although it might be too far for her, knock on the door of the Swannanoa early childhood education centre and ask them about it. She should have done that before she wandered into print, told mistruths, and was very slack with the facts.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022 data-id=\u002297528ac8f94d46f3a23160bfe2a4737f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000239\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002297528ac8f94d46f3a23160bfe2a4737f\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I will talk about the definition of \u201Cdevelopment contribution policy\u201D as laid out in Part 2 of schedule 2 of the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill. The schedule amends that definition and is an interesting move away, given the context of the bill that we are debating. This legislation now says a review period can be requested for development contribution policy decisions. That means that developers can put a lot of pressure on councils where they are paying a development contribution levy\u2014where a council has decided, for example, that if a development is going ahead in their area, if land is going to be put aside for it, if the council is going to chip in for amenities, then the developer can provide something back to that community in the way of a contribution. For example, it could go towards the provision of affordable housing or social housing in that district\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000240\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221dbd2811-8e58-4ffb-848d-31c0eaa9690a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220c7f2f4537f6453e8bf198d3e2f25782\u0022\u003EChris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: Or early childhood centres.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000241\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002210761c6dbb974dcd9fa1e2b5bf02dc70\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014or early childhood centres, as my colleague Clayton Cosgrove has pointed out. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000242\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EThis legislation says that the review needs to take place. It goes through this special consultative procedure, which is a very in-depth procedure in the Local Government Act. I recently sat through this procedure, both the judicial review and the Court of Appeal case that the Whakat\u0101ne District Council took to clarify what is required under the special consultative procedure. I am very pleased to say that the Whakat\u0101ne District Council ended up being successful in the Court of Appeal. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000243\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EA very in-depth procedure is required for the review of these development levies. It has a number of steps along the way and is intended to be robust. It is intended to be genuine, and that is a good thing. It is a shame, though, that the community is losing that right themselves, through various other portions of this bill\u2014in particular, clause 8 in Part 1. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000244\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EUnder Part 2 of schedule 2 we have discussion of a process for the review of development levies where a developer could put pressure on a council, because the developer does not want to keep having to pay it, to go back and review it. Yet the community has lost all these provisions for consultation. So the community loses consultation and the developer gets more consultation. That to me does not seem to be a particularly fair or just move under schedule 2 of this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000245\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EThese contributions are particularly important. It is commonplace everywhere in the world. It is not unusual to require developers to provide a contribution. I refer in particular to where a council may require a portion of a development to be set aside for affordable or social housing. In lieu of a developer being prepared to do that, a financial contribution may be offered, which could then go towards the provision of affordable or social housing. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000246\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EAs we know, we have a housing crisis in this country. It seems an incredible shame that where these brand new developments are going up, there is no leadership from this Government to make sure that part of that development ensures that young families are able to get into their first home. We know the benefits of homeownership; we know them very, very well. We know how difficult it is for young people to get into homeownership. So here is an opportunity when we have a new development for a council to put in place a policy or a levy that goes towards assisting people into homes, and goes towards housing people who find it very difficult to house themselves. They may be on a very low income because the cost of living has risen so highly under this Government. Here is an opportunity to address that crisis. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000247\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EThe Labour Government put in place legislation to specifically allow for that contribution, and to make it clear that councils are legally able to require it of developers. We did that off the back of a council in New Zealand that was being dragged through the courts by developers who challenged the council\u2019s right to do that. The National Government repealed that legislation, and I would have hoped that in both Part 2 and the schedules of this bill we would see something to replace it, or more of an effort to say that the council is there for the community, nor just for developers. There is nothing wrong with the council saying that all the community should benefit from a development, not just the private companies that are involved in it. Of course, the Government does not like that, but it needs to look at the local body vote in Auckland to see what the community was saying. They do not want corporatisation of these services. They believe they should be for community benefit. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022 data-id=\u002202499a1b5c1741a8b2ab4f700368bc80\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000248\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002202499a1b5c1741a8b2ab4f700368bc80\u0022\u003ELOUISE UPSTON (National\u2014Taup\u014D):\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=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022 data-id=\u002286af79c7aa35459793089afbfa94433e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000249\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002286af79c7aa35459793089afbfa94433e\u0022\u003ESU\u2019A WILLIAM SIO (Labour\u2014M\u0101ngere):\u003C/span\u003E I totally agree with Moana Mackey about what should be important in the bill. Unfortunately, those things are not in the bill. I also agree with Sue Kedgley when she says that this bill is designed to gut local government, to gut local democracy, and to make it easier for this Government to sell off our water assets. The Hon Clayton Cosgrove gave a wonderful speech that described the way this Government is going about couching this under \u201Ctransparency\u201D and \u201Caccountability\u201D, when in reality the bill removes transparency and accountability.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000250\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022\u003EI ask members to look at clause 47, \u201COther amendments to principal Act\u201D. This clause should be of concern to the public, and I have no doubt that it will be of concern, once they get wind of what this Government is attempting to do.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000251\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022447e52e101ce40dc9fc140804a310787\u0022\u003EHon Member\u003C/span\u003E: They submitted on it for months.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000252\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e0204bd7ea5b45fa825efc4e2472cf6a\u0022\u003ESU\u2019A WILLIAM SIO\u003C/span\u003E: Some of them submitted; not all submitted. Members of the community of Papakura are protesting right at this very moment because they are outraged by what this Government is attempting to do. Clause 47 refers us to schedule 2, which principally changes the way that we now have to look at how councils conduct their business when it comes to community council planning. Schedule 2 changes the definition of \u201Clong-term council community plan\u201D, and removes from the Act two critical words: \u201Ccouncil community\u201D. It removes the participation of community in consulting with councils to identify outcomes. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000253\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022\u003ELet me give members some examples why a lot of people, including supporters of this Government, and, no doubt, members of the National Party, will be outraged by this measure. Currently, ordinary ratepayers are able to be involved in the entire long-term council community plan from genesis right until the fruition of a particular outcome. One example is housing for the elderly, which resonates very strongly with elderly people in Manukau, in various parts of Auckland City, and, no doubt, throughout the country. Whenever a council is determined to remove housing for the elderly, many National Party members and supporters will turn up. It does not matter how old they are, or whether they are using a walking stick or a wheelchair; they turn up from the beginning of the consultative process right until the very end. But this schedule removes their ability to participate. This legislation gives the power to the local council to determine whether consultation should take place, and whether people are involved only at the beginning or not involved at all.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000254\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022\u003EThis bill also gives the right to the local authority to determine outcomes for ratepayers. In other words, what Sue Kedgley said about gutting local government is precisely outlined in this very schedule. Every section outlined in schedule 2 removes community participation. It removes the ability of ordinary people\u2014ratepayers and senior citizens\u2014to front up to their local government and to say that they are not happy with a particular course of action that that local authority may want to take place.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022 data-id=\u0022d4ea920f826549be8ca547b1d04fe838\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000255\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d4ea920f826549be8ca547b1d04fe838\u0022\u003EHon SHANE JONES (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E T\u0113n\u0101 koe, Mr Chairperson. Kia ora an\u014D t\u0101tou. I would like to direct our attention to Part 2, because, unfortunately, after I left the Local Government and Administration Committee the quality of input from Government members, in terms of vigilance and adherence to principles, diminished greatly. But that reflects the electoral fortunes that lie in their very near future. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000256\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022\u003EI want to direct our attention to clause 46, \u201CNew Schedule 10 substituted\u201D. New schedule 10 is set out in schedule 1. I have a great deal of sympathy for what proved to be a well-written minority report put forward by the M\u0101ori Party members. Naturally we support the attack that they are delivering. We are only sorry that they did not think they could join us and collaboratively oppose\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000257\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dfa577469ed04e8b8f635a79abcd20bb\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: Schedule 1 has already been debated.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000258\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a1d9f754b2234b4ebb14a7385e0eaf44\u0022\u003EHon SHANE JONES\u003C/span\u003E: I said schedule 10.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000259\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e36f22447c5b47d8bfff2f101d7b01f1\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: Schedules 2 and 3 are the schedules, not schedule 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000260\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221fa7905d9dfc451fa63dd605819077dd\u0022\u003EHon SHANE JONES\u003C/span\u003E: I am directing my attention to the provisions that relate to the M\u0101ori parts of this bill, which, unfortunately for our people, as reflective of the broader local government reforms of the last 18 months, are very slender. But there is an important part in Part 2 that relates to dealing with rates, and in particular M\u0101ori rates, and this was picked up by the M\u0101ori Party, that reflects a complete absence in terms of what might be the M\u0101ori expectations of this bill. I direct our attention, along with that of our colleagues here, to the issue that once we define the community that local government would serve in a narrow monetary sense, one is writing out their interests and stakes in local government. Why should people in local government communities be reduced to elements to be defined only by money or wealth? Unless one has money or wealth one will not be able to influence local government decision-making, in the absence of broad community consultation provisions. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000261\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022\u003EThat in actual fact is what has happened in this bill. We accept that red tape ought to be rooted out where it is found. But it was Local Government New Zealand, not the Local Government Forum, that told every member on the Local Government and Administration Committee that this bill will have the effect of worsening the level of red tape. I do not understand why Government members have backed so enthusiastically Nick Smith\u2019s attempt to improve resource management. Unfortunately that small glimmer of hope has long been wiped out by more recent attempts that he has made to improve resource management through local government, but that is another matter. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000262\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022\u003EThe tragedy of the situation is that although this part was designed to improve the prospects of simplifying local government and reducing costs, it has had the opposite impact.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000263\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002242bcf39d67a44f66823b6b513adb295e\u0022\u003EHon John Carter\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I raise the point of relevance. We are actually debating Part 2, which refers to schedules 2 and 3. The part that the member is talking about is contained in Part 1 and we have already dealt with that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000264\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c00cdf35e51543c7a67a331c1a5bfd3c\u0022\u003EHon Clayton Cosgrove\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000265\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228f459a6070244f5bb954e9669e8156d7\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: I do not need any help here. This is very clear, because I brought the member\u2019s attention to this earlier on. We are on Part 2, and that includes schedules 2 and 3. I ask the member to come back to those points. This is a very narrow debate. [Interruption] No, this is a very narrow debate, and that is what we are on at the moment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000266\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cf245f1192e64ead90efcaa0bbe99ce7\u0022\u003EHon Clayton Cosgrove\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. The theme that has come out of the speeches in the last hour has been around consultation, or lack of it. I accept your ruling absolutely, but I put to you that 90 percent of the member\u2019s speech has been around that theme. If that theme was relevant and valid for other members, then I would argue\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000267\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fb7047ee6dec47db9eeb14bd20d89245\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: I have been presiding on Part 2 since the start and the debate has been within the realms of Part 2 and schedules 2 and 3. I ask the member to come back to that part of the debate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000268\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a7a74f970f654b5da814e6a59997d58b\u0022\u003EHon SHANE JONES\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I was, unfortunately, interrupted earlier in that speech. I direct your attention to clause 24, which clearly talks about a local authority\u2019s policy on the remission of rates on M\u0101ori freehold land. The key point is that if we disenfranchise that segment of the community through participation and consultation, we make it very difficult for local government to make informed decisions. I would gladly accept a direction, either from parliamentary staff or from you, if I have misconstrued the clause.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000269\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b1544ef4b01f42559d88eef6930bb517\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, the member is correct. Please continue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000270\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229996a17f86a640dc9e93c8d655d807f3\u0022\u003EHon SHANE JONES\u003C/span\u003E: How much longer do I have, given that we have wasted enough time\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000271\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022da3c2a683e2f4ef191b3f978ff6c304e\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: No. When there are points of order, the clock stops, so no time has been deducted. You have 1 minute and 13 seconds remaining.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000272\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b9e0261bbb5448119b1d60f0d66d0fe0\u0022\u003EHon SHANE JONES\u003C/span\u003E: I am possibly doing the job that my relation from the far north Hone Harawira should be doing. Having said that, I actually want to enjoy a small measure of celebration on his behalf that I have enabled the Committee to exhaust a little of its attention on the postponement of rates on M\u0101ori freehold land. Although it might be said that it is a small and potentially irrelevant segment of this bill, it reflects the Government\u2019s approach to these seemingly insignificant things. Small, seemingly modest M\u0101ori issues can loom large, and they can even cause Ministers of the Government to invoke the spectre of hell, and start to recite Dante\u2019s version of politics. The underlying problem is that where one is to have a transitional provision for review, one cannot engage in the exercise of review unless one has access to information. That is not unreasonable.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022 data-id=\u002296667d81197d4120afebda6c43d15d24\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000273\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002296667d81197d4120afebda6c43d15d24\u0022\u003EDr CAM CALDER (National):\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=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022 data-id=\u0022d46d6f1b44c1419a9adf27d6e42ef889\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000274\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d46d6f1b44c1419a9adf27d6e42ef889\u0022\u003ESUE KEDGLEY (Green):\u003C/span\u003E In schedule 10 there is a whole section on long-term plans and what sorts of things long-term plans must clearly identify. It talks about all the assumptions of a local authority concerning the useful life of significant assets, the replacement of significant assets, etc. But the extraordinary thing is that although the long-term plan will have to do the sorts of things that are spelled out in clause 18, it will no longer have to spell out to the community whether a council intends to divest itself of strategic assets, including divesting itself\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000275\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223a592c67bd744e0eb709529462529703\u0022\u003EHon John Carter\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I listened to the member, and I assumed she was going to bring clause 18 into the relevance of the part we are debating, which is Part 2 and schedules 2 and 3. Actually, the clause 18 that she keeps referring to is in Part 1 of new schedule 10, substituted in schedule 1, so it is not part of the debate. We are talking about transitional issues relating to our long-term plans, so I think that clause is outside the scope of the debate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000276\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d22fbe43807749cda6028b4b28093d81\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the member. I say to the member that we are debating, as I indicated earlier, Part 2, and schedules 2 and 3.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000277\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002278398c419cec44d8aa8cd4fe8f47a0b1\u0022\u003ESUE KEDGLEY\u003C/span\u003E: In this section we are talking about long-term plans, and we are talking about transitional provisions for long-term plans. I was making the point that long-term plans will be required to do all sorts of things, but they will not, any more, be required to inform a community about when a council intends to divest itself of key strategic assets. Until now there has been a requirement for councils to alert people in their long-term plans that they intend to divest themselves of key strategic assets, such as the ownership of water. But now, under this section, they will not have to inform New Zealanders, in those plans.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000278\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EMost New Zealanders will not believe that as a result of this part of the bill, there is no longer a requirement for councils to inform or consult communities about when they intend to do something as fundamental as getting rid of the ownership of water supplies, which have been built up by generations of New Zealanders, and which will now be able to be handed over to\u2014in fact, owned by\u2014multinational corporations for a period of 35 years. That will not have to be mentioned in a long-term community plan. I honestly do not believe that New Zealanders will believe that the Government could do that\u2014could think it was acceptable to sell off water assets, or any other assets\u2014to a private corporation, without requiring that to be mentioned in a long-term community plan or any other plan. The real thing this bill does is that it guts the consultation requirements of local government agencies, so that they will not now have all the nuisance and irritation of having to consult communities when they intend to divest themselves of key infrastructures such as water. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000279\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EI notice a bit more squawking from the Government members; they say that the Government is not selling water. But I am afraid to say that allowing a private corporation to own a water supply for 35 years is water privatisation by any other name. I do not know why National members keep on trying to object\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000280\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f8af0787fe8442a08ae725c707cfb80a\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: Order!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000281\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d0135a28426a42e7a96b1bfc17e1ce85\u0022\u003ESUE KEDGLEY\u003C/span\u003E: But I am only responding to the interruptions that I am receiving from National members, Mr Chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000282\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220533642f9f08438fa344ae0a27989c6a\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: I bring the member back. The long-term plans are in Part 1. We are on Part 2 and schedules 2 and 3. Please confine your comments to that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000283\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225e21816a614e457ea5ee8320f0bc2612\u0022\u003ESUE KEDGLEY\u003C/span\u003E: The consequential amendments and transitional provisions outlined in Part 2 also refer to transitional provisions for the long-term plan, and that is what I am addressing. It is there in clause 49. As I was responding to my colleagues in National, I tell them that they have some idea that the public is going to be deluded into thinking that handing over the control and the ownership of a water supply for 35 years is not water privatisation. But New Zealanders will not be fooled. They know that handing over for 35 long years\u201411\u00BD electoral cycles\u2014the ownership of a water supply that has been built up over generations amounts to privatisation. Those members are wringing their hands and shaking their heads, but that is the truth.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022 data-id=\u0022a1752f2cd1f24cf1ab9168d17b1ef809\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000284\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a1752f2cd1f24cf1ab9168d17b1ef809\u0022\u003ECHRIS AUCHINVOLE (National\u2014West Coast - Tasman):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000285\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022503749cedc6343f99369d861b1bbeaef\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022 data-id=\u0022be5691da221c4761af19369ee9655b7d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000286\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022be5691da221c4761af19369ee9655b7d\u0022\u003EHon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Labour\u2014Waimakariri):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. With respect, I want to raise two matters with you. There has been a lot of to-ing and fro-ing over the schedules, and you have made a number of rulings. You ruled against Mr Jones in his first call, only to reverse that. Mr Jones sought a second call. He has had only one call in\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022 data-id=\u0022eac50c7331bb4f18b4bb3414a039af0e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000287\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022eac50c7331bb4f18b4bb3414a039af0e\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: No. I thank the member for his comments. I am the sole judge of the relevance of the debate. On many occasions, as is well known, I have asked members to come back to Part 2 and schedules 2 and 3. This debate has been going for nearly 50 minutes. It is a very narrow debate on a very small number of provisions. Determining the relevance of the debate is at my sole discretion, and I have accepted the closure motion.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000288\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002238480597a9514f4ca9ec0d9d29d1da7a\u0022\u003EHon Clayton Cosgrove\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Chairperson\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000289\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022017ac094ff27406eb95647ff3cb50a77\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: I do not intend to debate this matter further. I have accepted the closure motion and I will put it to the vote. That is where it stands.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022 data-id=\u0022a651154ab5864f38b722f05b978d5c4e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000290\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a651154ab5864f38b722f05b978d5c4e\u0022\u003EHon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Labour\u2014Waimakariri):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I wish to raise a matter with you. You are right that you have ruled in respect of relevancy. I point out that in doing that in respect of Mr Jones, you reversed your ruling. He was dealing with a very narrow point, as I understand it, in respect of the rating of M\u0101ori land. You called him out for that. You subsequently reversed that, and the words you used were: \u201CYou are correct.\u201D It is a very narrow point, which has not been examined by other speakers, but you denied him a second call.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022 data-id=\u0022a96342ed9cd84534a755c009acbb9e4a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000291\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a96342ed9cd84534a755c009acbb9e4a\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: I did not deduct any time from the member. He carried on and was actually talking about the provision of race\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000292\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002220f2084e44a9492692653e08d9ed2046\u0022\u003EHon Clayton Cosgrove\u003C/span\u003E: Rates.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000293\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022947b17498f2d48059de44c0df25b1c59\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch)\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014rates in terms of M\u0101ori land. I said he had 1 minute and 13 seconds remaining, and in that 1 minute and 13 seconds he did not actually mention anything that he had said he intended to mention. I have judged that the scope of this debate is a very narrow one. Under Speakers\u2019 ruling 65/3 I am the sole judge of relevance. I have ruled that I will accept the closure motion, and that is where it stands.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00222a04d215f7f047d6a4e58ec6998f8d44\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022c7f4ffb62b6240759d00dcb389826719\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That Part 2 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 2 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022d7191836052042ceb7756ed963e2be67\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That schedule 1 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESchedule 1 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00227d0910058dd44db991ab64d761643a7d\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That schedule 2 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESchedule 2 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002220b2a021538e45188199fc30456c2e1b\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That schedule 3 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESchedule 3 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000294\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022d1d6d54af15c4fc8bf819e7e0bbad03b\u0022\u003EClauses 1 to 3\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022 data-id=\u00225bdcad07c2ef472aa9eb00bc1f1300d4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000295\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225bdcad07c2ef472aa9eb00bc1f1300d4\u0022\u003EPHIL TWYFORD (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E We were discussing just a few weeks ago what came to be known as the \u201CWarner Bros Bill\u201D. I propose that we rename this bill the \u201CUnited Water Bill\u201D in honour of the economic interests that stand to benefit very significantly. We could call it the \u201CVeolia Bill\u201D, because under this bill the public of New Zealand should be very clear that councils will be able to enter into contracts for period of up to 35 years for the private management and control of our water assets, including ownership\u2014including ownership. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000296\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EThe Associate Minister of Local Government, who is currently the Minister in the chair, was candid enough, finally, in question time a few months ago to acknowledge that the bill allows private ownership of water assets. I think the Government has been a little bit unclear in its own mind about whether it would allow the private ownership of pre-existing water assets. We are talking about pipelines, dams, and wastewater treatment plants. Let us be clear: this bill makes explicit provision that it will allow the private ownership of pre-existing water assets if that is deemed to be incidental to the project and important to the success of the contract.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000297\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002292824476-4e66-4052-8435-b049833d8b83\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223d4ce5fdb199463eafa86b7ac6eefad5\u0022\u003ENicky Wagner\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s prohibited, unless.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000298\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ac2752e21d744c059e0747df22427bc6\u0022\u003EPHIL TWYFORD\u003C/span\u003E: Well, one could drive a bus through that. Not only does this bill allow private ownership of new water infrastructure that is constructed in the course of a build-own-operate-transfer scheme\u2014also known as a BOOT scheme, or a public-private partnership\u2014but also, if it is deemed to be important to the success of a contract, existing\u2014existing\u2014water infrastructure can be sold to the private sector. We have had the bizarre spectacle over the last few months where members on the Government benches have repeatedly denied that that is privatisation. I do not know how they can deny that when it allows 35-year contracts for private control, including the private ownership of our water assets. On any common-sense reading of that, it is privatisation. The member opposite Nicky Wagner is parroting the line that it has to be sold back to the council at the end of the 35 years. Well, you know, it could be sold back, but equally that contract could be rolled over to create a 70-year period of private ownership of our water infrastructure. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000299\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EI think the public of New Zealand see through the fiction that the National Government is pedalling in this case. There is no way around it; this bill amounts to opening the door to the effective privatisation of water infrastructure. The member opposite may not like it, but it explicitly allows the sale to private interests of our existing municipal water infrastructure, if that is deemed to be incidental to the contract and important to the success of it. It is there in black and white. How members opposite can continue to deny that that amounts to privatisation, I simply do not understand. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EThis bill could be renamed the \u201CUnited Water Bill\u201D in honour of United Water\u2019s role in this bill. The Associate Minister made a great play of saying that a few local rural councils would like the ability and flexibility to work with the private sector. But this bill allows Auckland\u2019s new billion-dollar water monopoly to have the whole kit and caboodle contracted out to United Water overnight, without consulting the public. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EWe are not talking about a little wastewater treatment plan in the back of beyond, I say to Mr John Carter; this bill applies just as much to Auckland\u2019s billion-dollar water monopoly, which has been paid for by generations of ratepayers. That can be handed over to United Water, and, under the cuts to the consultation requirements in this bill, which are in clause 11, ratepayers would not know a damn thing about it. It could be done without any sort of consultation or advanced notification to the community. I believe New Zealanders do not want that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022 data-id=\u00227531ac00d9bd46699e587058d74debc8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000302\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227531ac00d9bd46699e587058d74debc8\u0022\u003ECARMEL SEPULONI (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E Mr Chair, you always get a very good equity balance in the calls that you give out, and I think that is admirable.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000303\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EI have a number of ideas with regard to the title. To start with, rather than the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill, I think it is appropriate that we call it the \u201CLocal Government (We Couldn\u2019t Win Auckland in the Local Body Election So We\u2019ll Privatise Auckland\u2019s Assets in This Way) Bill\u201D. That name comes from something that has been discussed quite widely in this debate. It has been about the Government\u2019s agenda with regard to privatising assets, and privatising Auckland\u2019s assets in particular. It has been about the ideological views of members on the other side of the Chamber, who want our local government bodies to act in a corporate way rather than in a community-focused way. That title really is appropriate, given that this bill allows the private sector to own water infrastructure for up to 35 years, which effectively is privatisation, as my Labour colleagues and Sue Kedgley have pointed out. So that title is appropriate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000304\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EAlthough, as we have said before, we support what the bill states it intends to do, which is to increase financial accountability and transparency, we know that in all actuality that is not the case, because the bill is about privatisation and it is about removing the rights of the community to have a say in what is happening, so that corporates can move in and the communities cannot object to what is going on around them. So that is one idea with regard to what the title of this bill could be, and I will repeat it: the \u201CLocal Government (We Couldn\u2019t Win Auckland in the Local Body Election So We\u2019ll Privatise Auckland\u2019s Assets in This Way) Bill\u201D. It is a long title, and the one thing I am concerned about is that it is a little bit long. Other than that, it captures the agenda of the National Government and what it intends to do with this legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000305\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EAnother idea I have with regard to an appropriate title for this bill is along the same lines but a little bit shorter. Rather than call it the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill 2010, we could call it the \u201CGovernment Wants to Sell Off Your Water and Now We Can Bill\u201D. That would also be appropriate. I will not go into too much detail about why, because I think it was covered in the explanation of my previous recommendation of a good title for this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000306\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c3a88c42-f60b-4cf9-8065-8bfb80a020eb\u0022\u003EOn a different note, going back to the concerns that have been raised about the Government\u2019s desire to erase the community\u2019s ability to have a say in what is going on in local government and to hold their representatives to account, I think another appropriate title would be the \u201CLocal Government Doesn\u2019t Have to Ask You What You Want or Think Bill\u201D. That would be appropriate, given that this bill removes the need for local government to actually consult with communities on long-term strategic goals, on the long-term outcomes that are strategically put into place for the particular cities that will be covered. That is of concern, because one would think that with local government, and with central government as well, actually, constituents, ratepayers, and taxpayers should be able to have a voice in decision making. They should be able to go to their elected representatives and say that they believe that their representatives should be focusing on this, this, and this outcome, and then they should be able to push for their representatives to do that. Unfortunately, this bill removes the right for that to occur. Again, that recommendation for an appropriate title for this bill is \u201CLocal Government Doesn\u2019t Have to Ask You What You Want or Think Bill\u201D. I am pretty sure that that would give New Zealanders a good indication of what the National Government is trying to do, if they do not already know what it has been trying to do for the past 2 years it has been in Government, or for the entire history of National\u2019s existence. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022 data-id=\u0022f965ed20d5414f3493bac1e48e2c1068\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000307\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f965ed20d5414f3493bac1e48e2c1068\u0022\u003ESU\u2019A WILLIAM SIO (Labour\u2014M\u0101ngere):\u003C/span\u003E I said earlier that the Minister driving the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill is a Minister who has lost a lot of credibility in the eyes of the community, particularly in the eyes of the Grey Power community. It is the people in the Grey Power community who spend considerable time being part of their communities, and considerable time participating and engaging with their local government. Many of the Grey Power community members who are supporters of the National Government will now be saying that this bill should be called the \u201CIt is Time to Change the Candidate in Epsom Bill\u201D; that is the name the bill should be given. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000308\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022\u003EI also say that this bill\u2014and many of my colleagues have said so\u2014is really designed to enable the privatisation of water assets. If the Minister is so keen to promote transparency and accountability, why can this Government not be transparent and just name the bill the \u201CIt is Time to Sell Our Water Assets Bill\u201D. Heck, it is time to sell all of our assets and, while we are at it, why do we not just sell New Zealand, as well? We have done that recently with the Hobbit film, so why do we not go all the way? Those are the names that come to mind because of the way this bill has been rushed through in this Parliament, and because of the way the clauses of this bill are designed to gut local government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000309\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022\u003EWhile I am at it, I tell members that we should also give this bill a name such as the \u201CRemoving Community Outcomes From Our Communities Bill\u201D. Let us be open and transparent: that is what this bill is designed to do. It removes the right of ratepayers to identify and determine their own outcomes, and the bill will give the power to the local authority to decide those outcomes for the community. That is not right\u2014that is not right, but that is what this bill will do. I have a suspicion that ratepayers, and Grey Power members in particular, up and down this country, will be listening with interest to hear whether the Government takes a step back, and takes their word seriously about transparency and accountability. This bill does nothing for transparency and accountability. It closes shop for the few who are now being given power to make decisions on behalf of the community. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000310\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022\u003EAnother thing is that the bill also removes the right of ratepayers to be engaged in the consultation process from the beginning to the end. Let us be open and transparent for all New Zealanders and name this bill the \u201CRemoval of Community Participation in the Consultative Process Bill\u201D. Let us just be open about that, and declare that once and for all.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000311\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c08afcf7c1ad44b18969a754746c2f5e\u0022\u003EPhil Twyford\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s a bit long.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000312\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002218242a6ab7154a409079e17ad8961f5f\u0022\u003ESU\u2019A WILLIAM SIO\u003C/span\u003E: Well, it is a bit long. Nevertheless, it is being open and transparent; is that not what this Minister has been talking about? The bill is removing the right of ratepayers to participate in the consultative process. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000313\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022\u003EAnother thing is that simply handing over to local authorities the right to determine outcomes and to determine when ratepayers can participate in the consultative process does not make that right, and it does not make a local authority the community. The community are the ratepayers. Councils are elected representatives and can be part of the community, but they are not solely the community. The community are Grey Power; the community are ratepayer associations; and the community are Manukau, Auckland region, Waitakere, and Porirua where my friend Kris Fa\u2019afoi is fighting tooth and nail to keep this Government out there, come this Saturday. I would say they are the real communities. They are the real communities, but this bill, this Minister, and this Government have no desire to allow the participation of the wider community. That is why Kris Fa\u2019afoi would not agree with this bill. Kris Fa\u2019afoi would say that we should be open and transparent, and simply call this bill what it is; it is the \u201CFor Sale of Assets Bill\u201D; it is the \u201CFor Sale of New Zealand Bill\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228a1cb04e-8a86-44d1-9004-6e158e220339\u0022 data-id=\u00220834f6c057b8431494b45c05464ecb2c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000314\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228a1cb04e-8a86-44d1-9004-6e158e220339\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220834f6c057b8431494b45c05464ecb2c\u0022\u003ETIM MACINDOE (National\u2014Hamilton West):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022 data-id=\u0022ede2902243b9454e85a8e0ba24e0c05b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000315\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ede2902243b9454e85a8e0ba24e0c05b\u0022\u003ESUE KEDGLEY (Green):\u003C/span\u003E I have two particular names I would like to suggest for this bill. The first one is the \u201CRogernomics Part 2 Bill\u201D, and the second one is the \u201CBusiness Roundtable Implementation Bill\u201D or the \u201CRoger Kerr Implementation Bill\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000316\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EIt is the \u201CRogernomics Part 2 Bill\u201D because it implements the agenda of ACT and the Business Roundtable of corporatising as much of local government as possible, and allowing the councils to sell off their strategic assets without having to go through the inconvenience of informing their residents or even bothering to consult them. That is what this bill does. Mr Hide and the Business Roundtable are having to sit on their hands for 3 frustrating years because the privatisation of State-owned assets has been ruled out by this Government this term. That is for what it hopes will be its next term of Government. While they have to sit on their hands in frustration, unable to sell off State-owned assets, they have bided their time by focusing on local government. Nobody is surprised that Mr Hide got his prize of being the Minister of Local Government and immediately set about making radical, far-reaching changes to local government. He has not just got rid of Environment Canterbury and obliterated eight democratically elected councils in Auckland; he has worked on the prize of this bill, which, through a series of provisions, will encourage the councils to corporatise as many of their assets as possible. It will allow them to sell off their assets without having to consult\u2014even their water assets.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000317\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EThe second possible title for this bill is the \u201CBusiness Roundtable Implementation Bill\u201D or the \u201CRoger Kerr Implementation Bill\u201D, because Roger Kerr has been lobbying for the provisions of this bill for two decades. I have here a series of his papers, and I will read from them. This bill is what he has been lobbying for through two decades. It is the prize of opening up local government to the multinational corporations that he represents. He will be listening with mounting satisfaction to this debate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000318\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a76159fc9bbf450a889f6a333f1f0c75\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s just awful\u2014just outrageous. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000319\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228a35b31d4f8f4dc08050526896ec6d69\u0022\u003ESUE KEDGLEY\u003C/span\u003E: I say to Dr Smith that this is exactly what is happening. He may pretend otherwise, but this bill will allow Veolia Water, the largest multinational water corporation in the world, to own our water assets for up to 35 years, and if Dr Smith thinks that is not water privatisation, I say dream on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000320\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003ERoger Kerr has been lobbying for this outcome and one can only imagine the amount of behind-the-scenes lobbying by Veolia Water, the Business Roundtable, Roger Kerr, and Suez to get this bill. Vested interests have been lobbying in secret to get this prize, which is what this bill is for them. Mr Kerr has been pointing out since the 1990s that owning water is a $300 billion business, and he asks why we cannot open up our water supplies in New Zealand to water privatisation and water companies. He acknowledges in this series of papers that it is controversial, but he says water is not a human right, not a precious resource, not one of the life-support systems of our planet; he says it is an economic commodity, it should be treated as an economic commodity, and it should be run by the market, run by multinational corporations. Then he talks about the opposition to water privatisation, which he is increasingly frustrated by. His strategy is to say we should go for partial water privatisation, not complete, outright privatisation. We should pretend that the councils will still retain ownership of water supplies. We should come up with what he calls partial privatisation, which is allow the councils to hand over the water supplies for 35 years to private corporations. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022 data-id=\u0022d1db05b458c54d0ca7d76427b744a031\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000321\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d1db05b458c54d0ca7d76427b744a031\u0022\u003EDr CAM CALDER (National):\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=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022 data-id=\u00229a479322ce704c8b8f02ec54d93a81cc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000322\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229a479322ce704c8b8f02ec54d93a81cc\u0022\u003EHon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Labour\u2014Waimakariri):\u003C/span\u003E In addressing clause 1 on the title of the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill, I say that one could call it the \u201C Rodney Hide Special Bill\u201D. I for one am not at all surprised that Mr Hide has brought in this bill. He has talked about transparency. What is his tag line when he is in the political mire, as he has been, day after day? It is to say he has to go out and do the best job that he can for the people of Epsom. I say to Mr Hide that this bill reeks of hypocrisy. Mr Hide has a long, long track record of talking about transparency and accountability. He talked about it when the issue was about perks, and we all know he came a gutser on that. He talked about transparency and accountability in respect of law and order, and we know he came a gutser on that too, when he covered up for David Garrett. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003ENow Mr Hide has brought into Parliament this bill, which could be titled the \u201CBiggest Act of Hypocrisy That We Have Seen Come in Here Bill\u201D. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000324\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f76e70a175734bc98b26c03499b43646\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: Calm down. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000325\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022218b567a63ce4a879406f578f0d7d995\u0022\u003EHon CLAYTON COSGROVE\u003C/span\u003E: At least I have not had a couple of crates of V this morning, as that member has. If any member in this Chamber should calm down, it is \u201COld Psycho\u201D over there. He should not tell me or any other member to calm down, because Nick Smith does not want councils to be accountable, not even his own council in his own patch. The old windbag over there, the old hayseed, does not want his council to be accountable to the community or to consult it. Oh, the pills must have kicked in! He is a bit silent now. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000326\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003EI say to Mr Hide\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000327\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220f1bfef3239b4bd8af7d878bed31cdd8\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I take offence at the coarse allegations that are being made by Clayton Cosgrove. They are both untrue and unparliamentary. I ask him to withdraw and apologise. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000328\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002249ff4b1344004deabdaa1921f6ebe2a7\u0022\u003EHon CLAYTON COSGROVE\u003C/span\u003E: I withdraw and apologise. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000329\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b77bd263d15b42a99c617509a45256e1\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: I am on my feet. The debate has been quite passionate, but on a reasonably respectful plane. We are nearing the end of it, and I would not like us to lose that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000330\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c0e056ecf87941da84a7f846f370cd8f\u0022\u003EHon CLAYTON COSGROVE\u003C/span\u003E: I come back to the point that Rodney Hide and other members of the Government have gone around the country, saying this bill is about transparency and accountability. Mr Hide has made great play of the fact that the people should have their say. He has said the people should be involved in local government, and the politicians in local government should be accountable to them. It is a pity he does not apply that to his own personal affairs, but putting that aside, he states that politicians should be accountable to the community. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000331\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ec79b0768f0f4bbda51d5e30b498aeee\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: Always in the gutter. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000332\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022526a6b2979844b49b4d7c8a592183732\u0022\u003EHon CLAYTON COSGROVE\u003C/span\u003E: You are no example, I say to Dr Smith. Then we come to this bill, which reduces the requirement on local authorities to consult and be accountable to their communities. I come back to the suggestion that a good title for this bill would be the \u201CYet Again, a Rodney Hide Special Bill\u201D. It is a case of Mr Hide talking about transparency, accountability, the good people of Epsom, and how every day he has to try to be the best MP that he can be, regardless of his track record in this place, then pushing through a bill under urgency. Every bill on local authority matters that the Minister has introduced has been handled under urgency\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000333\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ada64a333c064179a8e5c54004ea0b66\u0022\u003EPhil Twyford\u003C/span\u003E: Bar one. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000334\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221dad7540670b496a9191dba641539bae\u0022\u003EHon CLAYTON COSGROVE\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014bar one\u2014because he does not want his legislation to be scrutinised and does not want the people to hold him to account. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000335\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003EI challenge the Minister to get up and explain how reducing the requirement on a local authority to actively consult with its community on community goals and outcomes in any way engenders and enhances political accountability to those people. I ask the Minister that question. That is what he said he founded ACT on. It is what he says he lives by, apart from in his own personal and political affairs in Parliament, yet although he preaches that, he does not walk the talk. How will a local authority know which goals and outcomes a community wants to have, if it is not required to consult that community? Even Nick Smith\u2019s council will not be required to consult on those community goals and outcomes. Yet again, Mr Hide preaches accountability and transparency for everybody else. He takes the moral high ground, desperately trying to rekindle a political future that is in tatters. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000336\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003EI will give Mr Hide this: he has guts. Even though he is trying to rekindle his political future and reinvent himself yet again, with or without the spray-on tan, he still has the fortitude to bring into Parliament a bill that does exactly the opposite of what he preaches that everybody else should do. Everybody else should be accountable; everybody else should consult their electorates. He says he consults the people in Epsom, but he brings a bill into the Chamber that reduces the requirement of a local authority to consult its community, its constituency. I ask my colleagues how that shows accountability and how that will hold local politicians\u2019 feet to the fire when they propose to do bad things\u2014and we have seen that occur. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000337\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003EWhen it comes to water, I challenge Nikki Wagner. We have a major water issue in Canterbury\u2014a major water issue. This bill, of course, allows the privatisation of water assets in the future. So I look forward to future debates with that member over there, Nick Smith, and with Nikki Wagner, as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022 data-id=\u00220de52f2a828d42a79c5ce1017c07776f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000338\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220de52f2a828d42a79c5ce1017c07776f\u0022\u003ECHRIS TREMAIN (Senior Whip\u2014National):\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=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022 data-id=\u0022f293410774ce4bb684bb3541f574e250\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000339\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f293410774ce4bb684bb3541f574e250\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I have been present for the entire Committee stage of this debate, and have participated in it. In reflecting on the Committee stage, I believe that the current title, the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill, is not appropriate, and needs to be amended to better reflect the debate in the Committee stage and the amendments made to the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000340\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EThe first change that I would suggest\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000341\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022da3021016eac4e2fb908f30f827db3d7\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. Mr Cosgrove, whose call has ended, is continuing to shout abuse across the Chamber when I am trying to listen to the contribution from his colleague. He has finished his time and he should be asked to desist.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000342\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022de95af7b57d74fc5acab02b30c2fc29d\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: I did not hear the member but a member has taken offence. As I said, we are nearing the end of this debate, so let us just conclude it in the best spirit that we possibly can.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000343\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d1e63d64c432477bbdd56d410d3b2e02\u0022\u003EHon Clayton Cosgrove\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I think it is a tradition in this Chamber that one responds when provoked.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000344\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b8dbff4922464d1098e70306130d9cc2\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: Look, I have just said that we are getting near the end of the debate\u2014very near the end of it, I think.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000345\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022486345f13683402781273e8b1e293ae5\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair; I say that members on this side of the Chamber have a lot more to contribute in this very important part of the debate. I am very pleased that the Hon Dr Nick Smith is listening to my contribution.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000346\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EI think a better name for this piece of legislation, perhaps, would be the \u201CLocal Government (That was Then; This is Now) Amendment Bill\u201D, because when I look at the issue of remitting rates on M\u0101ori land, I am reminded of the comments made by the Hon Dr Nick Smith on this very issue, when he was in Opposition, and when Labour passed the Local Government Act in 2002. The clause is being carried over into this bill\u2014a review period is being put into it. I think the bill should be called the \u201CLocal Government (That was Then; This is Now) Amendment Bill\u201D because of the comments made by the Hon Nick Smith, when he was in Opposition, on this very issue of remittance of rates on M\u0101ori land. He said: \u201CThis is nothing less than apartheid.\u201D The clause states \u201Cthat a local authority must adopt \u2018a policy on the remission and postponement of rates on M\u0101ori freehold land.\u2019 It must do that.\u201D He then went on to say: \u201CI ask the Minister to tell me why councils must have a policy on remitting rates on M\u0101ori land, \u2026 I want some member in this Chamber\u2014maybe Parekura Horomia\u2014to provide me with an explanation. Why must a council develop rates remission policies for your cuzzie-bros and not for mine?\u201D. The Hon Dr Nick Smith then went on to say: \u201CThis damn law that we are being required to pass is nothing less than apartheid, and I cannot believe that members opposite want to impose this sort of obscene provision. It offends against National\u2019s principle of one standard of citizenship.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000347\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EWell, that is quite a departure from the bill we have in front of us now. I ask the Hon Dr Nick Smith\u2014who said he was listening to my contribution, and I thank him for that\u2014to take a call and tell us whether that is still his position and, if it is, whether he will be voting against this part of the bill. Indeed, maybe he will vote for my suggestion of a new title, which is the \u201CLocal Government (That Was Then; This Is Now) Amendment Bill\u201D, because that is quite a U-turn, even for the Hon Dr Nick Smith. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000348\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EThe other title that I think would suit this bill is the \u201CLocal Government (Sale of Council Housing) Amendment Bill\u201D, because housing does not appear in the list of core functions in this legislation. Councils around the country have already said quite openly that they are looking at selling off their pensioner housing, because, clearly, central government does not think that it is an area councils should be involved in. That was backed up by the fact that the Minister of Housing has stopped local government from having access to the Housing Innovation Fund to maintain those properties. That is sometimes the sticking point; properties get to a point where they have to be maintained, and the council wonders whether it should sell them or keep them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000349\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EIf central government is prepared to take the issue of housing seriously, in partnership with local government, and to respect the role that local government plays in housing, then local government should be allowed to have access to the Housing Innovation Fund, as Labour allowed. I was in Kaipara earlier this year, and I was told that the Housing Innovation Fund allowed the council to maintain its properties, and that was part of the reason the council kept them and reversed its policy to sell them. Yet the National Government has said to local government that it does not have a role in housing, and that housing is not a core function, which has already seen the sale of some pensioner housing in districts like Whakat\u0101ne. The Whakat\u0101ne District Council has said that the Government did not want it to be involved in housing anymore. So we could call this bill the \u201CLocal Government (Sale of Council Housing) Amendment Bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000350\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003EIt could also be called the \u201CLocal Government (Consultation is Important for Corporates but Not for the Community) Amendment Bill. Under this legislation\u2014and we heard this earlier in debate on the Committee stage\u2014communities\u2019 consultation rights are being slashed back to the bone. But new procedures for corporates are being introduced\u2014for example, developers can put pressure on a council to review its developer levy and development policies. Corporates will get the right to the special consultative procedure while communities are having the right taken away from them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000351\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022914eb240a7054fff8d1a3488c661ed1b\u0022\u003ECHRIS AUCHINVOLE (National\u2014West Coast - Tasman)\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022423fbdc4a1cd43c4bd586c8dd8d673cb\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 51\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022fbbbaff8675d48b289caa87944de1b61\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That clause 1 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 1 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022cc8284a194b34e9e9d538b232e123f3f\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That clause 2 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 2 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00229f16890d506a4ecf84e25995a4f9bdeb\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That clause 3 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 3 agreed to. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000352\u0022\u003EBill reported with amendment.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022 data-id=\u00227e076dd348ff453a9004e87005a35714\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000353\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227e076dd348ff453a9004e87005a35714\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, That the report be adopted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022189afa8848ce4fe3877605d4f1488ead\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 report be adopted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EReport adopted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000354\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022eae621c6a05949a787b39891269ca7fa\u0022\u003EThird Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022 data-id=\u00223cc858d7116a489ea6cca97b568a4d49\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000355\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223cc858d7116a489ea6cca97b568a4d49\u0022\u003EHon RODNEY HIDE (Minister of Local Government):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill be now read a third time. The purpose of this bill is to improve transparency, accountability, and financial management in local government. Before the development of this bill, the Local Government Act 2002 contained few mechanisms to apply the principles of transparency and accountability, which it seeks to promote. Although it resulted in a lot of information being made available by councils, it was not always easily accessible to ratepayers or easily understood. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000356\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003EThe accountability mechanisms are retrospective, so do not provide ratepayers with any effective ways to control their councils. With this bill, I hope to change all that. It includes a number of new measures to improve transparency and accountability. Having a financial strategy, for example, makes transparent the overall effect of council proposals on rates, debt, investments, and services. It sets limits on rates and borrowing, which creates an accountability mechanism. Further transparency and accountability are then provided through the pre-election report. This will compare actual rates, rates increases, and borrowing and returns on investments with the limits and targets set out in the financial strategy. Voters will receive this and other information about their council\u2019s finances and proposed projects at the time they are best able to hold members to account\u2014the local election. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000357\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003EThere is more focus on financial information and management. A basic understanding of council finances is crucial if people are to ask better questions, or indeed any questions, of their council. Not everyone is an accountant, which is why having plain English financial information and standardised reporting is so important. Standardised information is particularly useful for infrastructure services. The ability to fund investment in infrastructure is the biggest factor affecting councils\u2019 financial sustainability and is where the most money is spent. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000358\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003EProviding ratepayers with comparative data on the levels of service for things like roads, water, and waste water helps to inform them about what they are getting for their money. It also helps them to ask questions about their council\u2019s performance and the issues they are facing, relating to these services. The Government takes seriously infrastructure and its important links with economic growth. Ensuring councils provide good information about their infrastructure assets and services is essential so that neglect does not hinder economic performance. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000359\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003EThe proposals in this bill can go only so far in making a difference, though. What happens next is up to councils, individuals, and communities. The bill provides for better quality information, so there are more transparent processes for making decisions about strategic issues. Councils will be left to establish and run these processes for themselves. However, no one can force ratepayers to take advantage of this new information or to be more actively engaged in local debates and decision making. It is up to them to choose to participate. On that note, I do not think fears that there will be a lack of consultation in the future are warranted. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000360\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003ECommunity engagement is not just about making a submission as part of a formal consultation process. People should be encouraged and enabled to make their views known whenever they like. Having better information about a council\u2019s finances and proposed projects, about how much services will cost to deliver, and about what they are getting for their money\u2014and being able to compare this with information from other councils\u2014will put ratepayers in a better position to put their views across to their council more clearly and more comprehensively. It should mean that when consultation does occur, the public will be in a stronger position to participate. It should mean that when councils are required to make themselves aware of, and have regard to, the views of communities, as the Act requires, they can generally give effect to this principle. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000361\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003EDuring the course of developing and enacting this bill, much has been made of the concern that it encourages the privatisation of water and other council services. The bill does not privatise anything. The councils and their ratepayers will make their own decisions. If at some point in the future they decide that some private involvement in their services is the right thing for them, that it is the best way for them to pay for these services and keep them affordable for local people, then that is up to them. If the bill makes it a bit easier for them to make these decisions, then I say it is great. If they do not make any change at all, then that is their choice too. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000362\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003ELikewise, if councils want only to provide so-called core services and their communities are happy with that, then that is up to them. If councils want to provide more, and they have community and ratepayer support, that is their choice, as well. But ratepayers have a right to challenge the council if it wants to spend their money on something that is not a core responsibility, particularly if it might take priority over other more essential local services. Having the core service provisions in the Act will help to guide councils and communities when they are debating these issues. That, along with the financial strategy and other new information, will empower ratepayers to question council decisions and to discuss trade-offs on a more equal footing. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000363\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003EAs I have mentioned throughout my speech, this bill is about choice. It is about giving councils and communities more flexibility to choose to deliver local services in ways that are right for them. It is about giving ratepayers better information about their councils so they can choose what kinds of services they want and how they want to pay for them, to choose how and when to be involved in decisions, and how and when they need to hold councils to account for those decisions. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000364\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003ECouncils will start developing their first long-term plans using the provisions of this bill early next year. I hope councils and ratepayers will choose to take advantage of the new opportunities the bill introduces. I thank the House for its support. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022 data-id=\u0022a838619015be4924b7426e8e654ccc39\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000365\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a838619015be4924b7426e8e654ccc39\u0022\u003EPHIL TWYFORD (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E Labour members oppose the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill with every bone in our bodies. The bill claims that it will increase the transparency and accountability of local government. In fact, it will do the opposite. Like all of the local government bills the Minister of Local Government has brought to the House in the last 2 years, it will undermine our public institutions and undermine our democratic process.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000366\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EWe have talked about water privatisation a lot, and no matter how much screeching we hear from the Government backbenchers about whether this bill allows, in fact, water privatisation, New Zealanders will not be fooled by the blatant lack of transparency that the Minister of Local Government has displayed in bringing the bill to the House. The bill will allow long-term contracts of up to 35 years for private sector operations to control our water supply. Section 137(4)(d) in clause 32 explicitly allows the sale of pre-existing water infrastructure as part of those long-term contracts. It is not, as the Associate Minister tried to argue this morning, simply something that will give more options to cash-strapped small rural councils. This bill will allow the billion-dollar water monopoly set up under Rodney Hide\u2019s super-city in Auckland to be contracted out to United Water for periods of up to 35 years, including the private ownership of pre-existing water infrastructure.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000367\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EThe ratepayers and the citizens of Auckland could be given no say, under this bill. At the same time as it allows water infrastructure to be sold to private sector interests, it also does away with the provisions in our local government law that would guarantee citizens the right to be consulted before their assets and their services are either corporatised or contracted out. The combination of those two things will imperil our public ownership or ratepayer-owned assets and resources. We are talking about water specifically, but the same principle applies to all sorts of other strategic assets. Does anybody other than the deluded members opposite\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000368\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022936f332fc03d49a6993887d70405c570\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: Order!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000369\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002244a3ce3eb4d347679575d0a68d722090\u0022\u003EPHIL TWYFORD\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014believe seriously that the privatisation of our water supply will not result in the inevitable price hikes that people have seen that have accompanied other botched privatisation initiatives that we have seen over the last few years? We know that if we hand over to the private sector a natural monopoly like water supply, it will almost inevitably end up in foreign hands. The guaranteed profits that will flow from private ownership of a natural monopoly will flow overseas. That money will go out of the pockets of New Zealand ratepayers and householders and straight into the pockets of overseas-owned companies. Does anybody believe that if we hand over resources of this scale\u2014a billion-dollar water monopoly in Auckland\u2014to the private sector, it will not result in huge corporate salaries further gouging the pockets of the ratepayer? This is not a good idea.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000370\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EI remind members opposite that the most recent independent opinion polls on this issue have shown that 80 percent of New Zealanders are opposed to any privatisation of our water system. It is a matter of choice, as the Minister pointed out. When New Zealanders go to the polls next year, they will be mindful of what the Minister did to Auckland local government, they will be mindful of what the Hon Nick Smith did to democracy in Canterbury, and they will be mindful of this bill opening up their municipal water supply to privatisation, and they will make a choice at the polls. This Government is gutting our local government public institutions and the democratic process, and those two things go hand in hand. They are taking the voice away from ordinary people, and they are opening the door to private control and ownership of assets and resources that New Zealanders have built up over generations through their rates. New Zealanders will not forget that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000371\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EThere are other obnoxious aspects to this bill that Labour members have opposed steadfastly throughout this whole process. One of them is the idea of core services that this Minister, whose party currently commands about 2 percent in the polls, is able to impose\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000372\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002244c8602dde2242a1a5514eb20a5347fc\u0022\u003EHon Clayton Cosgrove\u003C/span\u003E: Not that much.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000373\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002247eefd312ff643c993d0c7e418f83824\u0022\u003EPHIL TWYFORD\u003C/span\u003E: Is it not 2 percent? He is able to impose an ideological and arbitrary list of core services that he defines as core services. Nobody else does. Hardly a soul turned up at the Local Government and Environment Committee to say that it is a good idea; 98 percent of the submitters who came along said it is a lousy idea. They said that we should either put their issues and services in the list or not have it at all. The implications of what that list could mean is that a rural community, for example, that wants to provide free premises for a general practitioner service so that it can have a doctor in its rural community could be vulnerable to claims, through either the annual planning process or normal political debate, that it is not a core service\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000374\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226d4b11ed957a4982873684f79f9f976c\u0022\u003EMoana Mackey\u003C/span\u003E: Or a legal challenge.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000375\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ca9f158594f24380aa0cdc7cfd271df9\u0022\u003EPHIL TWYFORD\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014or, in fact, a legal challenge\u2014and therefore it should not be engaging in it. This idea tilts the playing field away from the democratic process that allows citizens to decide in conjunction with their elected representatives what constitutes a core service.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000376\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EThis bill also makes a number of cuts to the obligations currently on the councils to consult their citizens. It allows the councils to contract out public services to the private sector. It allows them to corporatise their assets and operations by shifting them to council-owned companies without consulting their citizens. That is a breach of people\u2019s fundamental, democratic rights. It constrains the whole process of setting community outcomes, setting the high-level goals that go into our councils\u2019 long-term plans. Under Rodney Hide\u2019s bill, a council could make up the community outcomes out of thin air, or out of the last thing someone said to one of its members on the street or in the supermarket. The councils are not required to consult the community in setting those outcomes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000377\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EThe bill also restricts the community outcomes unduly by requiring that they can only be things that the council itself can deliver on. Many of the most pressing issues for local communities, such as crime, safety, alcohol, and pokies\u2014any number of those issues\u2014cannot be made a community outcome, because the councils do not have access to all the levers to solve those problems. That is yet another example of this Government and this Minister taking democratic rights away from New Zealanders.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000378\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EThey have gutted the consultation process for decision making about many of the important things that go into the annual plan. Currently, there is a four-stage process that we have admitted was overdue for streamlining and could have easily been reduced down, but this Government has thrown the baby out with the bathwater. Now there is no principle-based mechanism that requires consultation on these important decisions. I predict that many of the Government\u2019s natural supporters and voters in leafy suburbs up and down this country, who are the people who are most demanding of their local authorities, will blame the National Government for taking away their democratic rights.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000379\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003EWe have seen three bits of legislation that imposed an unpopular, Rodney Hide - inspired super-city on our country\u2019s biggest city. Most of that legislation was pushed through this House under urgency. We saw the sacking of Environment Canterbury by the Hon Nick Smith, which was, again, done under urgency. This bill is the third leg of the treble. It guts our local government legislation, and it hands over our resources to privatisation and corporatisation. That is the legacy of the Minister of Local Government, who set out with such grand aspirations to be the \u201CMinister of Ratepayers\u201D. This is what he has done: he has weakened and undermined our public institutions, and taken away the voice of New Zealanders over things that they justifiably have a right to a say on and to be consulted on. He comes to this House trumpeting transparency and accountability, but everything about the way that he has implemented this legislation and implemented his policies speaks of the opposite. It is not transparency and accountability; it is the opposite. The public of New Zealand will hold him and this Government accountable for it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022 data-id=\u0022d33e0ef8c993449597ed3401d3d066cc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000380\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d33e0ef8c993449597ed3401d3d066cc\u0022\u003ECHRIS AUCHINVOLE (National\u2014West Coast - Tasman):\u003C/span\u003E I am a little saddened to hear the desultory speech from the previous speaker, Phil Twyford, who has been at least involved in the full process of the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill. I think he could have done better than he did. However, it was comforting to hear Shane Jones speaking at an earlier stage. He is a loquacious speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000381\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003EDebate interrupted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000382\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003ESitting suspended from 1 p.m. to 2 p.m.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000383\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022b0ace87da6c14f509bc68125388bc6f9\u0022\u003EQuestions for Oral Answer\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000384\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022547245616ae545f9af00cbd877caf3eb\u0022\u003EQuestions to Ministers\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000385\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022fcc98229ae7a40388dc8d57416b6fc06\u0022\u003EEconomy, Rebalancing\u2014Progress\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022 data-id=\u0022d07628bcbf9c4eed9a1df6d687afd2ed\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000386\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E1. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d07628bcbf9c4eed9a1df6d687afd2ed\u0022\u003EMICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Finance: What signs of progress, if any, is he seeing of the economy rebalancing from borrowing and consumption to savings and exports?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022 data-id=\u00220868d116be6f44db84d118c8477bd829\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000387\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220868d116be6f44db84d118c8477bd829\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance):\u003C/span\u003E There is no doubt that we are seeing some early signs of progress. First, we have had five consecutive quarters of growth in the past year and GDP has expanded by just under 2 percent. Secondly, growth is being reflected in a steady improvement in the jobs market, unemployment has fallen from a peak of 7.1 percent to 6.4 percent, and there are 40,000 more people in jobs today than there were a year ago. We expect the steady rise in new jobs to continue next year.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000388\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002262786f876c70415e90504b37b7261c77\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Before I call the honourable member, can I just ask members, please, to keep the conversations down a little. The background noise makes it very hard to hear.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000389\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b9199a435c3c4b97a4847eb6ae69a279\u0022\u003EMichael Woodhouse\u003C/span\u003E: What factors are driving the recovery?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000390\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bfdd5510b5e04ea98f50de46a8e2ebd2\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: First, growth is being driven by exports rather than debt-fuelled consumption or excessive Government spending. In the past year the value of New Zealand\u2019s exports increased by 15 percent. Secondly, New Zealanders are choosing to pay down debt and increase their savings rather than borrow for consumption or housing speculation. It is encouraging that the recovery is being built on savings, investment, and exports rather than consumption, housing speculation, and wasteful Government spending.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000391\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222858c7a5338847509f025d26f29c44d8\u0022\u003EMichael Woodhouse\u003C/span\u003E: What impact is that shift towards increased saving having on New Zealand\u2019s economic and fiscal outlook?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000392\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229a90da4971394360b59b9214fe1d2906\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: Increased household saving will create a stronger platform for faster growth further down the track. However, it means that the recovery will not be driven by sectors like retail and housing. So there will be a flatter domestic economy in the short term. This trend, along with the weaker global outlook, is likely to mean a lower growth forecast for the year ending March 2011 in the half-year fiscal update before the economy rebounds further in the following year. Combined with the impacts of the Canterbury earthquake, it also means slightly higher deficits in the short term before the deficit starts improving.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000393\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c83012b4-3939-4753-80fc-1956a3e2bd1e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a3f9a511ad9042cab79a33bb33e94b44\u0022\u003EMichael Woodhouse\u003C/span\u003E: What implications does the economic outlook have for Government spending decisions?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000394\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002235b71374385947b1b664f51b1f8d04ee\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: The Government has continued with a high level of spending to support the economy through the recession. In particular, a large-scale spend on infrastructure is supporting thousands of jobs around the country. But these figures remind us that there are risks in this recovery, because of the nature of the New Zealand recession and then the global recession that got Government finances in trouble, and we will have to reinforce consistent discipline for the next 5 or 6 years at least in order to get the Government\u2019s books back to surplus.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000395\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022366b5c9414c84e46b68f4119d03bdc70\u0022\u003EHon David Parker\u003C/span\u003E: Will next month\u2019s half-year Economic and Fiscal Update from Treasury show higher than forecast economic growth for the year ending March 2011, or will he once again be forced to acknowledge that the economy is doing worse than he predicted just months ago?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000396\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224418f760288e48169149462c4002f746\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: It has been clear for some time now that the economic recovery has been a bit flatter over recent months, for the reasons that we have talked extensively about in the House. New Zealanders are paying off debt and saving more. That is good for the economy and good for them. But it does mean there is not the same flush of spending on housing and construction. I have to say that if there was a flush of spending on housing and construction, I would be concerned about it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000397\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220fc05f1c-47b0-4fb0-8298-2f347adae4e3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224780341c78d547e699a4d134bd8e6533\u0022\u003EHon Sir Roger Douglas\u003C/span\u003E: How does the Minister expect to increase savings and thereby help rebalance the economy when the real rate of return on bank deposits is currently less than 1 percent after allowing for tax and inflation?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000398\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e96bab048a2c4944b7c9e82b90424f94\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: It is difficult to encourage people to save considerably more if they are getting less than 1 percent real return on their savings. This is one of the issues that the Savings Working Group is dealing with. We need to take a view of national savings, not just Government or household savings. We need to look at, for instance, the interaction of the tax system with our savings instruments to see whether we can do better.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000399\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002293108680de5c42c288150b2a893869a1\u0022\u003EHon David Parker\u003C/span\u003E: Has the Minister seen the Reserve Bank\u2019s Financial Stability Report, which shows that business lending has fallen by $9.3 billion since November 2008, while housing lending is up by $8.8 billion, and does this not show that his measures to rebalance the economy are not working?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000400\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022656672a96542469c87a8ed139fec9550\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: I have seen the report, and, no, it does not.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000401\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002216a1c18836d44254b57fc1a6279fa5e9\u0022\u003EHon David Parker\u003C/span\u003E: Given that the wage gap with Australia continues to grow, business lending is down, the Government deficit is up, and New Zealanders are more indebted than ever to the banks in the rest of the world, when will he admit, as Bernard Hickey said this week of the Government, that \u201CThe grand plan is in shreds.\u201D?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000402\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dfbeef322c8a41a3a8a6c701110d29e8\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: I certainly disagree with Bernard Hickey, who, like that member, is too focused on month to month economic figures and not strongly enough focused on the long-term shifts that this economy needs to go through. In fact, that member should be apologising for squandering the best decade of economic growth that this country has seen.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000403\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220fc05f1c-47b0-4fb0-8298-2f347adae4e3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fb2d4bdc0b404867bb969ae7cf5369e1\u0022\u003EHon Sir Roger Douglas\u003C/span\u003E: What issues is the Minister taking into account in his consideration of the tax treatment of savings?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000404\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fba907ff700b47fca9a670d87c647a73\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I apologise to the member, but because of the level of interjection across the front of the House I could not hear the member\u2019s question. I ask him to repeat it, please.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000405\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220fc05f1c-47b0-4fb0-8298-2f347adae4e3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d2958f5eeb224bffb4309f8b29e928b4\u0022\u003EHon Sir Roger Douglas\u003C/span\u003E: What issues is the Minister taking into account in his consideration of the tax treatment of savings?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000406\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227f47c8e2409741f4983a6d27c67e10ca\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: We are taking into account some arguments, which I do not necessarily agree with, that say that our tax system inherently favours debt over savings, and that that is one of the reasons that New Zealanders borrow more and save less. The solutions to that are all a bit messy. The Australians have looked at some solutions, and I understand that the Savings Working Group is considering those.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000407\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022b753a8bbbfdf4a28bf05b7612dd34e54\u0022\u003EGST Increase\u2014Effect on Low-income Families\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022 data-id=\u00221262a66de4cf41eb8cd2ff7e542c4239\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000408\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E2. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221262a66de4cf41eb8cd2ff7e542c4239\u0022\u003EHon ANNETTE KING (Deputy Leader\u2014Labour)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: What reports, if any, has she seen on the impact of the recent GST increase on low-income families?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022 data-id=\u002272e55a68302f4e82b99b5e0e3ee092ad\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000409\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002272e55a68302f4e82b99b5e0e3ee092ad\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH (Deputy Prime Minister) \u003C/span\u003Eon behalf of the Minister for Social Development and Employment: I have seen reports from today\u2019s Dominion Post that state that recent tax cuts, which are part of the tax package that includes an increase in GST, have added \u201C$30 to the national median weekly take-home pay packet in October\u201D, driving home affordability to the most affordable level in recent years.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000410\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228b1a582671a849cdadd6504ada1d69b0\u0022\u003EHon Annette King\u003C/span\u003E: Would a drop in income and an increase in GST have an impact on the budgets of low-income New Zealanders?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000411\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f6beea381a8d401481e9f6b8651865f4\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: Of course, if that happened in an individual case they may be worse off. A drop in income, which I am sure is the drop the member will refer to, occurs when people, for instance, lose their jobs. A whole lot of M\u0101ori and Pacific people lost their jobs because those jobs were reliant on excessive Government spending and excessive borrowing, and they were not sustainable jobs. We are going to create sustainable jobs so that when people get the jobs, they can keep them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000412\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e8823662d3fe4b06ac364996fd73cab6\u0022\u003EHon Annette King\u003C/span\u003E: Can I take from that answer, then, that the Minister has seen the information from Statistics New Zealand showing that the median income for M\u0101ori has dropped by 11 percent and the median income for Pacific people has dropped by 19 percent in the 2 years under a National Government, and does she think this will impact on the ability of families to cope at present?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000413\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002209ff32a22c4444d482ab420808c3288e\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: As I pointed out, those figures take account of all sources of income. For those who have kept their jobs, wages have gone up. As for those who have lost their jobs, Labour should be apologising to them, because those jobs were created by wasteful Government spending and a mismanaged economy. They were not sustainable jobs. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000414\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b6a4824c862e472da02bec070df12f5d\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I call Jo Goodhew.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000415\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e21b302c7e7042a292cb4af8c7424271\u0022\u003EJo Goodhew\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000416\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d52e59e3-2195-4c95-a654-665c11b39b63\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225fbb3e95c8ce47e896414b5264d97fcc\u0022\u003EHon Parekura Horomia\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The Minister seems quite clear on why things have happened. Can he give us a response as to why the unemployment rate for M\u0101ori is the same as what it was before\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000417\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221046576bd967487b899ad78050fbea78\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2014[Interruption] There will be no comment. I am not sure what the member was trying to do\u2014whether he was seeking to ask a supplementary question. I thought he had raised a point of order, and that was why I came back to the member after I had called Jo Goodhew. If I had that wrong I apologise to the member. Was it meant to be a point of order\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000418\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c1d68908009a4bc9a3ac02204348c52e\u0022\u003EHon Member\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, it was.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000419\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002279f026994f8b44508989a3c70e1bd7e8\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, it certainly was not. I accept that I was bit slow in dealing with it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000420\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022286779ba1b8b4c49af9a7f528efec430\u0022\u003EHon Rodney Hide\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I will make a quick comment through you to help the member. I am sure that if the member Parekura Horomia sought leave to ask a question, we on this side of the House would grant it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000421\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c82bc054c27b49d992990cd4bb4634a4\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: We will not do that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000422\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224ba994cad288475ba0f85421488397e9\u0022\u003EJo Goodhew\u003C/span\u003E: What support has the Minister seen for the reversal of the Budget tax package, including the GST increase and across-the-board personal tax cuts?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000423\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022890a5e9bf09340eb8cc3b389e0ac7fdb\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: I have seen no support for a reversal of the Budget tax package, even from the Labour Opposition, which has had the national focus of a by-election to promise to unroll the policy, which it keeps opposing in the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000424\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226322322c13b24758a2e84c5fad7c562b\u0022\u003EHon Annette King\u003C/span\u003E: In light of the Prime Minister saying New Zealanders would be better off after the tax switch, how can that be the case for Pacific people, whose inflation-adjusted median weekly income has dropped by $89 per week, and for M\u0101ori, whose same income has dropped by $60 per week, in the 2 years under a National Government? It has nothing to with a Labour Government; it occurred under a National Government, according to Statistics New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000425\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228ce24d1489a94134978593a34d4affd6\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: As I have explained, the drop in the median income has occurred because M\u0101ori and Pacific unemployment has gone up, and it has gone up because of the recession induced by the Labour Government through its damaging economic policies, and a global financial recession. The wages of M\u0101ori and Pacific people who have kept their jobs or found new jobs\u2014if they are among the 40,000 who have found new jobs\u2014have gone up. We will create sustainable jobs for those on benefits.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000426\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226edf26191d864ad3a417c1639702171c\u0022\u003EHon Annette King\u003C/span\u003E: Do I take from the Minister\u2019s answer that he is saying that the job of a Pacific Island woman\u2014a job she has lost\u2014providing home care to an elderly person under the Labour Government, which was providing such care, was a waste of money and time?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000427\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222eac34d780154e5aabdeb5e0f08e90c0\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: No, I am not saying that. I am saying that the promises made by the Labour Government to Pacific Island communities that it had performed some magic and created jobs for them turned out to be false promises. This time round, we will manage the economy properly so that sustainable jobs are created, and so that once people get new jobs they will keep them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000428\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022ff90d0904240483e8edcfc519a86406c\u0022\u003EKiwifruit, Pseudomonas Syringae pv. Actinidiae\u2014Government Response\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c0f78f60-c2fd-46f4-8138-72f39692fc20\u0022 data-id=\u002215051f448e7e4b169466bcbeb7d66c56\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000429\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c0f78f60-c2fd-46f4-8138-72f39692fc20\u0022\u003E3. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002215051f448e7e4b169466bcbeb7d66c56\u0022\u003ETODD McCLAY (National\u2014Rotorua)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister for Biosecurity: What recent announcements has the Government made in relation to the kiwifruit disease Psa?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e4b09a29-dfd3-42c0-8585-11463bd6077b\u0022 data-id=\u0022cec433aecc2744369792ff21bd2b5e01\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000430\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4b09a29-dfd3-42c0-8585-11463bd6077b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022cec433aecc2744369792ff21bd2b5e01\u0022\u003EHon DAVID CARTER (Minister for Biosecurity):\u003C/span\u003E Today I have announced that the Government is committing $25 million to fund an urgent, aggressive containment strategy to fight the kiwifruit disease Pseudomonas syringae pv. Actinidiae (Psa). This will be matched dollar for dollar by the industry, resulting in a $50 million Government-industry plan to tackle the spread of Psa and minimise its impact on New Zealand\u2019s $1.5 billion kiwifruit industry. The rapid response made by the Government to this issue is a great example of the industry and the Government working together, and, in the words of Zespri itself, it demonstrates this Government\u2019s commitment to the New Zealand kiwifruit industry.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000431\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c0f78f60-c2fd-46f4-8138-72f39692fc20\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002253fce8a694ce4afc82b29b30d7ca32ca\u0022\u003ETodd McClay\u003C/span\u003E: What are the details of the response package announced today?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000432\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4b09a29-dfd3-42c0-8585-11463bd6077b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022329932ce8ce5431d876cef89c934ff8d\u0022\u003EHon DAVID CARTER\u003C/span\u003E: The response package announced today reflects the compelling proposal put to the Government yesterday by the industry. If approved by growers, it will see an aggressive programme of management action, such as pruning back infected canes and vines, awarding compensation to affected growers for loss of income, and continuing research into the disease. Once the initial stages of response are complete, and infection rates are minimised, the industry will put together a long-term, self-funded pest management strategy. The aim is not eradication, but doing the utmost to minimise the impact of Psa on one of our brightest primary sector industries.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000433\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022daedea909a754d08b963a5b3efdcd7d0\u0022\u003EHon Damien O\u2019Connor\u003C/span\u003E: How much would it cost to rehire the 54 front-line Biosecurity New Zealand job positions that he cut in 2009, and will this be part of the response package so that future disease incursions will have a greater chance of being stopped at the border?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000434\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4b09a29-dfd3-42c0-8585-11463bd6077b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002254b7cb202c6c4168b9b61b77344fe4a7\u0022\u003EHon DAVID CARTER\u003C/span\u003E: I cannot answer with accuracy on that figure, but I am certainly aware that the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry faced a $4 million deficit associated with a dramatic fall in cargo volumes of 45 percent.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000435\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c0f78f60-c2fd-46f4-8138-72f39692fc20\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228c2adb4a86134ca3ad24fa8acf3f0937\u0022\u003ETodd McClay\u003C/span\u003E: Why did the Government decide to make such a large commitment to the kiwifruit industry?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000436\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e4b09a29-dfd3-42c0-8585-11463bd6077b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002256d38881f04841dbaae0eeb09185215e\u0022\u003EHon DAVID CARTER\u003C/span\u003E: Today\u2019s announcement of a major funding commitment was a decision not made lightly by the Government. It recognised the compelling case put forward by the kiwifruit industry to ensure its future viability, and the major contribution that kiwifruit makes to the New Zealand economy. It also recognises this Government\u2019s commitment to our biosecurity system and to New Zealand\u2019s primary sector.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000437\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022b3e62740d9c94f46a09532e111cbffae\u0022\u003EHealth Policy\u2014Progress\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022 data-id=\u002293829ae54552482e99fef0b712ee79a5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000438\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E4. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002293829ae54552482e99fef0b712ee79a5\u0022\u003EHon RUTH DYSON (Labour\u2014Port Hills)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Health: Is he satisfied with progress in achieving his health policy?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022 data-id=\u0022bfabc96d478d4e37a6e4ea63badf47ec\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000439\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bfabc96d478d4e37a6e4ea63badf47ec\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL (Minister of Health):\u003C/span\u003E Yes, because overall we are making progress. However, we inherited significant problems, such as a serious workforce crisis, a decline in real access to elective surgery, many patients travelling to Australia for cancer treatment, and a health sector on track to financial crisis.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000440\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002251568ee6ae2f4b499a5ec13b92f5858d\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: When, if ever, will he step in to save the \u014Ctaihape health services, where the midwife is losing her job and the rest home residents have been told to pack up and move out, despite the staff taking a massive pay cut in August of this year; when will he help the 40 staff, the 27 older people in the hospital, the 130 women who use the midwifery services annually, and the 3,500 people registered with the primary health service?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000441\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c041cd72b91445aaa340f53512dfa69d\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL\u003C/span\u003E: I have been in regular contact with the chair of the Whanganui District Health Board, Kate Joblin, and she chaired a meeting of residents in Taihape last night. The district health board is working to ensure the continuation of those health services in Taihape other than aged residential care. This includes primary health, maternity services, community nursing, and allied health services. This is expected to be determined within the next week. There are no questions over home-based support and palliative care services, which are not provided in Taihape through the \u014Ctaihape Health Trust.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224e0aa3569dd34c4e8f91b6b29aa06f1c\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: When, if ever, will he step in to ensure that doctors\u2019 visits remain affordable, given that we have just seen an increase of $7.50 per visit for an under-17-year-old going to their general practitioner in the Mana electorate, especially after he said in July that a $1 increase was justifiable?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000443\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d6d55c1f373f4d21bbff737a8cb5dd2d\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL\u003C/span\u003E: Practices that do put up their fees are required to notify the district health board and their primary health organisation. Neither the Capital and Coast District Health Board nor Compass Health have been advised of any increase of the magnitude of that claimed opposite. Eleven practices in the Mana electorate have increased their fees since April. Ten of those have increased their fees for the 6 to 17 age group; eight of those 10 have increased fees by $1 or less; one has increased them by $1.50.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000444\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022149391ea011e4a5987b4482a58168df4\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: When, if ever, will he acknowledge the true situation in health, with chief executives and district health board chairs leaving, saying they will not cut front-line services further; parents who cannot afford to take their children to the doctor because of the $7.50 increase; and the thousands of people in Taihape who are threatened with not just a cut but the complete closure of their residential hospital, midwifery, and primary health services?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000445\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fc06605a9a3e453c98df3a859892d645\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL\u003C/span\u003E: The fact is that some of the claims made by the member are unable to be supported by evidence. What can be supported is the fact that 20,000 New Zealanders are now getting elective surgery that they never got under the Labour Government; 99 percent of New Zealanders are getting their cancer treatment within 6 weeks; and more and more New Zealanders are getting speedy treatment in our nation\u2019s emergency departments. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000446\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cfdabe42-521a-4dca-afab-3e781731a130\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022db19df63f89a4282acb5dafcf233cf00\u0022\u003EDr Paul Hutchison\u003C/span\u003E: What progress has the Government made in improving services in Kenepuru Hospital in Mana?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000447\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e155234d87ba4b4dab80fa2bbb029c25\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL\u003C/span\u003E: What a timely question. In the last 2 years, under the National-led Government, the number of surgical procedures carried out at Kenepuru Hospital has increased by 57 percent, and the number of outpatient consultations carried out has increased by 30 percent. On top of these unprecedented increases in services, in the past 2 years at Kenepuru the new Government has introduced new services, including neurology clinics, general surgery and breast clinics, newborn hearing screening clinics, a four-bed observation unit in the surgical ward, anaesthetic pre-assessment clinics, pain management clinics, a psychiatric liaison service, and haematology and chemotherapy outreach services. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000448\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ade1fb2e13654a4fa7bccbf5069c4503\u0022\u003EHon Ruth Dyson\u003C/span\u003E: When, if ever, will he support people in Manawat\u016B with diabetes, and their families, who are this week, in Diabetes Awareness Week, describing the cuts to their diabetes support as reprehensible and incredibly short-sighted; and what is he going to do about it?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000449\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002222e224b11b04473eb83083bf9c63b135\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL\u003C/span\u003E: I have spoken to the MidCentral District Health Board about that change. This is as a result of a contract coming to its natural conclusion. The services provided under that contract will now be provided under primary care, which is being funded accordingly. The MidCentral District Health Board has had a $13 million increase in funding this year under the National-led Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000450\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022e4505547dbbb417786c88ae1c536140d\u0022\u003ERoading, Tauranga\u2014Eastern Link Road Progress\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022badb0a39-849c-462a-b32f-77fc017c9fc2\u0022 data-id=\u00225e2aa3bb22874506a0b03d1e7b3be450\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000451\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022badb0a39-849c-462a-b32f-77fc017c9fc2\u0022\u003E5. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225e2aa3bb22874506a0b03d1e7b3be450\u0022\u003ESIMON BRIDGES (National\u2014Tauranga)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Transport: What progress is being made on the Tauranga Eastern Link road of national significance?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224a244152-977c-48d2-bf53-4f3a369a27a9\u0022 data-id=\u0022c2fb352e10da4c57988743bc8b160464\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000452\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a244152-977c-48d2-bf53-4f3a369a27a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c2fb352e10da4c57988743bc8b160464\u0022\u003EHon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister of Transport):\u003C/span\u003E I am pleased to report that we will be turning the first sod on this $455 million project tomorrow, more than 6 months ahead of schedule. This is a very significant infrastructure project for New Zealand and an important building block in the Government\u2019s plans for real export-led growth. All those involved in the project have worked hard to bring it forward. We will now have elements of five of the seven roads of national significance under construction, those being the Victoria Park tunnel, the western ring route, the Christchurch motorways, the Waikato Expressway, and now the Tauranga Eastern Link.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000453\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022badb0a39-849c-462a-b32f-77fc017c9fc2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002274261053bf2342b59e75ee5032eacb1e\u0022\u003ESimon Bridges\u003C/span\u003E: What economic benefits will this project bring to the Bay of Plenty?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000454\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a244152-977c-48d2-bf53-4f3a369a27a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002250fbf249c7ae4bfb9bd47e18d7d15f1b\u0022\u003EHon STEVEN JOYCE\u003C/span\u003E: The Tauranga Eastern Link will dramatically reduce journey times across the Bay of Plenty, leading to significant productivity and economic benefits. It will especially reduce journey times between the cities of Rotorua, Whakat\u0101ne, the Bay of Plenty hinterland, and New Zealand\u2019s largest export port at Mount Maunganui. It is estimated that the new road will shave up to 24 minutes off travel time for a return journey between Paengaroa and Te Maunga. Construction of the project is expected to employ 200 to 250 people at any given time over the next 5 years, with more jobs being created or sustained in support industries and in the wider regional economy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000455\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c211fa4836bb474cafb2d5d1244eec40\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: How can we have confidence in the figures that the Minister has given us about this road of national significance, when the New Zealand Transport Agency website makes it clear that the volume of traffic on the P\u016Bhoi to Wellsford road of national significance is between 10,000 and 16,000 vehicles per day, and yesterday during question time he tried to assert that it was 24,000?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000456\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a244152-977c-48d2-bf53-4f3a369a27a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b0e3404e4f834b28821c00c3837b77c9\u0022\u003EHon STEVEN JOYCE\u003C/span\u003E: The numbers are different depending on whether one uses Warkworth and Wellsford, or P\u016Bhoi to Warkworth, when looking at the numbers. As the member will also know, I talked about the number of people travelling on those roads, and that includes, of course, a multiplier for the number of people in each car, because quite often there is more than one person per vehicle. Of course, Mr Hughes may have trouble with that arithmetic. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000457\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022468f88196d774004b3e8eb992cc798f2\u0022\u003EPolice\u2014Front-line Officers Deployed Since December 2008\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022 data-id=\u00224ef98f522596490e80a7a6d4a4a3598c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000458\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003E6. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224ef98f522596490e80a7a6d4a4a3598c\u0022\u003EHon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Labour\u2014Waimakariri)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Police: When she said \u201CNew Zealand streets are safer with the addition of 384 extra frontline police officers deployed since December 2008\u201D, how many of those 384 new police officers were part of the third tranche of 407 police officers that the previous Labour Government had funded for deployment within the 2008-09 year?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022 data-id=\u00225eab902fc4294709958882a41dad1547\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000459\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225eab902fc4294709958882a41dad1547\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL (Minister of State Services) \u003C/span\u003Eon behalf of the Minister of Police: I am advised that the premise of the member\u2019s question is incorrect. There was not a third tranche of 407 police officers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000460\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a426710d2f29420dab88d5b24e32bf99\u0022\u003EHon Clayton Cosgrove\u003C/span\u003E: Does she think that the people of Mana will feel any safer because of her claims of additional police across the country, given that police documents tabled in this House show their police district will actually have 46 fewer front-line police officers by the end of next year than it did when the third tranche of 1,000 additional police across the country came into force in mid-2009\u2014information obtained from the Minister\u2019s own department?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000461\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ae85912535774b98a43cb94c7da502d7\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL\u003C/span\u003E: The answer is the same as that to the question that the member asked the other week. The fact is that compared with when this Government came into office, there will be more police officers throughout New Zealand: 600 additional police officers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000462\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f6a80a9d0af841268712fbdc00e2bcbe\u0022\u003EHon Clayton Cosgrove\u003C/span\u003E: I seek leave to table two documents from the New Zealand Police showing that the crime rate in the Kapiti-Mana district, where police numbers are dropping, increased by 6.5 percent between 2008-09 and by a further 0.2 percent in the year to July 2010.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000463\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022817976d464104346bf504bbf145a0b10\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is objection.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000464\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a353b2689a5942cea83b499ade568081\u0022\u003EHon Clayton Cosgrove\u003C/span\u003E: To the Minister\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000465\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002204d1552d221f43e186ef89f7e0acaa44\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: Stop misrepresenting.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000466\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e3a792135fab4d5b8be7883f737c8ca1\u0022\u003EHon Clayton Cosgrove\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000467\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225f56d01135694bfe851d356842a8d983\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The member has been called to ask a supplementary question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eef298921b164ba588314bfe43185c9e\u0022\u003EHon Clayton Cosgrove\u003C/span\u003E: I have just been accused by that member of misrepresenting the facts, and I take offence at that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000469\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002252795546d53d4a5986d13d7436a81039\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The member knows that those sorts of interjections go across the House all the time. I heard the member sitting right beside him use some very unparliamentary language to describe something that the Minister of Finance was saying a short while ago. It was far more offensive that what the member interjected just now.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000470\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002215e52c1933144e53bfbeae9c347717b3\u0022\u003EHon Clayton Cosgrove\u003C/span\u003E: I take offence at being accused of being a liar.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000471\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220f894e2ebc4844deb4bbf17a6ed3f1ea\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: If the member wishes to ask a supplementary question, he will just do that. He was not accused of being a liar.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000472\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223e6b7a582d174c42b55539ff352a97ed\u0022\u003EHon Clayton Cosgrove\u003C/span\u003E: Does she believe that New Zealand streets are safer, when she hears reports from a Hastings sergeant, Kevin Stewart, that his section is attending fewer jobs due to the workload and a lack of staff and that \u201Ceven as recently as six years ago, I was arresting 100 people a year. Now the top arrest rate in my section is 50 a year.\u201D?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000473\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221a9ce83e603d4a9dbf1a633e1733a1da\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL\u003C/span\u003E: Of course, the Minister is always concerned if a police officer feels that way. What the Minister is doing about it is putting tens of millions of dollars of extra money into the New Zealand Police. By the end of our first term in office there will be 600 additional front-line staff, including 300 in Counties-Manukau, to make the streets safer for our nation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000474\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002279f0d5725ac94e66bedd6d96b45eb679\u0022\u003EHon Clayton Cosgrove\u003C/span\u003E: Does he believe that New Zealand streets are safer, considering the comments of a police supervisor: \u201Cif the public knew the real numbers of GDB\u201D\u2014general duties branch\u2014\u201Cstaff policing the streets they would be shocked.\u201D, and the comments of Christchurch sergeant Craig Prior: \u201CWe are not giving the public an acceptable level of service the way the GDB is run now.\u201D?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000475\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002225381a3a03af49e1975cc4eb7e1b11ee\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL\u003C/span\u003E: Those comments are being made, I think, with the complete lack of awareness of the tens of millions of dollars extra that the Minister has put into the police service, and the fact that within the end of our first term there will be 600 additional front-line officers. The police know that they have a Minister who will support them strongly. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000476\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222173aa156c854effb0724b1a69f37d4f\u0022\u003EHon Clayton Cosgrove\u003C/span\u003E: How can she claim that New Zealand streets are safer, when police resources are seemingly so stretched that Auckland resident Pamela Percivalle called 111 late on Friday night, when she was at home alone, to report at least two men were banging on her windows and doors and apparently trying to break into her house, but no police officer was sent to her aid because she sounded \u201Cvery calm\u201D?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000477\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022727526890ba24fc09d18b4b4e5b99955\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL\u003C/span\u003E: I know that the Minister of Police was shocked that that happened. She has raised the matter with the police and demanded an immediate report from them. The Minister is concerned that that might happen, because we simply do not want our Police Commissioner to appear before a select committee, under a National Government, and say that if people dialled 111 they had to scream to get help, which they had to do under Labour.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000478\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222fb54dcb245c489ca3fb5d44e88d73af\u0022\u003EHon Clayton Cosgrove\u003C/span\u003E: I seek leave to table a data table from the New Zealand Police showing that the third tranche of the 1,000 additional front-line police promised and funded by the previous Labour Government totalled 407, and came into force during the 2008-09 fiscal year. It is from the Minister\u2019s own department. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000479\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002270f994dcd1e240d1bff8e1cb42766a24\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Where was it published?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000480\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002219b91236b1374ec192e301b4df64ef18\u0022\u003EHon Clayton Cosgrove\u003C/span\u003E: On its website. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000481\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221f8651d56db841c1b79555578ed1f00c\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is objection.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000482\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00226894427654e7488f802da9b85a4c5150\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 4 to Minister\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022 data-id=\u0022d30d89d9155d41f28eb0beacab79afee\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000483\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d30d89d9155d41f28eb0beacab79afee\u0022\u003EHon ANNETTE KING (Deputy Leader\u2014Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I seek leave to table \u201CCapital and Coast GP practice fees\u201D, which includes the latest increase of a general practitioner practice in Mana, which has gone up by $7.50.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000484\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002261614d90e1764f0cb5f9e72204f5346e\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Would the member indicate the source of the document?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000485\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002257d50f6486074b4ab5f263648258bb3d\u0022\u003EHon Annette King\u003C/span\u003E: It is the Capital and Coast District Health Board\u2019s own publication.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022355c22c4c8654134b0380b83a93d2810\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is no objection.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000487\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EDocument, by leave, laid on the Table of the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000488\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002225b4940e5b1d41828a892973202acc09\u0022\u003EConservation Land, Public\u2014Renewable Energy Generation on Islands\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022 data-id=\u0022b449a358e5784fa9b72a06e236659c59\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000489\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022\u003E7. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b449a358e5784fa9b72a06e236659c59\u0022\u003EDr CAM CALDER (National)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Conservation: What is the Department of Conservation doing to provide renewable energy to remote areas of public conservation land?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022 data-id=\u0022bd65e7972c33400780efae8c1fe2dffa\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000490\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bd65e7972c33400780efae8c1fe2dffa\u0022\u003EHon KATE WILKINSON (Minister of Conservation):\u003C/span\u003E The Department of Conservation has recently completed a 60-kilowatt solar project to provide power to Motutapu island, at a cost of $715,000. This is only the first stage of an infrastructural upgrade of the island. Once we upgrade the grid and water reticulation system, we estimate achieving annual operating savings of $188,000.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000491\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226cb1ed6e56954f4eb562564df278528f\u0022\u003EDr Cam Calder\u003C/span\u003E: What other initiatives is the Department of Conservation doing as part of its sustainability programme?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000492\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a3b1ed0a9b8c40cc9d7597f3a10ec37f\u0022\u003EHon KATE WILKINSON\u003C/span\u003E: The department is installing renewable energy at a number of islands it administers, with a focus on off-grid sites because of the high cost of supplying electricity via diesel generators. The Mana Island solar system, for example, will cost $100,000 and save $567,880 over 20 years.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000493\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022de7fabc3c45d487ca8f13d508b849f6c\u0022\u003EHon Steve Chadwick\u003C/span\u003E: When was the Department of Conservation\u2019s renewable energy retrofits programme established, and under what Government?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000494\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022958e5ff5611c4e16b8afbdf84f6dc8f8\u0022\u003EHon KATE WILKINSON\u003C/span\u003E: I am aware that the previous Government had many strategies and plans, but it is actually the action that matters. We are making sure that we get action in the Department of Conservation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000495\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002234ac81f0af444d4f957b61331df065c4\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The question was very specific. It was not about plans, strategies, or actions; it was about a very\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000496\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221ebc99f9c9684a94ae9d1becc28b794f\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I hear the member. The question was very clear; I invite the Minister to answer it. First, I invite the Hon Steve Chadwick to repeat her question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000497\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225094a5ce10834bda97784ad75a6fa09f\u0022\u003EHon Steve Chadwick\u003C/span\u003E: When was the Department of Conservation\u2019s renewable energy retrofits programme established, and under what Government?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000498\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022565cfbd44a6a4839844b385bf619075d\u0022\u003EHon KATE WILKINSON\u003C/span\u003E: I must admit that I do not know the exact date. But it is a very good strategy, and if it was established under the Labour Government, then I certainly applaud Labour for it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000499\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00225918c1d7141f4bea958633ae8f180ad4\u0022\u003EEmployment Legislation, Changes\u2014Effect on Women\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022 data-id=\u002280f2afbb18354d188eda0bf8c5dc71d5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000500\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003E8. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002280f2afbb18354d188eda0bf8c5dc71d5\u0022\u003ECAROL BEAUMONT (Labour)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Women\u2019s Affairs: What advice, if any, has she received on the possible consequences that labour law changes proposed in the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) and the Holidays Amendment Bill will have on women?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022 data-id=\u0022bb078318cf1f452c9d1b25ad8335e66d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000501\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bb078318cf1f452c9d1b25ad8335e66d\u0022\u003EHon KATE WILKINSON (Minister of Conservation)\u003C/span\u003E on behalf of the Acting Minister of Women\u2019s Affairs: Mr Speaker\u2014[Interruption] \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000502\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eaf5103558c74e668fd9e422ea060b2d\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I want to hear the Minister\u2019s answer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002231a8ef56e89d4c10b6658aabb7d011a7\u0022\u003EHon KATE WILKINSON\u003C/span\u003E: The Acting Minister of Women\u2019s Affairs was appointed only very recently, and I understand that no advice on these bills has been received by her.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000504\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222bc9edba87754e3e91aa3f8dd573fe9d\u0022\u003ECarol Beaumont\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. That question asked was on notice. I would assume it would be possible to find out what advice the previous Minister had received, if the Acting Minister has not been in the role very long. Surely the Acting Minister is responsible for the work that is going on in that portfolio area.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000505\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002203973c0c5a7746e0bb211ee28fecece7\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I think, in fairness, the Minister did answer the question. It may not have been quite the answer the member wanted, but the Minister did say that under the Acting Minister\u2019s watch no advice has been received on that matter. The member has further supplementary questions to probe that answer, but I believe that it was a fair answer to the question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000506\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229acc5b995f7a4fa48b029669f7912b31\u0022\u003EHon Pete Hodgson\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. It seems to me that if a question is addressed to a Minister, the personage of the Minister does not matter; the office of the Minister does. That is to say, it does not matter whether a Minister changes person every day of the week; the obligation on the Government is to answer the question on behalf of the Minister\u2014the office. In that respect, if the Minister answering the question on behalf of the Acting Minister was referring only to a day or two of activity, that cannot be seen to be addressing the question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000507\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228d429a7af9684c2db1b6ea4af34119c5\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The member will have heard me just require a Minister to answer a question that was, in my view, not answered. So I am not averse to requiring Ministers to answer questions. But I believe that the Minister did answer this question. The member has supplementary questions available to her, and the first supplementary question is patently obvious. That is what supplementary questions are all about. I accept that it is marginal, but on this occasion I have ruled that the Minister has answered the question, and there are supplementary questions to probe that answer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000508\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229d8796169fa84b2ba0c9994a05caa2d0\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I think we are going somewhere we went yesterday, but this question, when it was originally lodged, did say \u201Cor her predecessor\u201D. When your office\u2014whether on the basis of objection or off its own bat\u2014takes out \u201Cor her predecessor\u201D, what you have done is substantially narrow this question away from the issues that my colleague was attempting to address. I agree with you: as this question has been read, there is no doubt that the Minister has addressed the question. But if, in fact, it was as it was lodged, I think you would have been requiring the Minister to answer in a different way.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000509\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002222a2826c1a89400b87cdfd875d472377\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I hear the member\u2019s point. I was totally unaware, obviously, of that exchange that took place in the lodging of the question, and I am somewhat troubled by that. I think in the circumstances, given that this is a primary question, I will ask the Minister to answer it in a more fulsome manner.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000510\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002232974b812b124614997a9502d6449979\u0022\u003EHon KATE WILKINSON\u003C/span\u003E: I understand that previous advice was provided by the ministry to the Department of Labour raising concerns about both bills. The Government considered the advice, and on this occasion did not find it persuasive.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000511\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022729c3894ea9f49c1b21d229505be70ba\u0022\u003ECarol Beaumont\u003C/span\u003E: How does she respond to advice from various women\u2019s and employment groups that the extension of the 90-day trial period will unfairly disadvantage women because they are more likely to have broken employment patterns, and will therefore be exposed more often to the possibility of dismissal without protection from unfair dismissal?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000512\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002249f04c7c8d444f94a8d5994250c90d42\u0022\u003EHon KATE WILKINSON\u003C/span\u003E: Extending the trial period to all firms will expand job opportunities for all New Zealanders, including women, and those job opportunities will, of course, benefit women. I am also advised that an evaluation of the trial period by the Department of Labour found that trial periods were taken up in roughly equal measure by men and women.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000513\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002269357accc8d64c029a5ec65560b10b74\u0022\u003ECarol Beaumont\u003C/span\u003E: Has she or her ministry made any representations on behalf of women who combine employment with child-caring responsibilities and are concerned that the proposal to allow employers to request a medical certificate after a day\u2019s absence will put additional stress and pressure on them, given that they are more likely to need sick and domestic leave?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000514\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002263df2743519a40f7b343b22d55339fb1\u0022\u003EHon KATE WILKINSON\u003C/span\u003E: As that member will be aware, the requirement for a medical certificate is a small change. It is anticipated that not many people will take it up, and therefore women will not be affected by that change.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000515\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223facbb72-b3b0-464b-b24d-e6de0616f323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002204fa021ddcc64ded81e4c380e2b6342d\u0022\u003ECarol Beaumont\u003C/span\u003E: As the Minister of Women\u2019s Affairs, how is she standing up for women who are paid less than their male counterparts, and are therefore more likely to feel pressured to sell off their fourth week of annual leave, meaning reduced rest periods and less time to spend with children during school holidays?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000516\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c1129db0e67e4ea08b3b354275a97853\u0022\u003EHon KATE WILKINSON\u003C/span\u003E: Concern was raised that if more men than women cashed up a fourth week, it was likely to increase the gender pay gap. The flip side is that if more men than women choose to cash up, it may increase the gender holiday gap in favour of women. This Government trusts New Zealanders, whether they are men or women, to make their own choices. [Interruption] \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000517\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e20c41e8b2ae4294a4db4b18cc01d4d6\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The dilemma the Speaker faces with that question was that it asked how the Minister has stood up for women in something. The problem with that kind of question is there no specific answer to it. The answer that was given, I have to say, did not much address the question, but my dilemma is that the question asked how the Minister has stood up for women, and it is difficult for me to put further pressure on the Minister\u2014and I do not think I should\u2014when a question is framed in that way. But I would ask Ministers to listen to questions, and even where there is no specific answer, as with that question, to try to address the question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000518\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022f832c16f162742b9878b7724d873522b\u0022\u003EBorder Control\u2014SmartGate System\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002267431f57-e958-4c83-b438-7da8061d479e\u0022 data-id=\u00226b21cd179c9d4d2b8c5114ee681e168c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000519\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267431f57-e958-4c83-b438-7da8061d479e\u0022\u003E9. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226b21cd179c9d4d2b8c5114ee681e168c\u0022\u003EPAUL QUINN (National)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Customs: What information has he received on the success of SmartGate?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022 data-id=\u0022662099e956c74961bd7268fec589e0c7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000520\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022662099e956c74961bd7268fec589e0c7\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON (Minister of Customs):\u003C/span\u003E SmartGate\u2019s success shows just how rapidly New Zealanders have taken to the new technology that the system offers. As a result, they have benefited from far quicker processing times on arrival at Auckland, Christchurch, and Wellington airports. This week the success of SmartGate reached yet another milestone, with the system reaching half a million users. That is an excellent result, given the system started less than a year ago, when the gates were first opened at Auckland Airport. SmartGate is now processing around about 17,000 people a week. Yet there is even more good news: from 1 December SmartGate will start processing departures at Auckland Airport as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000521\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002203d5ff0e0a5e4061874238ae9ec2b0a7\u0022\u003EBroadcasting\u2014Achievements\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022 data-id=\u0022b5e7b8565d424c94b7fd7240a83c0384\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000522\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003E10. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b5e7b8565d424c94b7fd7240a83c0384\u0022\u003EBRENDON BURNS (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Broadcasting: What is the one major achievement in broadcasting he would most like to celebrate?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022603ae58e-47c4-46f9-bfc8-8355a48988ad\u0022 data-id=\u002271e51805460b44a99c2609fd71b5de61\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000523\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022603ae58e-47c4-46f9-bfc8-8355a48988ad\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002271e51805460b44a99c2609fd71b5de61\u0022\u003EHon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN (Minister of Broadcasting):\u003C/span\u003E There are a number of achievements in broadcasting under this Government, all of equal merit. Legislation is progressing through the House to repeal the failed Television New Zealand (TVNZ) charter, and to free TVNZ from its ridiculous, unworkable mandate. We have taken that charter funding\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000524\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eda50732560b45bcbfbd57ec38a7c171\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I apologise to the member, but in the interest of the \u201CChampion of the Valley\u201D, I note that the\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000525\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002239e6e1b8eaf44891abf31a568b5fba55\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, no. Because of the way the member commenced his point of order, I am not going to accept that point of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000526\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226917c55dc88a4fea9222979eb9663f85\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. That is a description that you have approved for the member: the \u201CChampion of the Valley\u201D. You have approved that, sir.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000527\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229313b6fc6e8d4a1bab00242431dfbdc3\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The member will resume his seat for the time being. If that is the case, I apologise to the member, and I will investigate the approval. But I still think the point of order was probably out of order, because we had passed that question. We are now on to question number 10. The Minister should really not have been interrupted in answering it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000528\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022603ae58e-47c4-46f9-bfc8-8355a48988ad\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d15cf99dcc25440890ead25d5daa12e6\u0022\u003EHon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN\u003C/span\u003E: I will start from the top again, shall I? There are a number of achievements in broadcasting under this Government, all of equal merit. Legislation is progressing through the House to repeal the failed TVNZ charter, and to free TVNZ from its ridiculous, unworkable mandate. We have taken that charter funding, which was not delivering quality content, and used it to set up the $15 million\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000529\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022830c27ab0b2e48bda65f555b4990c3c5\u0022\u003EBrendon Burns\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. My question was quite specific. It asked the Minister to name one major achievement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000530\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002254cee75e213c460fb7f366ac6ac6c0ab\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: A point of order is being heard. It was very difficult for me to hear exactly what the Minister was saying, because of the noise level. The question does indeed ask that: \u201CWhat is the one major achievement in broadcasting he would most like to celebrate?\u201D. It is a primary question, so I would ask the Minister to start again, and share with us the one major achievement he would most like to celebrate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000531\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022603ae58e-47c4-46f9-bfc8-8355a48988ad\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220df6d12326d6441296cc6635d7e0e009\u0022\u003EHon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN\u003C/span\u003E: I guess, really, I would have to say that it is setting a clear direction for TVNZ, repealing the TVNZ charter\u2014the unworkable mandate that that organisation was left with by the previous Government\u2014and letting TVNZ get on and do what it does best.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000532\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d40dd65c6f7b45d0a80c9b5461fd6a91\u0022\u003EBrendon Burns\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Minister stand by his statement that \u201CWe have just been through a recession and New Zealanders would be expecting all public money to be accounted for and spent prudently\u201D; if so, what do we take from his belated judgment when he happily attended a $50,000 celebration hosted with taxpayers\u2019 money by NZ on Air?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000533\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a19542b9918c4f99afd2d1b4cc1d9a49\u0022\u003EHon Rodney Hide\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I am just wondering whether that question is in order, given the primary question. The question was about what the one thing would be that the Minister would like to celebrate, and then the member talked about the recession, and so on, and so forth. It does not follow.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000534\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a2f648b4f44e4dd4a7f7e3614a0a0f8f\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I think it is the kind of primary question that leaves wide range for supplementary questions. I think we are all familiar with that kind of primary question. The reference to the recession was in passing, and was getting on to the question about some function that the Minister attended.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000535\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022603ae58e-47c4-46f9-bfc8-8355a48988ad\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f82ae1d223374e4b98c1c8cb1ed69975\u0022\u003EHon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, I do; despite the impression that that member is trying to create, in what is really a thinly veiled personal attack, I was invited as the Minister of Broadcasting to deliver a speech and present an award at a function to celebrate 21 years of New Zealand music. Given a choice, most people would prefer to be at home with family in the evening, rather than at a work-related function, but I would not be doing my job if I did not turn up to give speeches and to present awards. At the function in question, I performed my ministerial duties, and left soon after. I point out that my attendance at this function where I was giving a speech and presenting an award could not be compared to Mr Burns\u2019 attendance at the opening of the Marque Hotel in Christchurch, where he turned up, ate a gourmet meal, drank a few glasses of wine, gave no speech, served no purpose, spoke to no one, and went home.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000536\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022598fa585d1f04bf69f0e4c7e3fc11124\u0022\u003EBrendon Burns\u003C/span\u003E: How many of the Minister\u2019s staff\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000537\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a84feb107f974d019dbf7f3b9a0e6ecf\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I apologise to the member. I ask the Government benches, on this occasion, please, for a little courtesy. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000538\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002238793a0d21684710ac0ea4a0a97c85e1\u0022\u003EBrendon Burns\u003C/span\u003E: How many of the Minister\u2019s staff and other National MPs also attended the NZ On Air party at the Powerstation, and what would the total cost have been, at $200 a head, for him and hangers-on to party at the taxpayer\u2019s expense? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000539\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022603ae58e-47c4-46f9-bfc8-8355a48988ad\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002236ec777ea014468096507bba44f1486e\u0022\u003EHon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN\u003C/span\u003E: As when the crowd opposite was in Government, when a Minister gives a speech they take a ministerial adviser with them, as I did on this occasion. I know there was one other National MP there, and she was entitled to be there. As a constituency MP, she had been invited, so the member can do the maths. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000540\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a0070d0ea40c42f39f63958de3835c20\u0022\u003EBrendon Burns\u003C/span\u003E: Will we see better judgment from the Minister and some vision for the future of broadcasting before the next lavish, taxpayer-funded function he attends, or after, or is he waiting for the right speech notes to arrive? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000541\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022603ae58e-47c4-46f9-bfc8-8355a48988ad\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229d5a6da814874c9f81792d24c959f033\u0022\u003EHon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN\u003C/span\u003E: If the member would like to talk about vision for broadcasting, I will say we are delivering on a vision for a dynamic sector where the public has enhanced access to a full range of local and international content, delivered across multiple platforms. We are giving public broadcasters certainty in terms of funding, and clear direction in terms of expectations. I note that under the previous Government there was a real culture of excess, which was built up over a long time. We are seeing the last remnants of it now, but we are squeezing it out. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000542\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a4fae71a862b4d5e8f623b4998265200\u0022\u003ERahui Katene\u003C/span\u003E: Would he like to celebrate the fulfilment of the Crown\u2019s Treaty and legal obligations to protect and promote M\u0101ori language through broadcasting, and is weakening the TVNZ charter the best way to achieve that? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000543\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022603ae58e-47c4-46f9-bfc8-8355a48988ad\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228796c6410a024f04b6477200b709c753\u0022\u003EHon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, why not? Send me the invitation and I will come along. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000544\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002245453d2cc88a4a6ba41b98ea0b48590c\u0022\u003ERahui Katene\u003C/span\u003E: Is the Minister aware that there are statutory and legal obligations on TVNZ as a result of the Privy Council\u2019s findings in the New Zealand M\u0101ori Council broadcasting case in 1993, and what is he doing to implement those obligations? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000545\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022603ae58e-47c4-46f9-bfc8-8355a48988ad\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ba2519032bb24c77a101c7b45e3bf6e8\u0022\u003EHon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN\u003C/span\u003E: As explained yesterday, we are fulfilling those obligations through NZ On Air and Te M\u0101ngai P\u0101ho, so there is plenty of money available for M\u0101ori broadcasting. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000546\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002258dc42ef48e046ef9af8d695b694d186\u0022\u003ERahui Katene\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I asked about TVNZ\u2019s obligations, not about NZ On Air or Te M\u0101ngai P\u0101ho. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000547\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c43fc4bdb2294da78ad15b65227bd47f\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: That is a fair point. I invite the member to repeat her question. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000548\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cd7ff98899614e2db5a730f021512fdb\u0022\u003ERahui Katene\u003C/span\u003E: Is he aware that there are statutory and legal obligations on TVNZ as a result of the Privy Council\u2019s findings in the New Zealand M\u0101ori Council broadcasting case in 1993, and what is he doing to implement those obligations? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000549\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022603ae58e-47c4-46f9-bfc8-8355a48988ad\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a817099297304e8e98080ab598622c1c\u0022\u003EHon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, and they are being honoured through the new statutory functions for TVNZ. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000550\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022eb37672a072e4c76a39195e73a9445b4\u0022\u003EWhaling\u2014Government Position\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022 data-id=\u00224967410be33a4ef6a227d418070a113c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000551\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003E11. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224967410be33a4ef6a227d418070a113c\u0022\u003EKEVIN HAGUE (Green)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Foreign Affairs: When he reportedly told Kevin Rudd that New Zealand would take a strong line opposing Japanese whaling this year in New Zealand\u2019s search and rescue zone, can he explain what he meant by a strong line?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022 data-id=\u0022b9e0c974929044289ff27eaf893efcc4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000552\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b9e0c974929044289ff27eaf893efcc4\u0022\u003EHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Attorney-General) \u003C/span\u003Eon behalf of the Minister of Foreign Affairs: A strong line means continuing to make firm public statements about New Zealand\u2019s position against whaling, and continuing diplomatic efforts to stop whaling. The meeting with Mr Rudd also provided an opportunity to hear Australia\u2019s views before New Zealand makes a decision about whether to join the proceedings against Japan in the International Court of Justice. Now that we have had those discussions, a decision on joinder or intervention will be made very soon. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000553\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c4429e536b594486969e48dc81c4402d\u0022\u003EKevin Hague\u003C/span\u003E: Will he be taking a strong line in response to the investigation by Maritime New Zealand that found that the Japanese whaling boat had primary responsibility for the collision with the Ady Gil? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000554\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220cd5988024dd4e8d91c586e890a9f753\u0022\u003EHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON\u003C/span\u003E: The Minister will emphasise what he and, indeed, Maritime New Zealand said: that this kind of activity in the Antarctic Ocean is very, very dangerous. He will be strongly warning both sides to avoid that kind of action. The Maritime New Zealand report attributed blame to both sides. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000555\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220133425c1ecb42de9494b7985168f84a\u0022\u003EKevin Hague\u003C/span\u003E: Can he confirm that his last answer essentially tells the House that he will be taking no real action against the Japanese in the light of Maritime New Zealand\u2019s findings?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000556\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f0844c92411a4f158d8f9b90a1c86aa8\u0022\u003EHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON\u003C/span\u003E: No, I cannot say that, at all. I made it clear on behalf of the Minister what his position would be, and I also outlined to the member that the Maritime New Zealand report attributed blame to both sides.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000557\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022651d2d5f108c45e3bd777e55c18a33df\u0022\u003EKevin Hague\u003C/span\u003E: Why does his strong line not include sending an offshore patrol vessel into the Southern Ocean this summer to monitor the Japanese whale slaughter? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000558\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223d52cbeb285f48b2a5b2856c3f35cd47\u0022\u003EHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON\u003C/span\u003E: No decision has been made about whether to send a vessel at this stage. The Southern Ocean is a very remote and inhospitable part of the environment, but the Government, certainly, will be calling on the masters of all vessels to make safety at sea a very high priority.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000559\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002254effcf31c5942078cd48f2d21f8d4aa\u0022\u003EKevin Hague\u003C/span\u003E: Given that he said on Q\u002BA this weekend that he had spoken to the Japanese Government and told it that New Zealanders would be \u201Cwatching what they do this year\u201D, how might they do this if he does not send a navy vessel to the Southern Ocean for this purpose?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000560\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221dd73ab2fc85482fb8779f993b24fed5\u0022\u003EHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON\u003C/span\u003E: I repeat what I said in my answer to the previous question: no decision has been made, and a number of factors will be taken into account in determining whether a vessel will be sent. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000561\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228351bea1168841789f2621271d65d183\u0022\u003EKevin Hague\u003C/span\u003E: Why has not his strong line so far included joining Australia\u2019s case at the International Court of Justice?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000562\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b96700eddd874bf58ae11c236f62f996\u0022\u003EHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON\u003C/span\u003E: As I said in my answer to the primary question, that issue is being very carefully considered now. The Minister is having discussions with the Attorney-General on the subject, and a decision about joinder or intervention\u2014there are a number of procedural paths\u2014will be made very soon.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000563\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229101451306b54e1483e7f47df860dcfd\u0022\u003EKevin Hague\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. My question asked why the Government had not done so to date.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000564\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022470d6e89a3584e7da5c4cdb9961291c4\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Because the member is running out of supplementary questions I will let him repeat his question, just to make sure the House has heard exactly what he asked.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000565\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225bada8bce1a94e1b91d12a0420feddab\u0022\u003EKevin Hague\u003C/span\u003E: It will be approximate. Why has his strong line not included joining Australia\u2019s case at the International Court of Justice before now?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000566\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022995eacd61f8246f190e8b02c6bd58af9\u0022\u003EHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON\u003C/span\u003E: As I said, no decision has been made at this stage because the Government is still making a decision about whether to join or to seek leave to intervene. As I said, there are two procedural paths. Weighing up all the matters and discussing the matter with the Australian Government have taken until this time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000567\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002281e8ca24-8b1d-4558-9ef9-c9418df2b3c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e2caa3dccc674c2e8932c370adc8209b\u0022\u003EKevin Hague\u003C/span\u003E: When he suggested that Japan could lower the targets size of its whale catch, what number of whales was he thinking was an acceptable number to kill this season?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000568\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a89016cd46064006b60c0b74e644040a\u0022\u003EHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON\u003C/span\u003E: No number is acceptable. The Government has always made its position clear. The Minister was proffering that as a possible solution to a problem.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000569\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00220f118f616c1641aead9c1e393ac4746e\u0022\u003EInternal Affairs, Department\u2014Proposed Merger with Office of Ethnic Affairs\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022 data-id=\u0022a6d3d0d563774cb8b7b4e8e456d39cf6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003E12. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a6d3d0d563774cb8b7b4e8e456d39cf6\u0022\u003EDr RAJEN PRASAD (Labour)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister for Ethnic Affairs: What will be the effects of the proposed relocation of the Office of Ethnic Affairs to tier three in the new structure for the Department of Internal Affairs on the services it currently provides to ethic communities?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002223de6bd3-0482-495d-88f4-7cc3f75d8442\u0022 data-id=\u0022b94295a6cd7e4b00b80699ac0d48b611\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000571\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002223de6bd3-0482-495d-88f4-7cc3f75d8442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b94295a6cd7e4b00b80699ac0d48b611\u0022\u003EHon NATHAN GUY (Minister of Internal Affairs)\u003C/span\u003E on behalf of the Acting Minister for Ethnic Affairs: The roles and functions of the Office of Ethnic Affairs will remain exactly the same as they are now.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000572\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022edfb90e66da94dae8a170480a6a8b4ba\u0022\u003EDr Rajen Prasad\u003C/span\u003E: Why is it, in his opinion, that staff and stakeholders expressed opposition to the downgrading of the office and were concerned that it may lessen access to the Minister and chief executive, as well as sending a negative message to stakeholders about its importance?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000573\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002223de6bd3-0482-495d-88f4-7cc3f75d8442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002261d02cb65b294e439852db061ec590de\u0022\u003EHon NATHAN GUY\u003C/span\u003E: The director\u2019s role is unchanged in a new policy, regulatory, and ethnic affairs branch of the Department of Internal Affairs. That member should not get hung up on tier levels. The Department of Internal Affairs\u2019 passport operation, for instance, the member might be pleased to know, employs 170 people in New Zealand and overseas, generates third-party revenues of more than $55 million, and is critically important to New Zealand\u2019s security, international access, and success. It is bigger than some stand-alone Government departments, and, indeed, is led by a third-tier manager.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000574\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002227cf527996264df488892e88c3d3f78b\u0022\u003EDr Rajen Prasad\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. My question was about the Office of Ethnic Affairs, and I asked the Minister to express his views on why stakeholders have expressed an opinion. He did not address that at all.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000575\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e971fdbb7fd141f0a3bdce3cf3796398\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: When members ask Ministers to express their views on something, there is no precise answer to that. I heard the Minister explain that the role of the director-general had not changed, and that that is one of the reasons\u2014he was expressing his view\u2014why people should not be concerned about the change. It was an absolutely fair answer to the question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000576\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225f09c6eddbef404e878848cd92e6f4b4\u0022\u003EDr Rajen Prasad\u003C/span\u003E: What is the Minister\u2019s response to the view of ethnic leaders\u2014for example, the Waitakere Indian Association\u2014that the relocation of the Office of Ethnic Affairs sends the wrong signals about the importance and functions of the office at a time when the New Zealand population is diversifying significantly, and, therefore, the need for its services is increasing?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000577\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002223de6bd3-0482-495d-88f4-7cc3f75d8442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227b47fd3acbef4d5da2c0ce79c5794a01\u0022\u003EHon NATHAN GUY\u003C/span\u003E: I thank those people who have made submissions through this process. That is an important part of hearing their concerns and any ideas that they have. I need to reassure the community that this will further strengthen the Office of Ethnic Affairs, and that member might be pleased to know that yesterday I was briefed by the director of the Office of Ethnic Affairs and I expect that to continue in the ongoing new working environment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000578\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f989b8cff6ef4acb8547b5a0fbcc2ae8\u0022\u003EDr Rajen Prasad\u003C/span\u003E: Will the Acting Minister of Ethnic Affairs in her new advocacy role for ethnic New Zealanders step in to protect the Office of Ethnic Affairs from being downgraded and marginalised; if not, why not?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000579\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002223de6bd3-0482-495d-88f4-7cc3f75d8442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229c305f316ced45ceb8ee9c85e1bc8788\u0022\u003EHon NATHAN GUY\u003C/span\u003E: I do not believe that it is being downgraded or marginalised.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000580\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225db0a23e-1579-44c6-9194-76e34cf5ae99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d0725f81aa464ada9aae9aa800fd7c0b\u0022\u003EDr Rajen Prasad\u003C/span\u003E: I seek leave to table a document from the website of the Department of Internal Affairs on the organisational structure of the department, where it expresses the views of those who submitted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000581\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002215ea0f53814347bd987e11669d510b08\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is no objection.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000582\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EDocument, by leave, laid on the Table of the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000583\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00227afc935bb81a40c8b0f33a061bd26a3e\u0022\u003EQuestions to Members\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000584\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022e68d29f4233c4538bf7c8500446c7487\u0022\u003EMarine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill\u2014Submissions\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c53e4642-d448-4d84-abfe-0443fe24aae9\u0022\u003E1. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b19b36e1d20d409089f1b50fdf611237\u0022\u003EHILARY CALVERT (ACT)\u003C/span\u003E to the Chairperson of the M\u0101ori Affairs Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022 data-id=\u002215c789e7292940be815aaa99fc0206e3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000586\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002215c789e7292940be815aaa99fc0206e3\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE (Chairperson of the M\u0101ori Affairs Committee):\u003C/span\u003E As of today, 1,109 submissions have been received.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000587\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c53e4642-d448-4d84-abfe-0443fe24aae9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221a208442e43546ef8c0d927fd4fd764b\u0022\u003EHilary Calvert\u003C/span\u003E: Is he aware that a number of people have been unable to send their submissions due to an apparent fault in the online submission process, and will he extend the closing date to allow people to get their submissions in?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000588\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227bfecbbc8fb54069882cf396a0e2e1e9\u0022\u003EMr SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Before the chair of the committee answers that, the first part of the question can be asked, but not the second part. The second part is a matter for the committee, but the chair is welcome to answer the first part of the question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000589\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002293cbe739047c4cec8c0ad5ace4a69d06\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE\u003C/span\u003E: It is not my responsibility; it is actually the responsibility of the Office of the Clerk. I am aware that the problems it is having are being looked after as we speak.\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=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022824e823d74a84fa68c8b1249b3f470d0\u0022\u003ELocal Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000591\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a5648304828f4ba6a900369b60d9a349\u0022\u003EThird Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000592\u0022\u003EDebate resumed.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022 data-id=\u002291cf3227864a4feaa0d6b37e7846ccde\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000593\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002291cf3227864a4feaa0d6b37e7846ccde\u0022\u003ECHRIS AUCHINVOLE (National\u2014West Coast - Tasman):\u003C/span\u003E Some concluding remarks were made when we started on the third reading, and I mentioned the contributions made by various members of the Opposition. I said that Shane Jones had given a good speech, but perhaps I should say that his speech was quite good, or, perhaps, goodish. When I listened to speakers on the other side of the House, I wondered whether we were talking about the same bill. Goodness me! It was as if we were introducing apocalypse three\u2014it is not as bad as that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000594\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003EI stand to speak in the third reading of the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill. It is all good, and I am excited that this bill is about to become law. I have not heard very many problems associated with it coming from councils or councillors. I must say that I wonder what sort of council and councillors the members on the Opposition side of the House have in their territories. I revere the good citizens of Tasman-Buller, the great district in Westland, who stand for their councils and do a thoroughly good job representing their people. They are quite capable of making choices; they are quite capable of making good decisions. Again, I say this is a good bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000595\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003EWe heard a lot about the dangers of giving councils the option of having water services conducted by private partners\u2014there is no compulsion for any council to do that. It is not a compulsory thing. If councils choose to, they can. That is why the bill has been put forward as it is. It ain\u2019t compulsory; it ain\u2019t complicated.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000596\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003EI am a bit surprised, again, that there has been scant reference from members opposite to smaller communities. Those members seem to have a huge preoccupation with Auckland, but there are other places in the country. I live in the small community of Moana, down in the West Coast, and residents each have their own private water supply. There is no centrally reticulated water system, so we have our own private water supplies. But after thinking about that further, and having been in conversation with some members of the Local Government and Environment Committee, it is astonishing that many small communities\u2014and I am sure Mr Jones is aware of this in his part of the country\u2014are dependent on privately provided infrastructure to keep themselves going. Those who visit our locality are amazed at the many local facilities that have been put in place by members of the community or working groups.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000597\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003EI want to turn to how the bill achieves what it sets out to do. It makes councils more accountable to their ratepayers by providing ratepayers with better information through a provision of a financial strategy, the pre-election report, plain English financial reporting, and the disclosure of infrastructure service information and performance measures. Standard performance measures will be in place for five key infrastructure activities: water supply, sewage treatment and the disposal of sewage, stormwater drainage, flood protection and control works, and the provision of roads and footpaths. This is a great package that will enable ratepayers to make comparisons of costs, funding arrangements, and service performance standards. Plain English financial reporting will mean that ratepayers can clearly understand the financial situation and dealings of councils, without it in any way being obscured. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000598\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003EThe bill requires that councils have particular regard to the contribution that specified core services make to their communities. In the debate this morning and late last night, some members could not come to a conclusion as to what those core services might be. Well, members of the public do not seem to have any trouble determining what the core services for a council should be. The bill requires that the council has particular regard\u2014it is a careful phrase: \u201Cparticular regard\u201D\u2014to the contribution that specified core services make to their communities. Those who suggest that the list of core services is rigid and restrictive must bear in mind that just because a council is required to have particular regard to each of the core services, it is not obliged to deliver those services and it is not obliged to do anything else. Again, there is no great deal of compulsion. Local authorities will be able to decide that certain services are not a priority in their community, or that those services are adequately provided for by other organisations. There is nothing preventing a local authority from deciding to provide a service that is not listed as a priority.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000599\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003EThe most contentious measure in this whole bill is probably the extended length of contracts for the operation and joint arrangements for the provision of water services, from 15 to 35 years. Private partners will be allowed to provide, and then own, new infrastructure for a period of up to 35 years, after which it will be transferred to the council. Opposition members have called this measure \u201Cprivatisation by stealth\u201D, but nothing could be further from the truth, because local government organisations will continue to be responsible for water quality and the provision and pricing of water services. Opposition members do themselves no credit by creating an alarming situation and scenario to describe their fears. Local government organisations will regain ownership of all infrastructure associated with water services on the expiry of the contract.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000600\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003EIn summary, this Government has listened to the concerns of the local government sector, has been well advised by it\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000601\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbc37df2-57ae-4536-94ed-a2e39eecd585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e7392d8b4fe64289b35e2b1473ff2b87\u0022\u003EPhil Twyford\u003C/span\u003E: Rubbish.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000602\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002288106969416d4b69a8f84bb8ebb4abcd\u0022\u003ECHRIS AUCHINVOLE\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014oh yes, it has\u2014and has acted accordingly. We have increased flexibility. We have increased transparency and accountability, which in turn improve engagement and consultation with communities. I feel sorry for those members on the other side of the House who wish this legislation did even more, but I am delighted to be part of a Government that is making such huge improvements to local government in New Zealand. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022 data-id=\u0022f72772d921cc49928542bcc0508a4e79\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000603\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f72772d921cc49928542bcc0508a4e79\u0022\u003EBRENDON BURNS (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central):\u003C/span\u003E The Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill represents blind ideology, and outdated ideology at that, which the rest of the world has in large part abandoned. It is based on an absolute belief that the market can, and will, get it right in privatising water supplies, and with sinister intent this bill also removes public health oversight of the management of public water supplies. It is not the first such move. It has been accompanied by several other similar efforts by this Government, and I note most particularly the Environment Canterbury bill that was passed under urgency, in 30 hours, in March of this year. It took away the role of councillors in the public oversight of the management of Canterbury\u2019s water. There has been overwhelming public submission on this bill, saying that New Zealanders do not want to see their councils putting water into private ownership by providing for a 35-year tenure, effectively a generation. If it looks like privatisation, if it smells like privatisation, then indeed it is privatisation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000604\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003ENew Zealanders know the risks of that. This morning I received an email from a woman known to me who 20 years ago was working in the United Kingdom. One of her tasks involved the clean-up, in a metaphorical sense, of the aftermath of the biggest water-poisoning incident ever seen in the UK, at a place called Camelford, under an organisation called South West Water, which was one of the first water boards privatised by the Thatcher Government. A contractor to that company accidentally dumped 20 tonnes of aluminium sulphate into the wrong tank. It led into the water supply of communities that fed off the supply from South West Water, and hundreds of people were made sick. But the interesting thing about this case was the cover-up. It took more than 20 years and a coronial inquiry before people were told the facts of what had happened. The reason for that was the Thatcher Government did not want to have this made public. It did not want any taint attached to the privatisation project it had under way for the water boards and schemes of Britain. The eventual result was simply that South West Water was prosecuted for the total sum of \u00A310,000. It was fined \u00A310,000 for an incident that caused hundreds of people to become sick. Some people suffered permanent injuries, due to aluminium poisoning. Although 148 people were able to bring a case and get some very modest compensation, they had to fight through the courts to get compensation for their ongoing health problems. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000605\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003EAs the email this morning said: \u201CHaving seen that and remembering what a terrible mistake it was,\u201D that woman hopes \u201Cit never happens in New Zealand.\u201D She said \u201CI see that the Government is saying it is not about privatisation, but about management.\u201D Yes, believe it, if you will. This is about the privatisation of our water supply, and it is part of a concerted effort by this Government, not involving just this particular bill. It extends, I believe, for instance, to a contract awarded 3 or 4 months ago by Tony Ryall as the Minister of Health. The contract for the oversight of our nation\u2019s drinking water is worth $2.25 million, and is a job that used to be one of the core functions of the Ministry of Health. It had a team of five or six water engineers, and other such experts, who were there as part of the core public function of ensuring our water was safe to drink. But they have gone; there is only one staff member. Instead we are paying $2.25 million worth of public money to a consortium that includes American engineering consortium Parsons Brinckerhoff, who are involved in water privatisation schemes all over the world. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000606\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003EThis is all very much part of the same approach\u2014that the market will deliver\u2014although the experience around the world has been that when it goes wrong, it goes absolutely, horribly wrong. It is rampant ideology at work. It is contracting out to the private sector what should be a core function of government. We can argue across this Parliament about what the core functions of government should be, and I would be happy to take part in that debate, but if members opposite want to argue that oversight of our drinking water is not a core function of the State, then I would like to know what the heck is a core function of the State. I believe that drinking water is a basic human right and it is essential infrastructure. It deserves to be in public ownership, overseen by officials who do not have any concerns other than making sure that water is safe to drink, that the supplies are up to scratch, and that targets do not have to be met in respect of providing returns to a private consortium. Yet here we have a bill paving the way for our water supplies to be put into 35-year ownership contracts. Those contracts will be put into private hands for a generation, a lifetime of private ownership. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000607\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003EAn example comes from Britain in respect of what happened under one of the first privatised contracts. Hundreds of people were poisoned by the misapplication of chemicals. It took people 20 years to get justice. I argue very strongly that if that incident had involved a publicly owned entity, there would have been answerability on that issue, one would hope, in a parliamentary democracy. Hundreds of people were made sick very, very quickly, and I hope that answerability have would have come, irrespective of which party was in power. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000608\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003EBut there are other examples outside of that example in Britain. The Local Government and Environment Committee, which considered this bill, heard a submission from the Canterbury District Health Board. It was the most explicit submission I think I have ever heard from public officials. They said to the Government that removing sections 125 to 129 from the Local Government Act 2002 effectively removes the regulations about water and sanitary services, and the oversight provided independently by the medical officer of health. So we have it happening on two levels. In the Canterbury District Health Board, the medical officer of health\u2019s role in terms of the oversight of the water schemes is obliterated by this bill. The private sector will be running and will be responsible for the monitoring and testing of the quality of the water that they are making their living from. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000609\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003ESo at the local level the oversight is gone. Meanwhile, at the head office of the Ministry of Health, the team that oversaw that has been decimated and replaced by a private consortium with the profit motive at the heart of it. Our chances of having anybody in public office being able to stand up and blow the whistle on schemes that are not working are gone, are obliterated by those double acts of the Government, both by this bill and by the non-announced move by the Minister of Health. The Press newspaper and I publicised recently that the contract had gone to Allen and Clarke in concert with eight other parties, including the American conglomerate Parsons Brinckerhoff. Here we have at two levels, nationally and locally, the oversight of the safety of our water going into private hands for 35 years. There will be no oversight. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000610\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003EI commend the Canterbury District Health Board officials for their bravery in putting forward their submission, on which we have not had a response from the Minister. I wonder why that is. I still invite members opposite in the time remaining\u2014Canterbury members in particular, or those like the chair of the Local Government and Environment Committee, whose electorate might be going into a district health board with Canterbury\u2014to stand up and take a call to defend the Government\u2019s overriding of the concerns of people with no agenda, with no axe to grind. Public health officials said in their submission to the committee that the role they have played in providing an oversight of drinking-water schemes will go with the passage of this bill, and that we are putting the oversight of water standards into private ownership. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000611\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002267aa5137-7503-4a8f-bde1-1811615598e2\u0022\u003EThe officials are extraordinarily explicit in saying that what this is doing is parallel to what happened in the community of Walkerton, Ontario in 2000 after a Government came in with a big agenda to sweep away the red tape and regulations that were strangling the Ontario economy. And what happened? Walkerton went into a scheme without any oversight from public health officials, and seven people died and about 100 people were made seriously sick. The cost to that community and to Ontario was estimated at $200 million. In fact, in total, 2,500 people got sick from the outbreak of E. coli that happened in that community. That is a forerunner of the risks this Government is taking not only with putting our water supply into private ownership for 35 years, with the potential for councils to pick that up, which they will, but also with the fact that we are taking away health oversight. I say that this Government is taking an extraordinary risk with public health for reasons of blind ideology. It does not make sense. New Zealand will end up paying a very high price for the pernicious legislation that this Government has put in front of us today.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022 data-id=\u0022b927b92216cd4c3e8884c9286c54b96c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000612\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b927b92216cd4c3e8884c9286c54b96c\u0022\u003ESUE KEDGLEY (Green):\u003C/span\u003E Roger Kerr of the Business Roundtable will be listening with enormous satisfaction to this debate today. For 20 years he and the Business Roundtable have been lobbying to privatise our water supplies, and the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill is the prize, the culmination, of 20 years of intensive lobbying. In fact, with this bill Mr Kerr and the Business Roundtable have achieved their wildest dreams. This bill, once it is passed, will allow foreign-owned multinational corporations to own our water assets for 35 years. The bill also lets them get their hands on any other strategic assets without having to consult local people, because the bill takes away the requirement for councils to consult before they sell strategic assets. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000613\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EBest of all for the bill\u2019s supporters is a little clause that was sneaked in after Local Government New Zealand and others had made their submissions. I am referring to a provision whereby councils can sell any water infrastructure if they believe that the sale is desirable for the success of the joint arrangement. Members of National and ACT have been trying desperately to deny that this bill will allow water privatisation, but that clause, which was sneaked in at the last minute, says unequivocally that any council will be able to sell any water service if it believes that the sale is desirable for the success of the joint arrangement. That is water privatisation by any other name. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000614\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EOne can only speculate on the intense lobbying that must have gone on in secret by the powerful vested interests\u2014the major water companies, Roger Kerr, and the Business Roundtable\u2014to get this bill passed. I think it would be very much in the public interest if the public were to have an answer to the question of whether the Business Roundtable and global water corporations made large financial contributions to the ACT Party and the National Party. Perhaps one of the next speakers from National could answer that question. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000615\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EThere has been a big debate recently in New Zealand about our opposition to foreign ownership of land, but what will New Zealanders think when they realise that once this bill is passed, in an hour or so, our water supplies, which have been built up over generations by ratepayers, can now be sold to any of the huge, private, multinational corporations, which, I might add, are literally scouring the world, looking for water supplies to take over? They have worked out that as water is becoming increasingly scarce, they want to take advantage of water shortages\u2014it is, of course, a natural monopoly\u2014by buying up water supplies around the planet. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000616\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EOnce a water corporation takes over a water supply, as corporations will now be able to do in New Zealand, its goal will not be to protect the public interest or to ensure that everyone has access to safe and clean water. Its goal will be very explicit\u2014to maximise the profits for its shareholders. It does this in three ways. It is almost a formula; these corporations do it all around the world. The first thing they do is sack most of the staff that run the water services. Secondly, they charge more for water so the price of water soars and becomes unaffordable for many people, who then have their water cut off because they cannot pay their water bill. The third thing they do is run the water infrastructure down. They do not bother to fix the leaks or to invest in the infrastructure. Instead, they siphon off the profits to shareholders. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000617\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EI will use England as a bit of a case study, although I could give examples from all around the world. When the water industry there was privatised, the corporations immediately fired 25 percent of the workforce, increased the price of water by 50 percent in the first 4 years, and slashed their investment programmes. They used the savings to increase the dividend and pay huge salaries to the management and directors of the water companies. While customers faced continual price hikes and the number of people having their water supply cut off tripled, company profits soared by 142 percent in the first 8 years. That is what will happen in New Zealand if any local community has its local water supply taken over by a private water company. I was about to say \u201Cif the local community allows it to happen\u201D, but, of course, it will not be up to the local community any more, because under this legislation the local council will be able to flog off a water supply without having to consult the locals. The locals need not even know about it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000618\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EOne of the problems is that once these corporations own or manage a water supply for 35 years, or if they sell it under the provisions I was just reading out, locals and their representatives will have virtually no say over water supplies for the next generation. The contracts that the local council will enter into will be secret. They will be commercial-in-confidence, so ratepayers will be completely in the dark about what the provisions are and about any deal that has been struck between the council and the water company. Many contracts have guaranteed rates of return for the water company regardless of its performance. Chile, for example, had to guarantee a profit margin of 33 percent to Suez as a condition. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000619\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EAnother thing is that once these contracts have been signed, one is locked into them. It is very difficult to get out of them, even if over 35 years circumstances change radically, or if a company happens to go bankrupt. What happens then? It is hardly surprising to learn that water privatisation has a terrible track record around the world. There is a huge and growing backlash against water privatisation. Literally all around the world, communities are fighting back against the water privatisation of the 1990s. It happened in many parts of the world, particularly in Latin America, aided and abetted by the World Bank. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000620\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EMore and more councils and Governments are trying to get out of contracts they entered into with private corporations. France used to be known as the home of water privatisation, but more than 40 towns and cities have taken their water services back into public hands. Paris took back its water service amidst huge controversy earlier this year, and other countries in Latin America are doing the same. It will be ironic if it happens here, just as around the world water companies are being thrown out by grassroots opposition because communities have woken up and understood what happens when they allow water, a precious resource, one of the life support systems of the planet, to be handed over to private corporations who will decide whether to turn off the tap if someone cannot afford it. And, of course, it is not in the companies\u2019 interests to worry about water quality and so forth. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000621\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EAround the world, even across the Tasman, private water companies are being booted out. Adelaide has decided not to renew the 15-year contract that Veolia Water had to run their water services. Now Veolia Water and all the other private multinational corporations can pack up their bags and come to New Zealand, because they have achieved their wildest objectives with the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill. Councils can now not only contract out water for 35 years but they do not need to alert or consult the public, and the sinister little clause that National members have failed to mention enables any council to sell its local water supplies to any private water company if the council considers that to be desirable for the success of a joint arrangement. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000622\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003EWe have opened our doors to water privatisation. We have gutted consultation not just for the sale of water but for the sale of any strategic asset. This bill is the implementation of Rogernomics part 2, which is the corporatisation and privatisation of local government in New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022 data-id=\u00222cfe983b16a54c3f90a8893f80d8c3ef\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000623\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222cfe983b16a54c3f90a8893f80d8c3ef\u0022\u003EDr CAM CALDER (National):\u003C/span\u003E I am amazed at the alarmism, extremism, and scaremongering that we have heard in the House today. The Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill is a simple bill to improve transparency, accountability, and financial management. It is a bill on behalf of ratepayers the length and breadth of this country. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000624\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022\u003EIts provisions are intended to operate on two levels. First, at a strategic level, the bill aims to change the way that local authorities set their direction and the way this direction can be influenced and assessed by the community. It is directed at communities having more knowledge of what is going on. How does the bill aim to achieve this? It reinforces the need for local authorities to focus on core services. We have already heard that the Wellington City Council approves of this. It is a guideline; it is not didactic. Effectively, local councils can focus on core services, and they will learn what those core services are from their communities. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000625\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022\u003EThe bill talks about introducing a pre-election report. Why does it do this? It is to encourage an informed election debate. People can elect the officials who will represent them on the basis of being informed and knowing well what each person stands for, how they perform, and how the council has performed in the preceding 3 years. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022\u003EThe bill introduces a financial strategy to the long-term plan in order to help local authorities and their communities debate and resolve the key financial and service delivery trade-offs that local authorities must make. It integrates community outcomes and long-term planning processes to encourage better prioritisation of community aspirations. Once again, it is all to do with what the community wants. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000627\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022\u003EThe legislation focuses community outcomes on the role that a local authority intends to play in its district or region. Of course, it improves the financial and non-financial information in long-term plans by making it more accessible, more useful, and more comprehensible to most of us. Most of us do not have an accounting degree; we want to make this information easy to understand. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000628\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022\u003EAt an operational level, the bill aims to simplify decision-making processes. We want to do this because we heard from many councils that they were required to consult at so many steps that they were getting consultation fatigue. The bill removes unnecessary auditing by taking a number of operational policies out of the long-term plan. It removes unnecessary consultation, as we have said, and levels the playing field to better enable the private sector to deliver local authority services where that is required by the local authority. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000629\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022\u003EPeople have had a few concerns about consultation. I will address some of these concerns. The Local Government Act 2002 contains many provisions to ensure and enable community engagement and consultation in local authority decision-making. This bill proposes amendments to remove some of the more prescriptive ones, and we have heard from the other side of the House that that proposal has had a certain amount of acceptance from the Opposition. I am pleased to hear that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022\u003EThe bill proposes to remove some of the more prescriptive consultation requirements, but we acknowledge and underline the fact that consultation is still required. Where is this consultation required? Section 78 of the Local Government Act 2002 requires a local authority to give consideration to the views of interested or affected parties when making a decision. Section 97 requires that any decision that would significantly alter the level of service provided for a significant activity, or that would transfer ownership or control of a strategic asset, be included in the long-term council community plan, which itself requires an involved community consultation. So we can put that concern to one side. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000631\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228cf0fb6b-0b8f-4327-983d-73e1166c220e\u0022\u003ECore services are another area that we have had a lot of debate about. Clause 5 of the bill introduces a list of core services. It says that local authorities must have a particular regard to the contribution of these services to their communities. Many submitters noted that the list is unduly rigid or restrictive, and pointed out that what is considered a core service in one area is not considered a core service in another. We understand that. Clause 5 does not prevent a local authority from providing services not listed if it deems them a priority for its local community. The ability of the local authority to decide which services to provide for the community is preserved. The clause may be seen as providing a reference point and focus for community debate. I commend this bill to the House. Thank you very much.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022 data-id=\u00224d2e557726f5431ba630d7a92f7a8df2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000632\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224d2e557726f5431ba630d7a92f7a8df2\u0022\u003EDAVID SHEARER (Labour\u2014Mt Albert):\u003C/span\u003E The Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill is really a piece of ACT ideology that the National Government has decided to go along with. I do not even know whether the National Government really understands, or has contemplated, what is in this bill and how it will play out in the years to come. We have known that for many, many years Rodney Hide has talked about the need to reform local government so that corporate and private interests have a much bigger say. That is what this legislation does, and the National Government is going along with it, probably because of some agreement for supply whereby the National Government needs the ACT Party\u2019s support in order to progress its other agendas. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000633\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003EThis bill has gone through under urgency. Almost every piece of legislation that Rodney Hide has brought to the House has gone through under urgency. Members sat in the House until midnight last night for the second reading of this bill, and we have been debating it all day today. Two of the three bills amending Auckland\u2019s local government structure also went through urgency. The first famously had Opposition members sitting almost right through the weekend in order to oppose it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000634\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003EMany of my colleagues on the other side of the House have said that this is really about listening to the people out there and giving ratepayers a better say, and that in fact that is one of the intentions of the bill. But when one looks at the public response, one finds that there were 414 submissions to the Local Government and Environment Committee. In Auckland, on one occasion that I attended, many of the Auckland councils came and presented their evidence to the select committee. There 360 submissions against the legislation, and of those 36 were from councils. This is not simply a case of mums and dads sitting down and talking to the select committee\u2014although those people are also welcome\u2014it was councils that have been elected by ratepayers, saying that this legislation is a backward step. On the water privatisation part of this legislation, we had 414 submissions. There were 360 submissions against it\u2014360 submissions\u2014and 17 submissions in favour. Members can do the maths. About 5 percent spoke in favour, and an overwhelming number spoke out against it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000635\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003EThis measure is not wanted by New Zealand. It is not wanted by the councils that represent the local people around New Zealand. In the local body elections, people spoke out and said that they do not want this. In Auckland people voted overwhelmingly for a mayor and councillors who would be in opposition to this sort of legislation. We are lucky that we have them. We are lucky that those people are there to stand up to what amounts to ideological claptrap that this Government is bringing into the House. Not only is this legislation ideological but also a lot of it is actually unnecessary. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000636\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003ECam Calder talked about the pre-election report that this legislation wants to have. We had varying degrees of submissions on this, but overwhelmingly submitters were against it. Some of them said that they could go along with it. But what do they really say? Well, most of the big councils said that they could do this, as they are already reporting back in a number of other ways to people. They make themselves accountable in a number of other ways, but they say they can also do this. The smaller councils said that they can do this pre-election report, but it will cost them, because they will have to employ more people to write it. In fact, this requirement will increase the administrative burden on many of the small councils. A number of the larger councils came along and showed us the reports that they already give. The local authority in the Waikato area puts out a report that is very easy to read. It is already doing what this legislation is asking for. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000637\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003EThis legislation is unnecessary. It is taking the \u201Clocal\u201D out of local government and it is making sure that the Government is standardising, pushing from the top down, and making local government authorities, which are already representative of their local populations, more subject to central control. That goes for core services. This bill stipulates the core services. In fact, many of the local bodies that came before us said that this is not appropriate for them, because they do a lot of other different things. They want to be a lot more flexible towards their ratepayers. This bill makes them more straitjacketed than they will have been before. This bill also says that it wants to increase transparency. It says that it wants to simplify many of the consultative procedures. That is code for removing some of the safeguards that are already in place in the Local Government Act 2002 as it stands at the moment. There is a need to do some streamlining, and a number of the people who came to us said that. This bill removes the obligation to consult on key projects. These include the possible privatisation of water. Some of the core services\u2014for example, transport\u2014could be moved into an agency, which would change their whole accountability back to the council. That can happen. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000638\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003EThe part that I think is most odious in this legislation is the privatisation of water\u2014or the \u201Cprivatisation\u201D of water, because the bill basically pushes out the contracts from 15 years to 35 years, which could be half the lifetime of anybody in New Zealand\u2014on the basis of no evidence that it will make water quality better, increase water availability, or make water pricing any cheaper. There is no evidence for that, at all. We have heard copious amounts of evidence today in this House from my colleague Brendon Burns and from Sue Kedgley to show that water privatisation, which is in this part of the legislation, has been shambolic around the world\u2014shambolic. It has cost more, the water is of poorer quality, it has led to disease and public health risks, and water is less available for the people who need it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000639\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003EWhat does that add up to? If we take away the requirement for consultation on key projects such as water and water quality, and if we up the ability for the contracts to be put in place from 15 years to 35 years, then we have a recipe for the non-transparent, non-consultative, non-accountable privatisation of the core assets that the people out there demand and need. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000640\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003EOne of the key aspects of this legislation as reported by the Government\u2014or certainly by the ACT Party; it is by Rodney Hide, the Minister of Local Government\u2014is that somehow this measure will save on costs. But the really interesting thing about costs is that if we look at the costs and at the way that rates have, in theory, been going up over time, we see that rates have actually been staying pretty much level with the level of GDP. As GDP has gone up, the expenditure in local government has kept track, at about 3 percent of GDP. It is not actually true that these prices have been going up. But the Minister is making the case, wrongly, that somehow these cost rises are a function of all the non-core services\u2014as he calls them\u2014in this bill. Well, the fact is that the biggest amount of money spent by any council or local body is spent on the core services. Of all the money spent by local government, 97 percent of it is spent on the core services that are in this bill, yet this legislation aims to remove cost increases on non-core services. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000641\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003EThere is a lack of analysis and a lack of a plan. It is unnecessary legislation. It is ideological legislation, which has been brought into this House to further the ideological pathway of the ACT Party inside the National Government. It is a complete travesty of a bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220fc05f1c-47b0-4fb0-8298-2f347adae4e3\u0022 data-id=\u0022ab3cb55327e64f6b949421b81b08df21\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000642\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220fc05f1c-47b0-4fb0-8298-2f347adae4e3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ab3cb55327e64f6b949421b81b08df21\u0022\u003EHon Sir ROGER DOUGLAS (ACT):\u003C/span\u003E I will be relatively brief. The Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill is, in essence, a relatively simple bill. If one reads the bill, one finds it is clear that the Opposition\u2014particularly the Greens, but also the Labour Party\u2014is making a mountain out of a molehill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000643\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220fc05f1c-47b0-4fb0-8298-2f347adae4e3\u0022\u003EThe attitude of the Labour Party and the Greens to water is simply crazy, or mad, if you like. They have no interest in the question of the quality of water. Water quality is not at the heart of their opposition; at the heart of their opposition is the question of ownership. They say that it must be owned by the public. Public ownership is of the essence, irrespective of water quality. The goal for the Greens and the Labour Party is for water to be provided only by public institutions, when the goal should be to provide quality water at a reasonable price. Frankly, provided that the goal is reached of having high-quality water at a reasonable price, then we should not be too concerned about whether the water is provided under public ownership, community ownership, or private ownership. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000644\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220fc05f1c-47b0-4fb0-8298-2f347adae4e3\u0022\u003EI end by saying that over the last weekend I spent some time reading Tony Blair\u2019s book. I recommend it to the Labour members. In the first 100 pages he raises the trials and tribulations he had in bringing a lot of his party members into the 20th century. Some of the things he describes remind me of the New Zealand Labour Party today.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022 data-id=\u00225b8ecba5a17448cda964dc4da15ac1d2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000645\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225b8ecba5a17448cda964dc4da15ac1d2\u0022\u003ERAHUI KATENE (M\u0101ori Party\u2014Te Tai Tonga):\u003C/span\u003E It gives me no pleasure at all to rise to speak on the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill today. In fact, it literally gives me a pain. This bill, if it is simple, as the previous speaker, the Hon Sir Roger Douglas, described it, must have been conceived by a very simple person. The Minister who brought it to the House has a simple philosophy, and it is one of no representation, no consultation, and no tangata whenua involvement. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000646\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003EThe M\u0101ori Party put our minority view into the report of the Local Government and Environment Committee on the bill, and when my colleague Te Ururoa Flavell spoke in the previous reading last night he talked about my report. It points out that some key areas in regard to the Act that this bill amends must be addressed, but none more so than that of tangata whenua participation at the local government level. It is well established that at the local government level tangata whenua have been unfairly, inequitably, and disproportionately under-represented across elected councils and boards, and this bill makes that worse. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000647\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003EIn fact, when I stood to speak on another bill earlier this week\u2014the Aquaculture Legislation Amendment Bill (No 3)\u2014I alluded to the fact that the provisions in the aquaculture settlement were unable to be carried out because of under-resourcing and other things that local authorities could not do. As a result of that speech I received an email from a local councillor in the Bay of Plenty who said the work had already been done on the aquaculture settlement in terms of the allocations there, and who pointed out that this may have been because there are so many M\u0101ori on the local council. We can see from this that when M\u0101ori are on the local council, things actually work. Things happen; things move along. If we do not have tangata whenua there, and if we do not consult tangata whenua, then things will slow down very much. This is a very bad bill in that it takes away even more from the need to consult tangata whenua. In fact, this Government does not want tangata whenua to be dealt with at all. As I say, this is a simple philosophy from a very simple Minister. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000648\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003EIt is of real note that in the annual review of race relations issued by the Human Rights Commission in March 2010, the need for M\u0101ori representation in local government and an effective voice for M\u0101ori in the decisions of the new Auckland Council are identified as one of the top 10 race relations priorities. I think this is something that is not given enough air time. By taking away representation and consultation with tangata whenua, we are actually creating a rod for our own backs in the area of race relations. This House needs to take the lead in creating good race relations here in this country, and this bill does not go in the right way. It definitely goes in the wrong way. It is something that everybody is concerned about except, unfortunately, for the National Government, which is led by the ACT Party and this simple Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000649\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228f2223aa76964746bf959788d01b9b37\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Led by the nose by the ACT Party.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000650\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002230fe60ad38e848ea9c08e096d6644eaf\u0022\u003ERAHUI KATENE\u003C/span\u003E: The member has got that right. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000651\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003EWe have real concerns about the provisions for water. It is really a problem that things are sneaked in by stealth, as they were. Throughout our select committee deliberations the National and ACT members tried to make it clear that things would not change and that this legislation was not about water privatisation, but then, suddenly, here it is. The evidence is right there in front of us that this legislation is about privatisation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000652\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228ee418ca5cc04bff87154f8ae76d91db\u0022\u003EChris Auchinvole\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, Rahui, I\u2019m shocked. This is so unlike you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000653\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229abbf5ffcfa34884a50a71d90f02cfc9\u0022\u003ERAHUI KATENE\u003C/span\u003E: I am sorry that the chair of the select committee is not able to see that that is what this legislation is about, but that is the fact of the matter. It is about privatisation. Given the fact that the privatisation of water has not worked anywhere else in the world, why on earth are we taking that route? Why is New Zealand not taking the route of seeing what is going on and picking up the best of what is happening in the world, instead of picking up the worst of what is happening in the rest of the world? We do not want to be a leader in the water privatisation area, so let us hold back and learn the lessons that have been learnt elsewhere. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000654\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003EWe have real problems with this bill. We will be voting against it, and I really hope that this simple Minister will stop now with his simple philosophy of trying to get rid of tangata whenua.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022 data-id=\u0022d52a3e24304e4babae271cacc6a0f82c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000655\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d52a3e24304e4babae271cacc6a0f82c\u0022\u003ELOUISE UPSTON (National\u2014Taup\u014D):\u003C/span\u003E It is a delight to be able to speak in the final reading of the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill. Despite the discussions that have taken place in the House today, our Local Government and Environment Committee has worked together very well on this bill. Obviously we do not agree on everything, but I do want to correct some of the misleading statements that have been made in the course of this debate. Chris Auchinvole always chairs this select committee in a fine, sound way, and this is yet another example of a Government bill that we are pleased and proud to bring to a conclusion. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000656\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003EI want to come back to a couple of points and remind the House that this bill is about increasing transparency and allowing local government to be more accountable. However, I stress that this is about keeping local decisions in local government because that is what builds strong communities. I wanted to touch on a couple of key areas as a way of summarising. The first is around core services. I was fairly staggered to hear a previous Labour speaker talk about the fact that 97 percent of council spending is on core services. That is not the message I have had from the three district councils in the Taup\u014D electorate at all. Local councils like the ability that they will have to respond to their constituents, to the people who live in their communities, and to make decisions based on priorities that suit them. That is obviously once they have taken into account core services\u2014obviously, sewerage and roading, as a couple of examples. Councils are not restricted just to these core activities, but they will create a sense of priority in relation to the activities defined in the bill as core. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000657\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003EI will now move to financial management. There was general agreement from submitters in relation to the fact that it makes sense that a local council should be able to be more transparent in terms of how the council is funded, and to have some more consistency around financial management. We have heard about the defined fiscal envelope. That allows a council to make a decision about what its own constraints are. From some of the speeches we have heard, people listening might think that this is a central government imposition of constraint, but it is not at all. It is a set of boundaries that each council puts around its own spending. This is really important to the constituents of the Taup\u014D electorate. I am sure there are councils up and down the country that are concerned about further increases in their rates when their incomes are not growing accordingly. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000658\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003EI think that the pre-election report is a really important and valuable addition to local government. We were fortunate to have some examples of some of the reporting that local government provides. One example was from the South Waikato District Council in the Taup\u014D electorate. It presents plain English information about how the council is doing, and in a format that the majority of voters are able to understand. I think that is a really important part of it. Yes, there are annual plans; yes, there is the long-term council plan; yes, there is the annual report. Some of the information currently in those is pretty highbrow. I do not think one should have to have an accounting degree to understand the books of the community in which one lives and pays rates. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000659\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003EOne of the important changes that we made in the select committee process recognised that councils come in different sizes and shapes, and therefore have different abilities. We removed some of the requirements for councils with populations of fewer than 20,000 people to do it. Performance measures are one area in particular that I am very proud of, having worked in a city council when performance measures were put in place. This basically allows for councils up and down the country to have the same measures, so that ratepayers can compare how their council is doing. There was a bit of a hue and cry, and one would have thought that the sky was falling in, based on the Opposition\u2019s comments in terms of how hard this will be. But if we look at some of the Department of Internal Affairs existing reports, we see that some of this information is available and the focus really will be on indicators that are relevant to the public, and that they can see are of value in assessing how their own council is doing. They pay rates, so I think it is fair enough that they have the ability to see how their council is performing and how that money is being spent. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000660\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003EThe final point that I bring to the House\u2019s attention is the issue around water assets. This issue comes back to the point I made about the fact that we on this side of the House recognise that local authorities come in different shapes and sizes\u2014so do their demographics, and so do their geographics. Therefore the decisions around infrastructure for things like water are very, very different from one district council to the next. We recognise that, and in this bill we have allowed the flexibility so that if a council chooses\u2014and I say the word \u201Cchooses\u201D again\u2014to contract out water services, it now has the ability to do that for 35 years. The focus again is on a council managing its infrastructure planning, managing its asset plans, managing the debt that might go on to ratepayers, and having the flexibility to deal with its infrastructure commitments in a way that suits it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000661\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003EThis is not privatisation\u2014it is not privatisation. On this side of the House we do not think that the private sector is a big, bad, ugly monster. We actually think it does some things well, and through this legislation we are allowing it to do a bit more if the council chooses\u2014if the council chooses. Local government is a democracy; it is only if the council chooses. It is not privatisation. Contracting out provides better and more flexible ways for councils to manage assets, if they want to. Councils being able to choose 35 years will allow them to better plan over the longer term for capital projects, and is in line with the Land Transport Act. So there is some consistency in what we are doing with this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000662\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003EI am very proud to support the final reading of this fantastic legislation by our very able Minister of Local Government, Rodney Hide. I am very excited about supporting this bill. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022 data-id=\u0022277337c846594d8ea54a0cc3aeaf843d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000663\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022277337c846594d8ea54a0cc3aeaf843d\u0022\u003ESU\u2019A WILLIAM SIO (Labour\u2014M\u0101ngere):\u003C/span\u003E As the last speaker for the Opposition on the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000664\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d2f4021a06d34d20935f48612ecb956a\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: But the best.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000665\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225d70bd61ec754e91a9a5e79a526daa33\u0022\u003ESU\u2019A WILLIAM SIO\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the member. I will use up my full time, unlike the Government member Louise Upston, who did not use up her full time. I will tell members why. I acknowledge the members of the Opposition, both Labour and Green. They have fought tooth and nail to hold the line for democracy for New Zealand, right through to midnight last night and early this morning, including taking a bit of democracy out to the Mana electorate, where Kris Fa\u2019afoi is campaigning on our behalf. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000666\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022\u003EThe Government has argued that this bill is about keeping local decisions local. That is what the Government has argued. It has also\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000667\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d034bebd067448e0bf4e0256bc57d578\u0022\u003EMr DEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The member is in full flight here. I would like to hear what he has to say.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000668\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002296f1197edae94fe889cb2e10bacfc0d4\u0022\u003ESU\u2019A WILLIAM SIO\u003C/span\u003E: I was in full flight; my wings were about to expand. The Government has argued that this bill is about keeping local decisions local. That actually means keeping local government decisions away from the ratepayers. That is what it is about. The Government argues that it is about keeping local decisions local, but we are saying that, as we understand this bill, it is actually about keeping local government decision-making away from the ratepayers, who pay for local government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000669\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022\u003EThe Government has also argued throughout this debate that the bill is about transparency and accountability. I will reflect to members and repeat, perhaps, what many other speakers have said in this House. In so far as the Opposition is concerned, this bill does not provide one iota of transparency or accountability. The bill ushers in a sad day for local democracy\u2014a sad day for local democracy. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000670\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022\u003EThe public who have been observing these debates will no doubt be asking why such important legislation as this bill is being rammed through the House in urgency, as the Government is now doing. Organisations such as Grey Power, and the ratepayers and residents associations right throughout this country are asking that question. I suspect that many will come to the conclusion that it is by Government design. It is deliberate. It is intentional, to undermine not only the Opposition\u2019s ability to respond, but also, more important, the ability of the wider New Zealand public to react and respond defiantly. That is why it is important that I acknowledge all my Opposition colleagues for holding the line of democracy throughout this debate, and for fighting tooth and nail to hold this lot here accountable. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000671\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022\u003EI have a feeling that many who are listening to these debates will come to the same conclusion that my colleagues and I have reached: that despite the eloquent rhetoric of Government members, despite their use of certain key words such as \u201Caccountability\u201D and \u201Ctransparency\u201D, this bill does exactly the opposite. The behaviour and language of this Government has been designed to lull the New Zealand public into accepting something they would normally not accept, in the same way that a snake uses hypnotism to lull its prey before making the final and fatal strike. That is what this Government has done. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000672\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022\u003EI will point out why I believe this and why I think so. The first thing is the water assets. These are important assets right throughout this country. The reference to water assets was hidden in the bill. This Government did not want the public to see what was in its design. Rodney Hide is allowing private companies to own the water infrastructure of councils for up to 35 years. It is privatisation, in spite of Government denials\u2014it is privatisation. By giving over a valuable asset that generates an income stream that the ratepayers pay for, we are giving this valuable source of income to the private sector, no doubt to a select few\u2014perhaps friends of Tau Henare, the millionaire from Te Atat\u016B, as some might say\u2014simply so that they can have that ongoing source of income. Who pays for that? It will be the ratepayers. What happens to the asset at the end of 35 years? No one knows. It has been my experience that the private sector generally squeezes every profit out of an asset and leaves it to rot. There is no maintenance. Who will have to pick up the maintenance of that particular asset after 35 years, with no one looking after its ongoing welfare? It will be the ratepayers. It will be the ratepayers right through this country. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000673\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022\u003EThe Government denies that it is privatisation, but that is nonsense. How many years would a dam have to be in private ownership before the Government called it privatisation? Fifty years? One hundred years? This bill allows private business to own water infrastructure for 35 years. That is a step too far for an activity that is, by the Minister\u2019s own admission, a core service of local government. Rodney Hide has already admitted to the New Zealand Herald that he favoured the privatisation of council services. Changes brought about in the bill clearly show that that is in fact the Government\u2019s agenda. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000674\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022\u003EACT\u2019s policy is clear: it wants to see local government services, including roads and pipe water, run on a fully commercial basis. But National does not have the courage to be up front with New Zealanders. National MPs have spent the last few months arguing at the Local Government and Environment Committee that the bill\u2019s long-term contracts for water are not privatisation and that shifting services to a council-owned company is not corporatisation. When the public sees the goings-on by this Government, they view it as being deceptive politics to say one thing when doing something else, and to also believe in doing something, but handing it over to that \u201C1 Percent Party\u201D to conduct affairs on its behalf. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000675\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022\u003ECommunity consultation is a significant part that now changes. Instead of the wider community, the ratepayers and citizens of this country, being able to participate in the ongoing discussion of issues from the beginning to the end outcome of whatever the issue maybe, this bill now says that the local authority has the right to determine whether a citizen can participate in that process. At one point in time, I used to be the chair of the council\u2019s annual plan committee throughout Manukau City. As somebody who values community participation, I took that committee to every corner of that electorate. I witnessed with my own eyes many National Party members and supporters in Botany and Pakuranga who took the time and valued being able to participate in the consultative community process. I say to every ratepayer and resident who is a member of the National Party that they will no longer have the right to participate in that consultation process. That right has been taken away from them by this bill and given to a select few on the local authority\u2014it could be the chief executive officer. That is significant in terms of the gutting of local democracy, and that is what this bill does. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000676\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b398827c-6bf5-403e-90dc-ff03205302a5\u0022\u003EFinally, community outcomes have now been removed from the residents, ratepayers, and citizens of this country. It has now been given to the local authority to determine what outcomes the community ought to receive. That is arrogance and it is extreme, and that has been displayed by this Government throughout this debate. I say again: this bill overwhelmingly is about keeping decision making away from ratepayers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c0f78f60-c2fd-46f4-8138-72f39692fc20\u0022 data-id=\u0022abd781bef0614126b1af9a6d39f44e06\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000677\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c0f78f60-c2fd-46f4-8138-72f39692fc20\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022abd781bef0614126b1af9a6d39f44e06\u0022\u003ETODD McCLAY (National\u2014Rotorua):\u003C/span\u003E The previous speaker, Su\u2019a William Sio, wasted his time towards the end of his speech by offering advice to members of the National Party who are residents or ratepayers about what is or is not happening to them. If he had suggested that advice to them at the beginning of his speech the four people listening may have been able to hear him, but I fear they were fast asleep when he got to the end of his 10 minutes. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000678\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c0f78f60-c2fd-46f4-8138-72f39692fc20\u0022\u003EIt is a pleasure to rise and speak on the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill. It is a pleasure because good local government is essential for our communities, our economy, and our environment. I say clearly that the National Government values having an honest and open working relationship with local government and the local government sector, and we on this side of the House recognise that a one-size-fits-all approach to local government does not work. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000679\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c0f78f60-c2fd-46f4-8138-72f39692fc20\u0022\u003EThe previous speaker made mention of democracy. He linked democracy in local government and local communities to this bill. Indeed, he mentioned the electorate of Mana and said the people of Mana would feel that they did not have democracy when it came to this bill passing through the House. I say to members opposite that I have heard rumours that some of the members of this House who sit opposite have spent the last 5 weeks of the Mana campaign on the telephone, berating members of the Pacific Island community in Mana and telling them how to vote. Why is it that members opposite are saying that this bill will be bad for democracy, but when they get on the phone and call hard-working people from Pacific Island churches in Mana and tell them how to vote\u2014I am not saying that they threatened them; I am sure members opposite would not stoop as low as that\u2014it is good for democracy? I will not even say in this House what some members of the Labour campaign team have said about Pacific Islanders in Mana. I would not repeat that; I think it is wrong. It is a horrible thing for them to say. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000680\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c0f78f60-c2fd-46f4-8138-72f39692fc20\u0022\u003EWhen it comes to local government, this bill will encourage local authorities to operate within a defined fiscal envelope. The people of Mana want their local authority to work within that envelope. The people of Mana want this Government to work within the tight fiscal envelope that has been set for us because of the recession that we face. They are happy with what the Government is doing. That certainly will be helpful to them, come the election. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000681\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c0f78f60-c2fd-46f4-8138-72f39692fc20\u0022\u003EI say to Mr Hughes opposite that a year ago when Hekia Parata was working in Mana she had mana. Last week when she was in that electorate she had mana. Today in that electorate she has mana. It does not matter what happens on Saturday in that electorate, on Monday she will still have mana. That is more than I can say for most of the members on the other side of the House. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000682\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c0f78f60-c2fd-46f4-8138-72f39692fc20\u0022\u003EI think the people of New Zealand want this bill to move forward. I think the people of New Zealand and their local government are looking forward to transparency, looking forward to accountability, and looking forward to a level playing field to better enable the private sector to help deliver services. I will not take up any more time in this House. I will let members opposite get up and ring a few more of those Pacific Island ministers in Mana and tell them what they should do on Saturday. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022729689f2d2ed46e7b864f5e5f547967f\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill be now read a third time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 64\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; M\u0101ori Party 5; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill read a third time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000683\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022aa68f86247ef4decbc17707ab448b701\u0022\u003EEducation Amendment Bill (No 2)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000684\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022b82e0bea928e48e2869eb679ff308a0b\u0022\u003ESecond Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022 data-id=\u0022d24da943097846b7940a4490a4315716\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000685\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d24da943097846b7940a4490a4315716\u0022\u003EHon JOHN CARTER (Minister of Civil Defence)\u003C/span\u003E on behalf of the Minister of Education: I move, That the Education Amendment Bill (No 2) be now read a second time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000686\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fda497dea2d0492a82e631b736e51332\u0022\u003EHon Member\u003C/span\u003E: Excellent.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000687\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c98f1a6542544a5f8a509e62981c4915\u0022\u003EHon JOHN CARTER\u003C/span\u003E: It is an excellent speech; it will just get better and better. Of course, everything with the National Party gets better and better. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000688\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022\u003EThe bill introduces legislation that will enable the establishment of secondary-tertiary programmes for students enrolled in school. The bill will reduce the compliance burden on what are described as limited-attendance centres by exempting them from early childhood education licensing standards. The bill will protect the sustainability of New Zealand\u2019s export education sector by changing the refund provisions for international students enrolled in private training establishments. Amendments in the bill will improve the law affecting private schools in response to the Law Commission\u2019s 2009 report Private Schools and the Law. The bill will also make minor changes to school enrolment scheme priorities by offering places to out-of-zone students via a ballot process. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000689\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022\u003ESince the bill\u2019s first reading, the Education and Science Committee has recommended some amendments to strengthen the bill by clarifying some of the policy decisions. I thank members of the committee for their careful consideration of this bill. I also acknowledge the contribution of those who provided submissions. I am particularly pleased that the select committee adopted the changes proposed to the legislation affecting the New Zealand Teachers Council. I thank the committee for agreeing to consider those amendments at short notice, and for their sensible and diligent attention to those serious issues. I also appreciate the committee accepting the changes proposed to teacher information matching. Currently, the Education Act 1989 prevents the Ministry of Education and the Teacher Council from matching data on relieving teachers. This change will allow data matching on relieving teachers. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000690\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d493351f88f948749af67714213237a5\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: It doesn\u2019t prevent it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000691\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ecf0fd88eb4f4c419fca449ec7dac66f\u0022\u003EHon JOHN CARTER\u003C/span\u003E: That may be true, but this bill will now permit it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000692\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022\u003EI will now go through the key elements of the changes to the bill recommended by the select committee. The bill has been amended to make it clear that industry training organisations cannot directly provide secondary or tertiary education, but may still be involved in the arrangement of tertiary courses and work experience as part of secondary-tertiary programmes. A change has been made to refund provisions for international students, to require a private training establishment to hold in trust any payments made by a foreign student enrolled in a course for under 3 months. The funds will be available for refund to the students according to the rules specified by the New Zealand Qualifications Authority. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000693\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022\u003EFive changes have been made to the legislation affecting private schools, following the Law Commission\u2019s review. The requirement for the Education Review Office to charge private schools with more than 29 foreign students for reviews has been removed from the Act. Charging the relevant private schools would be difficult to administer, and would generate very little, if any, revenue. The legislation has been redrafted to allow the Secretary for Education to request a further Education Review Office review of private schools during extensions to provisional registration. A change has been made to include the Insolvency Act 1967, as well as the Insolvency Act 2006, when assessing a potential private school manager against the fit and proper person requirement. The bill has been amended to ensure that if the Secretary for Education finds grounds to suspend a private school\u2019s registration, the secretary must also impose conditions to allow the school the chance to lift the suspension before considering deregistration. Two other minor technical amendments have been made to this part of the bill, which clarify the role of the secretary when suspending a private school\u2019s registration. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000694\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022\u003EThe bill brings creches at centres like gyms and shopping centres, which look after children on a very temporary basis, into line with provisions such as those that apply to Sunday schools, and exempts those centres from early childhood education regulations that require education plans, qualified teachers, and ratio and space rules. The select committee amended the bill to allow limited-attendance centres that look after the children of employees to also be exempt from the early childhood education regulations. Those centres will continue to be subject to arrangements with the operators of the facility, local government, and other legislative requirements to ensure the safety and welfare of the children, while recognising that parents have a responsibility to make sensible decisions with regard to minding their children. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000695\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022\u003EDuring the select committee process the committee was asked to consider including some further amendments regarding the New Zealand Teachers Council. The Teachers Council requested those changes in response to difficulties it was having in administering its legislation. The Teachers Council has processes in place to help teachers with competency issues to improve. However, the council cannot currently show in the teacher\u2019s registration that a teacher is going through this process. The bill has been amended to allow the Teachers Council to annotate teachers\u2019 registrations to indicate when teachers have conditions imposed on their practising certificates due to incompetence. This will decrease the risk that schools could unknowingly employ a teacher with issues in relation to his or her competence. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000696\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022\u003EA further change will correct an anomaly in the legislation that currently prevents appropriate action being taken in certain competency or conduct issues. Cases involving possible serious misconduct by a teacher mostly result from the mandatory reports submitted by a school or a teacher, but some cases result from a complaint. To ensure that children and members of the public are not put at risk, it is often appropriate that a teacher be suspended until an investigation has been carried out. However, the legislation currently allows for an interim suspension of a teacher only following a complaint. This amendment makes it clear that an interim suspension can also be made following a mandatory report of teacher conduct.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000697\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225a8a2fa221274a789fec9b1c098ca55c\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Who was the silly Minister who introduced that?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000698\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229a805ecd74994e05a76d656fd1a77041\u0022\u003EHon JOHN CARTER\u003C/span\u003E: I am not sure, but I am sure Mr Mallard had some involvement in it, no doubt. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000699\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002250dd34dc392144bfb7e9bbb27e587028\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: It was me. I apologise.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000700\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226cab511c17d8494f8abbe55c0c04e13f\u0022\u003EHon JOHN CARTER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I am sure the member will take a call and make the apology himself. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000701\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022\u003EA similar issue exists regarding the actions that the Teachers Council can take if it finds a teacher to be incompetent. The Teachers Council can take action following an investigation that has been the result of a complaint about competence, but not when an investigation follows a mandatory report about competence. The bill amends the Education Act 1989 to make it clear that the Teachers Council may take action following a mandatory report or a complaint about teacher competence. This provision will help to ensure that children are safe, and will help to maintain and improve the quality of teachers in our schools. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000702\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022\u003ESubmitters raised a further issue during the select committee consideration of these amendments. Currently, the law technically requires a board of trustees to dismiss a teacher who is the subject of an interim suspension. In many cases, that may be unfair for the teacher concerned. There is an intention to bring forward an amendment to the bill at the Committee of the whole House to ensure that an employer of a teacher is not forced to dismiss a teacher who has been suspended while his or her case is being investigated. Once again, I thank the members of the committee for this work, and I commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u0022a13f74837e054dadaa161e3e5a4b6040\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000703\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a13f74837e054dadaa161e3e5a4b6040\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour\u2014Hutt South):\u003C/span\u003E Labour members supported the Education Amendment Bill (No 2) to go to the Education and Science Committee, but we will not be supporting it from this point on. There are two major reasons for this. Firstly, we became aware that one of the major undertakings given to us by Anne Tolley was incorrect with regard to police checks on people in limited-attendance centres. Secondly, she failed to accept an approach to open up the Teachers Council disciplinary hearings, and desired to continue to hide those teachers who are abusing children. So we will not be supporting this bill to go forward. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000704\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EHowever, I think it would be churlish of me not to congratulate the chair of the select committee, Allan Peachey, and all the members of the select committee on the contributions that were made there. I think the chair has an ability to haul together a variety of points of view\u2014those of two ACT members, and those of National, Green and Labour members\u2014and to work, as far as is possible with some of our different philosophies, for the benefit of young people. I think it is fair to say that we have those differences within parties as well as between parties, and there might even be some overlap in some matters. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000705\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EMuch of this bill is pretty much harmless. As I have indicated to the Minister of Education and to the chair of the select committee, I think the whole secondary-tertiary part of this bill is unnecessary. I think it will give us a pile of bureaucracy that we will come to regret later on. It will tie us down in a way that will mean that policy changes and improvements will be hard to make, and I regret that the Minister has chosen to take the advice of people who want to have everything possible written into legislation. I think that is a short-sighted approach on her part. It shows a poor understanding of the way both the education system and Parliament work. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000706\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EThe first and relatively minor point that I will focus on is the change to allow inherited rights to take precedence over local entry to State schools. It is my view that in New Zealand we are an egalitarian society. Some schools have limited places, generally because of geography and the way that populations have grown. Schools have good reputations, and they have to have enrolment schemes. Labour has always been firmly of the view that the people who live close to the school should have preference, and that a zone should be developed. If there are spare places from outside, they should be available by way of ballot. There is a method relating to current and former siblings, and people work through the matter on that basis. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000707\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EThe changes made by this bill state that if a child\u2019s parent attended the school, the child will get access. That provision is intergenerational, so someone could end up having access to a school not because they or their mother or father live or lived in the zone, but because their grandparents lived in the zone. That is the idea of inherited rights to entry to State schools, while other people are excluded. Let me make this point clear; Allan Peachey understands it well. Zoning in zoned schools applies only when there are a limited number of places, and when one person gets in, another person does not. That is the way the system works, and what we are doing here\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000708\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220fc05f1c-47b0-4fb0-8298-2f347adae4e3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002256fb7c85250e413585afff88a4588274\u0022\u003EHon Sir Roger Douglas\u003C/span\u003E: It doesn\u2019t have to work that way. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000709\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228dc2af1f8fa74ec1a78ad875786ba5d2\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: He is absolutely right. We can build massive schools when they are popular, then abandon them later. We can have massive capital investment in areas where schools are popular at a particular point in time, and then when they are less popular and the school down the road is more popular, we can make massive capital investment there. The member might want the private sector to do that building work, and he might want public-private partnerships in order to help his mates, but I am for the rationing of capital in schools, and for the capital going where it is needed. That is a relatively minor issue, and we probably would not vote against the legislation on that issue alone. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000710\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EThe next point I refer to is the issue of the limited-attendance centres. Those are things like gym or shopping centre early childhood education facilities. We received an assurance from Anne Tolley, the Minister of Education, that the people who will be leading the centres\u2014not the teachers but the people supervising the children\u2014would be subject to police checks. On that basis we supported the first reading of the legislation. I am not saying that she deliberately misled us. I think that in this case\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000711\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a02412421cce4925a04868e825ca45b6\u0022\u003EHon Maurice Williamson\u003C/span\u003E: You can\u2019t say that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000712\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bb522cd7265846ddb0e0400c6099bf5e\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: That has never worried me in the past. In this case I think it was genuine ignorance. I think she did not know. Maybe she was badly advised, but now she has been properly advised. She and Government members were asked to change this bill to ensure that someone who might be in an enclosed room with children and could have a long-term criminal record of sexual abuse of children should have a police check. This bill is an early childhood education sex-abuser\u2019s charter, because it takes away, for the first time, the requirement for those people to have a police check. My view is that that is wrong, and I look National members in the eye now and ask whether they will be prepared to front up to the families of the first, the second, and the third child who is abused by someone who was already of interest to the police, someone who would have failed a police check if one had been necessary. Members opposite are saying that they want to take that police check away. I just think it is shocking. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000713\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003ESome other things are important for those centres. One of them is that there should be always be a line of sight. They should be open in their design; they should not be totally enclosed. One of the principles of good education now is that there should be some glass in certain areas to ensure that nothing untoward is happening in the rooms. It is a very good protection for the teachers or the people who are doing the supervision, because it can prevent false accusations. Having unregistered people in unlicensed premises without police checks and without a line of sight to where they are working is a recipe for abuse, and I think all members of Parliament should be concerned about that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000714\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EThe other matter I will focus on is the question of the Teachers Council. I had a meeting with the Minister, and she put to me a series of propositions, which I agreed with. Most of those propositions came to the select committee. One of them did not, and that was her proposal to open up the hearings of the Teachers Council by way of a method similar to a court, and to grant suppression orders. At the moment the hearings have to be either open or closed, and the current rules do not allow for suppression orders. They could, but the only protection is a $1,000 fine, and that is not good enough. Media could ignore it. They could take that fine, and certainly bloggers do all the time. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000715\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003EI have drafted two amendments. One of them is very simple: it increases the fine from $1,000 to $100,000, and thereby invites the Teachers Council to rewrite its rules in order to allow for suppression orders. The other takes the approach of Simon Power by using a presumption of openness, stating that the hearing should be open, but there is room to close it and to suppress the name of the teacher and, most important, the names of any of the witnesses. I think in particular of child witnesses, because I think it would be wrong for child victims of teachers to have their names printed. I want a system where we can identify the offenders but protect the children. There are two amendments, which we will get to at the Committee stage, and I ask Allan Peachey, in particular, who understands these matters, to read them carefully and talk to his colleagues, because this is more important than politics.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022749d97b8-a772-4227-83da-b5e264c37bc0\u0022 data-id=\u0022e9cb4fbdd02e44428dc330e5e56b2231\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000716\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022749d97b8-a772-4227-83da-b5e264c37bc0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e9cb4fbdd02e44428dc330e5e56b2231\u0022\u003EALLAN PEACHEY (National\u2014T\u0101maki):\u003C/span\u003E I begin by acknowledging the opening remarks of the Hon Trevor Mallard, and I thank him for what he had to say. I join him in recognising the work the Education and Science Committee has done on the Education Amendment Bill (No 2), and the work it does generally on education issues. There are huge philosophical and practical differences between some of us on the committee, and certainly between Mr Mallard and me, but what is never in doubt is that both of us, and other members of the committee, have at heart the best interests of children and education in New Zealand. Although we have some very rigorous debates, and we do not always agree, the committee has shown an ability to find pretty broad common ground on a lot of issues. Sure, there are differences over this bill, but the committee members worked very hard to come back with recommendations that were as good as we possibly could make them. I also acknowledge Mr Mallard\u2019s support as the deputy chairperson. He is a very experienced member with a very good grasp of the Standing Orders and procedures\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000717\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226365114e6ceb48d7b76b56840d2bfefa\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Don\u2019t go too far, I might lose this election. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000718\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022749d97b8-a772-4227-83da-b5e264c37bc0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002256efaf9ba7ff48c68e7a7e78c7aa1991\u0022\u003EALLAN PEACHEY\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014and if I continue, I may even get him demoted to the backbenches opposite. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000719\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022749d97b8-a772-4227-83da-b5e264c37bc0\u0022\u003EThe Education Amendment Bill (No 2) makes changes in six broad areas, and I will run through them very quickly. The first change is the introduction of secondary-tertiary programmes to give greater opportunities for youngsters at secondary school to have part of their education in a workplace or at a tertiary institution. Secondly, the bill exempts limited attendance centres from early childhood education licensing requirements; in other words, it exempts short-stay places at shopping malls, swimming pools, and that sort of thing. Thirdly, it changes refund provisions for international students enrolled at private training organisations. Fourthly, it updates the law regarding independent schools, and in doing so responds to a Law Commission report called Private Schools and the Law. Fifthly, it makes changes to the priority order for admission to schools that have enrolment schemes. A number of us on the committee, certainly including me, reflected long and hard on that, because I understand from my own background that every time we put in a priority we are giving somebody an advantage over somebody else. I am very keen on the idea that all youngsters should have a fair crack at getting into a school of their choice. There are very good reasons why some schools are so enormously popular and others are not. I do not share Mr Mallard\u2019s view about spreading capital around, and all the rest of it. My objective has always been to get as many youngsters as possible into the best schools. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000720\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022749d97b8-a772-4227-83da-b5e264c37bc0\u0022\u003EFinally, the bill removes inconsistencies regarding the New Zealand Teachers Council and the imposition of suspensions. That issue came to the Education and Science Committee late. I appreciate the cooperation that committee members showed in enabling us to deal with it in a timely fashion. I also want to take a moment to acknowledge the contribution made by the New Zealand Educational Institute, the Post Primary Teachers Association, and the School Trustees Association. They made themselves available at very short notice, and I acknowledge that they were put under some pressure to respond to the committee. They did that and I appreciate that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022749d97b8-a772-4227-83da-b5e264c37bc0\u0022\u003EThis bill amounts to an extension of the Government\u2019s desire to maximise participation in schooling and education, to keep students engaged in education for as long as possible, and to ensure that, above all, the State gets value for its investment in education. I commend the bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022 data-id=\u0022199385c2ca0c4562a6cf17f1678d0678\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000722\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022199385c2ca0c4562a6cf17f1678d0678\u0022\u003ESUE MORONEY (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E It is a pleasure to speak in the second reading of the Education Amendment Bill (No 2). I thank the previous speaker, the chairperson of the Education and Science Committee, Allan Peachey. He does a very fine job in the chair. He was right when he said we did have a very strong sense of cooperation on our committee, particularly when the ministry wanted to bring some late information into this amendment bill. Even though we are the Opposition, we felt that these issues were important and appropriate for this bill, so we accorded the Government our agreement to make sure that those issues were addressed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000723\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003EBut we find ourselves debating this bill under urgency. That is kind of ironic, really, because although we were prepared to give the Government the time on the select committee to actually address some issues that came late to the table, we now find that we are using urgency time in Parliament to debate a standard bill that should go through under the normal processes. However, here we are debating it under urgency. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000724\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003EI want to focus on the part of the bill that impacts on the shadow portfolio that I am involved in, early childhood education, because there are substantial changes in relation to the lowering of standards for limited-attendance centres. As I think other members have already said, limited-attendance centres are described in this bill as being the sorts of facilities that we might use when we go to the gym or the shopping centre. They are defined in the bill as being early childhood education settings where children will not be for any longer than 2 hours in 1 day. I think people will imagine the sorts of settings that those places are in. But lowering early childhood education standards for our very vulnerable children is a bit of the theme with this Government: \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000725\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003EI will just read from a very, very good submission that the select committee received on this bill on the matter of limited-attendance centres. It was from the Human Rights Commission. I want to read its actual words, because they tell us about the human rights aspects that are under threat with the passing of this bill, which is one of the main reasons why Labour opposes it. The Human Rights Commission said it \u201Cis concerned due regard does not appear to have been given to the vulnerability of babies, infants, and young children attending LACs and the steps required to ensure their physical and emotional safety and wellbeing. \u2026 The commission understands there is doubt as to whether staff in LACs would be required to undergo a police vetting check.\u201D Of course, these are not its words, but what we found when we closely questioned officials about that is that this bill completely does away with the requirement for police vetting checks for those centres.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000726\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003EThe Human Rights Commission said \u201CWe welcome the Minister\u2019s reassurance during the Bill\u2019s First Reading that it was not the Bill\u2019s intention to remove police vetting.\u201D, but, of course, we know now that that intention was not followed through. The Human Rights Commission went on to say \u201CWe strongly recommend that such checks remain mandatory for any staff member who has unsupervised access to young children and that the Select Committee identifies what measures are necessary to enforce such a requirement.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000727\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003EThere were members of the select committee who did exactly what the Human Rights Commission asked for. They were the members of the Labour Party and of the Green Party, and those issues are detailed in the, I am sad to say, minority reports in the report-back from the select committee. Although the Human Rights Commission asked the entire select committee to identify measures that were necessary to look after vulnerable children, only the Labour Party and the Green Party were determined to make a stand on that issue. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000728\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003EThe submission went on to state: \u201CThe commission would be concerned if deregulation of LACs reflected any perception that caring for a group of young children is unskilled work with few responsibilities or that it does not require training.\u201D But, of course, that is the view of the National Government, and we know that not only because of this bill but because of its determination to reduce the number of qualified staff in the early childhood education sector right across the board. In the Budget this year one of the largest cuts to any portfolio was to early childhood education, and that cut was meted out in particular to centres that dared to go after the goal that Labour had set when it was previously in Government\u2014having 100 percent of the staff qualified. But John Key and Anne Tolley have said our children in New Zealand do not need or deserve to have 100 percent of the staff qualified. They say the children do not matter and it is good enough for 80 percent of the staff to be qualified. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000729\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003EWe see exactly that attitude coming through in this bill. The National members do not understand that those young children are engaged in early childhood education. They see early childhood education as being glorified babysitting. That is why they have taken the knife to qualified teaching staff in early childhood education centres, and it is why they have moved to completely remove any standards and any form of regulation from these limited-attendance centres. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000730\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003EThe Human Rights Commission went on to outline the safeguards that it wanted to ensure were in place. It wanted someone who is qualified in first aid to be available at all times. The Government members on the select committee did not see fit to do that. It wanted sufficient staff to be available, including cover for times when a staff member may need to locate a parent urgently. The Government members did not see fit to do that for limited-attendance centres. The Human Rights Commission wanted, as a bare minimum, staff to be aware of relevant child protection and abuse protocols. The Government members would not even agree to that. The last minimum that the Human Rights Commission wanted was for adequate records to be kept so that staff could ensure that children did not attend more than 2 hours a day. The Government members on the select committee could not even agree to that as a very, very basic level of protection for preschool children. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000731\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003EThe Human Rights Commission gave a very well-thought-out submission, but unfortunately for the majority of the select committee, the Government members, it fell on completely deaf ears. It fell on completely deaf ears because this Government fundamentally does not believe in the value of early childhood education. Government members do not understand that the commission was in fact saying there is a vulnerability on the part of babies, infants, and young children. They think they do not deserve protection, but parents and families look to the Government for that protection. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000732\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003EI believe that in a country like New Zealand, a country that has always had very high educational standards, when parents drop off their children at a limited-attendance centre in a creche, a gym, or a shopping centre, they will expect some minimum standards to be set for the people who are charged with looking after their children. Parents will expect in a country like New Zealand that the Government has the courage to make sure their children are be safe, and that at the very least there will be police checks and, as my colleague Trevor Mallard said, a line of sight, for example. Those are just some very basic things that ensure the protection of young children when they are away from their parents or their primary caregivers\u2014that is not too much to ask. They are very, very basic standards, but the Government members could not even bring themselves to recommend them. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000733\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003EI do not think it is too extreme to say Government members are potentially leaving these babies, these infants, and these children at the hands of potential sex abusers whom the police already know about. What will the Government\u2019s response be when something happens? I would like to say \u201Cif something happens\u201D, but I think my colleague Trevor Mallard is right to say the people who operate in this field will look for these opportunities. They will see this gap, and they will know that they can have access to young children who are unsupervised by their parents, without having to face a police vetting check. I think the Government members should think very seriously about the vulnerability of children and the position that they are putting them in. I really do hope that during the Committee stage we can find that there is some heart on the National benches.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022 data-id=\u00221acc6532be7342a3a901518158411f86\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000734\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221acc6532be7342a3a901518158411f86\u0022\u003ECATHERINE DELAHUNTY (Green):\u003C/span\u003E T\u0113n\u0101 koe, Mr Deputy Speaker; t\u0113n\u0101 koutou katoa. The Green Party is opposing the Education Amendment Bill (No 2), and I am pleased to have the opportunity at its second reading to explain why. I would like to acknowledge the Education and Science Committee, and the committee chair, and all the work that the committee does, but I cannot say that I found this particular bill edifying or coherent. Although it does have some value, the Greens will not be able to support it. This bill is so broad and diverse that the net effect is a strange mixture of the perfectly reasonable and the completely unreasonable. We have waded through this bill with the assistance of the small number of submitters who actually knew what it was about, and the result is as disparate and mediocre as when we started. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000735\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022\u003ESo I will begin with talking about what is reasonable in the bill. It is reasonable in Part 1 to provide a legislative framework for the secondary-tertiary programmes. These programmes are not new. There have always been these types of programmes, but there is probably no harm in updating and clarifying them in terms of some of the issues raised; whether or not it is necessary, it is not essentially harmful. I have no problem with issues such as recognising the providers, and the obscure issues that are important\u2014which are not actually obscure\u2014like pastoral care for students of school age. We must remember in debating this bill that the students are school age. We support clarification of the lead provider role. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000736\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022\u003EThe secondary-tertiary programme clauses support an existing provision of more options for young people who have an active interest in learning trades while still of school age, and this is a positive and practical development, so we do not have a problem with it. However, there are four main other issues that we have tried to contest, which prevent us from supporting the more reasonable provisions. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000737\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022\u003EFirstly, I would like to speak about limited attendance centres, which have been well covered but there is more to say. The clauses on childcare provision at gyms and shopping mall creches remove the early childhood centre requirements but throw the baby out with the bathwater. Of course creches at malls and gyms are not formal educational establishments, but as the previous Labour speaker, Sue Moroney, pointed out, young children are learning at all times; it is a matter of what they learn and from whom they learn it. We cannot stop them learning and we need to protect them and create environments where that learning will support their well-being. This bill removes all requirements to ensure police vetting of staff, staff-to-child ratios, and health and safety provisions particular to the care of children.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000738\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022\u003E It was said at the committee that there would be health and safety provisions as standard in any gym or shopping mall. Well, we are not talking about adults here. We are talking about the particular care of children. The argument that the parents will be nearby, so there is no need for extra protection, does not ring true. Meanwhile at the other end of the gymnasium or the shopping mall\u2014and some of them are vast, with loud music deafening the ear\u2014an untrained person may be trying to care for someone\u2019s toddler, two 6-year-olds who did not like each other on sight, and a crawling bottle-fed baby, without facilities. I am not saying there should not be a creche at these places, but the public would assume\u2014parents would definitely assume\u2014that there are standards for care and protection. It is a given in a so-called modern civilised society that people\u2019s children will be protected by the State when they enter into any formal environment, that at some level there will be that protection. That is a given that citizens and parents will assume. They will be astonished\u2014any of them who know about this\u2014to realise that the police vetting bottom line is not there. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000739\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022\u003EThe only argument that was raised at the Education and Science Committee on the issue by the Government was that parents could choose to use those facilities and would make their own calls about safety. The Green Party does not believe that parents will even know. There is not likely to be a sign outside the creche saying \u201CNo Police Vetting Here\u201D; it will not really happen like that. The parents will not know about this law, which removes standards, and we cannot agree with that. We believe that removing the formal education requirement could happen in a sensible way without lowering the standards for safety and making them non-existent in terms of children and babies. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000740\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022\u003EI do wonder how much imagination is needed to figure out what could happen if there are not enough staff or facilities or safety measures, in terms of police vetting for small children. But then, this is not about children, is it? This is about the ideological opposition to standards and regulation, and it is an opportunity\u2014an inappropriate opportunity\u2014to cut those at the expense of families, because the parents will not know, and the staff will not be trained. The children are the people we should be concerned about. So I really fail to understand how we got to this place. It is very bizarre. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000741\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022\u003EThe second issue is private school governance. The Law Commission review into private schools made a large number of recommendations, five of which this bill picks up. However, this bill is a missed opportunity. There are some gaps around the information to parents about suspension and expulsion in particular. The Law Commission recommended that there be transparency in terms of the suspension and expulsion policy being available to students and parents in the interest of natural justice and the welfare of children. In recommendation 28 and recommendation 29, the Law Commission has made two clear recommendations on appealing suspension and making disciplinary procedures available to families upon request. These were not included in the bill, so we cannot trumpet this bill as a celebration of the interpreting of the Law Commission\u2019s recommendations. It is not. It has missed out some of these vital things, and this was brought to our attention by a couple of people. It may not be a major issue, on its own it might not have been enough for us to vote against the bill on this, but I can see what the Law Commission is saying in the interests of natural justice. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000742\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022\u003EA more serious issue for the Green Party and a more profound issue is the out-of-zone enrolment priorities. At a recent Victoria University seminar on inequality\u2014in fact, this week\u2014a comment was made that social origins and inheritance matter more in less egalitarian societies. This change to out-of-zone enrolment priorities to offer priority to students of former pupils and children of board members, is simply reinforcing inequity. That might be a tenet of private schools but it does not belong in the public system. We wholeheartedly oppose this principle. Why would we want to increase privilege and inequity and create more power for social origins and inheritance than the ability to attend one\u2019s local school, unless we want a less egalitarian society? If we do, let us come out and say it. Let us come out and say that we do not want egalitarian societies and we do not want public schools available to everybody, and that we want to create inherited privilege. That is fine, that is what the private school system does. But we will fight tooth and nail for the rights of children to go to local schools and we are absolutely opposed to this. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000743\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022\u003EThe amendments that came to the select committee late are of great concern to us, and not so much for the content. The amendments were regarding the Teachers Council. We do not have a problem with the annotation of the Teachers Council registers in terms of a teacher\u2019s history, and neither do the unions, but I do have a problem with the process. It was the last days of consideration when these amendments were brought forward. The teachers\u2019 unions and the staff had less than 2 days to consider them and make submissions. It was acknowledged verbally in the committee as a bad process. The issues in these amendments need to be tightened up, and if teacher suspension needs new law, then teachers themselves need to be consulted, and they need to take ownership of those changes. We have enough conflict going on at the moment between the Government and the sector without adding to it. We need good faith, and the teachers\u2019 unions showed a clear willingness to look at the issues raised. They did not have a problem with looking at the issues around suspension, or even the suppression orders, but they did have a problem with being told they had 1 day to consider those issues. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000744\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022\u003EThese groups are representative groups. They wanted to go back to their members and talk through these issues, because it vitally affects those members. The issues around suspension and pay affect the daily lives of teachers, and maybe they need to be tightened up, and maybe there is room to improve the ability for hearings to be made more public and for names to be made more public. But we do not give them 1 day to consider it. I have been talking to those unions, and they said to me that they wanted to go back and talk to their members. That is what they do. They do not do Draconian decision-making on behalf of others. They are not the elite who speak on behalf of others. They speak with their members. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000745\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ee528dc-7870-4553-95ed-5ec0cab60f07\u0022\u003EGiven all of those issues combined, the Green Party is unable to support this bill. The education sector and the Government are in what I consider to be crisis, but we are spending a lot of time talking about things like the small centres where children will not get protection. We are spending a lot of time talking about how to privilege those people who already have an inherited relationship with a school. That is not actually what I thought we would be doing when I joined the select committee. I thought we would be at the heart of the debate, but we are not. In fact, there are a number of very negative things happening in the bill, and for those reasons the Green Party will not be supporting it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022 data-id=\u0022dd4d23298e5f443da8ade469c784ae25\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000746\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022dd4d23298e5f443da8ade469c784ae25\u0022\u003ERAHUI KATENE (M\u0101ori Party\u2014Te Tai Tonga):\u003C/span\u003E I am pleased to stand and speak on the Education Amendment Bill (No 2) today. A very interesting assessment of the current state of our education system was made in the Post Primary Teachers Association (PPTA) submission to the Education and Science Committee on the bill. A comment was made by the former Deputy Minister of Education from Ontario, Professor Ben Levin, that when we look at New Zealand education policy, we see \u201Clots of good projects, but no strategy.\u201D They are words that could very well have summed up this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000747\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003EIt is a pretty good idea to refund course fees for international students who leave their courses before they are completed, but what about the bigger strategic direction in respect of international education or student fees? Another great idea is to stipulate specific requirements that would enable managers of private schools to be assessed as \u201Cfit and proper\u201D for the responsibilities of managing a school. But, again, I ask what strategy is emerging from private schooling.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000748\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003EIn Budget 2009, an extra $10 million was announced to supposedly make private schools more affordable, with $2.6 million going into Aspire Scholarships to provide assistance for students from low-income families to attend private schools. But how do we know whether that funding has made a difference? Was it just a nice gift to independent schools? How many M\u0101ori families have benefited from that gift? How effective has it been in overcoming the long tail of underachievement and system failure, which is consistently reported in the education sector?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000749\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003EThere is also the issue of the removal of early childhood education regulatory requirements for limited-attendance centres. These centres are set up to provide short-term care in places like gyms or shopping malls. Again, it seems a good idea that there should be a different set of standards in place for such short-term centres. The last thing we want to do is make the compliance costs so burdensome that parents are stung by over-the-top fees for what is essentially an hour or two of supervision.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000750\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003ESome parents have it so easy. I remember when I had to go shopping with my five children. We did not have childcare centres there then. I had to take my five children with me, and they screamed around the supermarket and the mall. But now we have shopping malls with childcare centres, and that is a fantastic idea. But we should not make it too burdensome for parents to be able to leave their children there. We are not expecting such centres to provide comprehensive and developmentally appropriate learning opportunities. But on the other hand we do not expect those centres to compromise the health and safety of our precious children. So we take on board the concerns of Te Tari Puna Ora o Aotearoa, the New Zealand Childcare Association, that safety and well-being must not be compromised for short-term gain.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000751\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003EFinally, we come to the project proposed to open up secondary-tertiary programmes. We were interested to see that this project received support from as wide as the Human Rights Commission and the PPTA. The commission said that the experience of the Manukau Institute of Technology in seeking the opportunity to enable a tertiary high school to operate there should be supported in other centres. The PPTA did suggest, however, that the legislation would do well to learn from the successful models of secondary-tertiary partnerships, which have been trialled and positively evaluated to support students into work or further training. It talked about the fact that in most areas industry training organisations, polytechnics, and some private providers have successfully built partnerships that enable students to pursue alternative pathways towards work and further education while still at secondary school.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000752\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003EThe M\u0101ori Party is willing to support this bill to enable opportunities to enhance education that will result in positive outcomes. But we do return to the question of the proper strategy to really make the difference. In essence, the ideas in this legislation are just tinkering around the edges, leaving the enormity of the problems confronting the education sector untouched. This bill will not make the difference that is desperately needed. Although that does not mean we should vote this bill down, it does mean we will continue to be vigilant in asking the Minister of Education about what she is doing in respect of general schooling and making the gains that we expect to see for M\u0101ori children. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000753\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003EThe Hon Dr Pita Sharples is working in the area of kaupapa M\u0101ori education. He has announced a national review of M\u0101ori language education, and is helping to keep a focus on quality and excellence in kaupapa M\u0101ori schooling. But the reality is that less than 5 percent of our kids are in kura kaupapa education, leaving the great bulk of M\u0101ori children in the general system, in the mainstream. The 2005 annual report on M\u0101ori education showed that M\u0101ori students in year 11 who attended schools where teaching was in te reo for between 51 and 100 percent of the time had a higher rate of attaining National Certificate of Educational Achievement qualifications than M\u0101ori attending other schools. We have known that fact for 5 years, yet it still seems we are doing very little other than Te Kotahitanga to make the difference we need for M\u0101ori children to succeed in general schooling.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000754\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e2e2ee61-b3b9-4a89-bcc3-5b7be76c5825\u0022\u003EI have outlined the strategic questions that we expected this bill to cover. But they are not covered. I guess we have to admit that the bill was never set up to answer those questions, but it does not mean to say that the bigger questions should not be asked.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022 data-id=\u00220da8a819d63743ddb32c5a6cbd521847\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000755\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220da8a819d63743ddb32c5a6cbd521847\u0022\u003ECOLIN KING (National\u2014Kaik\u014Dura):\u003C/span\u003E It is a pleasure to rise and speak to the second reading of the Education Amendment Bill (No 2). This bill is another part of this Government\u2019s relentless push towards educational excellence, which is certainly is a priority for this Government. There is a lot of work to be done. We spend $12 billion on behalf of the taxpayer to ensure that all children have access to excellence in education, and we recognise the importance of that money being spent wisely. We do value early childhood education; we spend at least $1.3 billion on it. We have taken approximately $100 million out of the Budget to prioritise increased participation, because we know that there are areas in New Zealand where as many as 24 percent of children are not yet engaging in the very, very important foundation of early childhood education. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000756\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022\u003EI would like to focus on the work the bill addresses. We have heard from members on the other side of the House that secondary-tertiary educational programmes are alive and thriving. I would say that there is a major issue in this area. We have failed miserably. We have focused on, basically, an academic pathway, and we have neglected the better part of 70 percent of hands-on learners in our schools. I believe that the way this bill is structured will empower a level of cooperation. It gives a very clear message about what we expect that relationship to look like. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000757\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022\u003EThe reason why it has not happened, as far as I can see, is that there is an issue over where the money goes. It is a real tragedy that when we look at a country that is considered a First World economy, we do not have an abundance of money to be able to spend and prioritise in this particular area. We have to spend it very carefully, because even though we spend $12 billion on education it is spread quite thinly. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000758\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022\u003EWhenever I talk to tertiary providers and colleges, I hear that the colleges are very keen to see some of their children go across into high-quality tertiary education, with hands-on skills that lead to apprenticeships and high-quality trades. But it comes down to a question of where the money goes. I must mention the Manukau Institute of Technology, and Stuart Middleton, who has worked relentlessly on behalf of hands-on learners and who focuses his attention on how he can best do that. I think he will be very satisfied with this. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000759\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022\u003EThis Government has really focused on the youth guarantee, which relates to 16 and 17-year-olds. Hands-on learners are fascinated with learning. They have to have opportunities opened up to them where they can engage and get their hands on things. They design, build, and then understand why they must drill a hole in the right space, in respect of measurement and maths. They also have to be able to read and interpret plans and designs. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000760\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022\u003EThis bill takes us to another level. The Government has set a goal of starting at least five trades academies by 2011. I encourage everyone in the House to really get behind the initiative, because the biggest destructive aspect in education often is the politics. If we could get rid of the politics and get the cooperation going, we would certainly be doing a lot better. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000761\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022\u003EI want to touch on an issue that is mentioned in Labour\u2019s minority report. It talks about giving people privilege over one another, and it probably illustrates where we in the Government differ from the Opposition. When we turn to the Education Act 1989, we see section 11F, \u201CHow to select applicants who live outside home zone\u201D. Subsection (1) states: \u201CThe order of priority in which applicants who live outside a school\u2019s home zone are to be offered places at the school is as follows:\u201D. The Opposition was saying that schools will manipulate their zones to exclude certain people and get the people they want. Well, members on this side of the House do not feel that that will be abused. That is a difference between the Government and the Opposition. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022\u003EThis is a very positive bill. It is relentlessly pushing forward to educational excellence, and I am pleased that the Government has had the internal fortitude to really make sure that tertiary education takes centre stage. I have pleasure in commending this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022 data-id=\u00221538d00c4ec74c07a9a9cbd0e53f1635\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000763\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221538d00c4ec74c07a9a9cbd0e53f1635\u0022\u003EKELVIN DAVIS (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E The main parts of the Education Amendment Bill (No 2) have been described by other speakers, but I will run through them quickly. As we have heard, secondary-tertiary programmes are part of this bill. It updates and clarifies the law affecting private schools, it changes the refund provisions for international students enrolled in private training establishments, and it exempts limited-attendance centres from early childhood education licensing standards to make it easier for recreational facilities, shopping centres, and similar organisations to provide short-term childcare. The bill also makes changes to school enrolment scheme priorities to make it easier for the children of board members and former pupils living out-of-zone to attend a school.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000764\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022\u003ELabour will not support this bill because, as Trevor Mallard has said, a number of changes that the Labour members of the Education and Science Committee wanted were not included in it. I was not a member of that committee, but I have my own reasons for believing that this bill will do very little whatsoever to make a difference for the core purpose of education. This bill, in my opinion, tinkers at the margins. It does nothing to address what really needs to be addressed in education in order to improve outcomes for kids and in order to shorten the tail that we hear so much about.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000765\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022\u003EEverybody in this House needs to realise that when it comes to talking about educational policy and educational legislation we need to fix on what will make the biggest difference in raising achievement. We make the biggest difference in raising achievement when we focus on teachers\u2014no, not even on teachers but on teaching. It is not teachers who raise achievement; it is what teachers do that raises achievement. We will not raise achievement until our legislation and our policies send a laser beam down on what teachers do and how we can support them to better do what they do.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000766\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022\u003EThe person whom the Government refers to most of all when it wants advice on education policy is Professor John Hattie. He has done his best to create a science out of the art of teaching, and I agree with a lot of what he says. One of the big things that he says in his book Visible Learning is that teachers engage in about 136 strategies, and he makes it easy for us because he lists those strategies in order of what is most effective to what is least effective. He talks about strategies with an effect size of zero. Anything a teacher does with an effect size of zero will have no impact on learning. Of those 136 strategies, about five have an effect size of less than zero. So about five strategies actually make kids dumber. That means that all the other strategies do have a positive impact on student achievement. But there is no point fixating on those strategies that have an effect size just above zero. Professor Hattie says that the strategies we need to use are those that have an effect size of 0.4 or higher, because they are in the top half of the strategies that make a difference. He is not saying that we need to follow those strategies as a recipe and just tick them off; we need to focus our policy on those strategies because they have been proven to make the biggest difference in raising educational achievement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000767\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022\u003ERahui Katene mentioned Te Kotahitanga. Te Kotahitanga is about the relationships that teachers have with their students. But on that scale that Professor Hattie talks about, relationships are No. 11. They are the 11th most effective strategy that can be employed. That means there are 10 other strategies or things that we can legislate for and can support teachers to do in their classrooms that will have a bigger impact on educational achievement than the Te Kotahitanga programme. And we all know that Te Kotahitanga is extremely effective.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000768\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022\u003EIt is not until this House fixes its educational legislation and its educational policies on those strategies that are proven to make the most difference to raising achievement that we will address the tail of underachievement and lift up everybody. I implore the Minister of Education, when she brings the Education Amendment Bill (No 3) to the House, to make sure that what is included in that bill focuses squarely on those strategies that are proven to be the most effective at raising achievement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000769\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022\u003EThe secondary-tertiary programmes that are being talked about here probably will make a difference, I believe. They may not make a huge difference, but they may make some difference. What the secondary-tertiary programmes are doing is, as Colin King mentioned, providing another pathway for students to learn. They change the context in which they are learning. In themselves, they may not make a difference. It depends, again, on the teachers of the kids in the secondary-tertiary programmes; it is what they do that will make the difference. I think it is good that the Government is thinking along a different context.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000770\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022\u003EI want to bring up something Allan Peachey said in a book he wrote, which I read while I was still a principal. He wrote that New Zealand is scared to allow students to specialise at an early age. I think we could be a bit braver in allowing students to specialise at an earlier age. We have in this bill the secondary-tertiary programmes pathway, and we already have the academic pathway that is going on in schools at the moment, and not all kids are successful at that pathway. We should try to think outside the square and come up with other pathways that students can participate in. One of the pathways that I believe we should look at is, quite simply, the art of teaching kids how to make money, how to use money, how to invest money, how to be entrepreneurs, and how to be enterprising. If students do not want to go off to a technical school or a practical school, or to do the academic stuff, but might want to set up their own business before they leave school, then that is a really worthwhile avenue that we could focus on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000771\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022\u003EAnother strand could be that we allow students to specialise in sports. I am not saying that a sporting academy, for want of a better name, should be any less academically rigorous; it is just about changing the context of those kids\u2019 learning, so that instead of learning in the traditional classroom with fours walls, a whiteboard, and a teacher standing at the front, they are learning in a context based on sports. If we look at the career pathways that that could lead kids into, we see that they could be trained to become All Blacks, or netballers, or rowers, but also sports managers, sports psychologists, personal trainers, physical training instructors, nurses, or doctors. It is all about giving kids a whole heap of options and pathways forward to their futures. We should not think that because we have secondary-tertiary programmes we are catering for all the needs of all the kids. I think we need to be brave and bold, and explore other pathways for children to achieve beyond their potential.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000772\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022802874a3-deca-48b7-9d33-9087058892f5\u0022\u003EFinally, I am a very concerned about the limited-attendance centres not having to screen employees. It is very dangerous that people can just set up shop as an early childhood centre in a mall or shopping centre and start looking after kids. I think that is a really dangerous thing for us to pursue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022 data-id=\u0022db386aad19934261856c5e0ca10935e1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000773\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022db386aad19934261856c5e0ca10935e1\u0022\u003ELOUISE UPSTON (National\u2014Taup\u014D):\u003C/span\u003E I am always proud to speak on education legislation in this House, particularly as part of this Government when the largest amount of money ever is being invested in education. Budget 2010 is investing $12 billion in education because this side of the House recognises that education is so vital for this country, for lifting achievement, and for growing our economy. We recognise that this legislation, the Education Amendment Bill (No 2), covers a number of areas, and I thought I would just cover them briefly and also bring in some practical examples of how these changes will be applied. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003EThe first one is the trades academies, which as part of this bill will be able to function with the flexibility that they need to provide options for people in our high schools. I am sure many members in this House will have been at high school prize-givings in recent weeks. I know they are always a time of celebration when we see how fantastic our young people are and how well they are achieving in a range of topics and subjects such as sports, drama, and academics. This is something that provides further opportunities to make some of the policies we have been elected on come to fruition. We heard a number of speakers talk about the technical changes we made in the select committee, particularly around the New Zealand Teachers Council. I will not spend any more time on that, because I think it has been well covered in this second reading debate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000775\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003EIn terms of the six broad areas, as I said, the introduction of secondary tertiary programmes gives greater opportunities for young people in secondary schools up and down New Zealand to spend time learning in a tertiary environment or in the workplace. This is allowing us to have some flexibility to provide learning opportunities for young people that will better suit their needs. I want to come back and speak in a bit more detail about the exemptions for the limited attendance centres from early childhood education licensing standards, because I think we have heard a bit of dramatisation about what this part is about. It is changing refund provisions for international\u2014[Interruption] It is fascinating to hear the comments that are being thrown across the House. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000776\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003ELet us talk about it now. As a mother with three children, I have had my children placed in early childhood centres, but this is quite different from that. We are talking about someone like me, who perhaps goes to the gym for an hour to hop on the indoor bike, and there is a glass panel over there\u2014my children are not in preschool any more, but they were, not so long ago\u2014that I can see through to my 4-year-old happy child. It is my decision to leave my child there. As a parent, I really like having the opportunity to leave my child in an environment where I am not far away. It gives me the flexibility to undertake some exercise, and we all know, particularly with Diabetes Awareness Week this week, how important it is for parents to be able to engage in exercise and for a gym to be able to offer that as a service. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000777\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003EIf I as a mother make a choice to do that, it is my choice as a parent to do that. Therefore, there is some responsibility on me to be comfortable with the environment that I am leaving my children in. I trust parents to be able to make a decision if they want to go to the gym for an hour, to leave their child just over there where they can see them. It is the same with Sunday school. At Sunday School, if I want my children to be looked after for a couple of hours while I am in church, in the building next door, then actually I am quite comfortable with the fact that the person who is with my child or children for perhaps an hour or less\u2014a maximum of 2 hours\u2014will not be teaching them how to read, write, and do maths. I am quite comfortable with the fact that they are going to be looked after, which is very different from the rigour of the regulations that are required for a licensed early childhood centre. So this is about just bringing some common sense back to this sort of area. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000778\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003EI think back to when the present Opposition made this change initially, and I think back to some of the comments, and the horror and disgust and annoyance, from parents because of the overly bureaucratic, nonsensical regulations that that Opposition, when it was in Government, wrapped around a centre like this one\u2014limited attendance. I am pleased I was able to put the record straight on this, because this is another measure that this Government is taking to get rid of stupid bureaucracy\u2014absolutely stupid bureaucracy\u2014and measures that assume that parents do not have the ability to make a decision for their children, and for parents to be able to exercise, perhaps for an hour in the gym, while their children are just there. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000779\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003EWhat else? The other thing I was really excited about in this bill relates to the member\u2019s bill I put forward\u2014I put it in the ballot\u2014to change enrolment zones for schools. I was very excited when the changing of priorities was brought into this legislation, because it allows for children of board members and former pupils to get some priority in the enrolment schemes. This is important, and it is why I put it into the ballot in the first place, because I recognise that schools have a strong sense of community. I think it is really important for the achievement of children to have some connection to the school they are with, and those connections are often stronger and those bonds are deeper when they have a parent who has been there\u2014obviously siblings are already one of the priorities\u2014and also the pupils of board members. Board members have a strong connection to the school, and it makes sense, in terms of keeping that connection strong, that their children should be given priority to enrol in that school. I am proud of that amendment, which has been put into the Education Amendment Bill (No 2) as a result of a member\u2019s bill that was on the ballot, and adopted to be incorporated into this legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000780\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003EWhat else does the legislation do? We have talked about the limited-attendance centres. I could speak quite happily for 10 minutes on that subject alone, because I think it is so important. I will come back to a comment that was made earlier in the House about cuts to early childhood education, because I am sick to death of that comment, when I think that\u2014and this is where the maths lesson comes in\u2014an extra $107 million has gone into early childhood education. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000781\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b55a559c7e3546a7ad6bab99f801d85a\u0022\u003ESue Moroney\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s true. Go and visit the early childhood education centres in Taup\u014D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000782\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022af93a7a001f84b86b7888fe47449f635\u0022\u003ELOUISE UPSTON\u003C/span\u003E: That is a plus sign. How is the member\u2019s maths? One hundred and seven million dollars extra has gone into early childhood education, so that people in my electorate, the Taup\u014D electorate, can access early childhood education. I believe that every child has the right to a place in an early childhood centre. I am really thrilled to be supporting this legislation, because we are a Government that is committed to education.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022 data-id=\u0022f2706600784141d4956c014a12a712c4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000783\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f2706600784141d4956c014a12a712c4\u0022\u003EDAVID SHEARER (Labour\u2014Mt Albert):\u003C/span\u003E First of all, I will say a few words on the cooperation that happened at the Education and Science Committee in respect of the Education Amendment Bill (No 2). We have voiced some of our real opposition to the bill, but at the select committee itself there was some reasoned and good discussion around the some of the issues. But, ultimately, they went to the Minister of Education and were turned down, and I think that is very sad. I am pleased that the Minister, Anne Tolley, is in the House, because in a minute I will talk about limited-attendance centres, which are an appalling part of this legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000784\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003EThis bill is a mixed bag. There is the good, the bad, and the downright ugly. I will go through a couple of the bill\u2019s provisions that are reasonably good. One of them\u2014some members have already spoken about this; Louise Upston talked about it, as well\u2014is the interface between secondary and tertiary. I am not 100 percent sure that this needed to be legislated for in the way that it was. Nevertheless, it does provide some opportunities for kids, particularly as they progress through secondary school, and it helps them transition into tertiary education in a way that will help them and ensure that some them stay at school longer, continue on to acquire more and better skills, and, therefore, move into tertiary education. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000785\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003ENew Zealands needs, perhaps more than anything else, well trained and well-educated young people coming into the workforce to upskill it, and this bill will help in that regard. I acknowledge Colin King\u2019s mention of Stuart Middleton, who was a former teacher of mine when I was in the seventh form, and who is still going strong with passion and zeal at the Manukau Institute of Technology. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000786\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003EThe bill will enable the Minister to approve a board of trustees, a registered private school, a tertiary institution, or an industry training organisation as a lead provider of a secondary-tertiary programme, and then they can enter into a partnership or an agreement. The agreement or partnership is specified in the legislation. It will help 11 to 13-year-old students in particular to continue on. Some parts of this legislation are useful, but it is basically housekeeping. There is a tightening up in the international education area. Growth in the international education sector happened largely under the Labour Government. It is now a $2 billion industry. It needs to be well legislated for in order to ensure, as this bill does, that there is no waka jumping between various institutions and that the international education arena maintains standards and stability. That is a useful tightening of the legislation and it needed to happen. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000787\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003EMembers have spoken about hereditary entitlements to attend schools. I am of the opinion that schools should be of excellent quality no matter where they are, and that if an element of competition is introduced, all that happens is the school that is most favoured\u2014the best school of the day\u2014gets bigger and bigger at the expense of the school down the road. As Mr Peachey knows, that can reverse when there is a change in the economic status of a particular area. When that happens, immediately people start flowing out of that school and into another school, which then gets bigger and bigger, and the first school is left with empty classrooms. It is inefficient in a State education system. What we have at the moment works. Although we do not necessarily agree with the provisions in this bill, it not necessarily something that would cause us to oppose it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000788\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003EWhat causes us to oppose it, more than anything else, is the provision that brings in limited-attendance facilities. I will refer to two of best submissions the select committee had on this particular subject. Sue Moroney has mentioned the submission made by the Human Rights Commission. The submission mentions, of course, that the bill proposes to amend section 310(2) of the Education Act 1989 so that the limited-attendance centres would no longer be regulated as early childhood education centres. Labour does not have any problems with the education element of this, but it does have a problem with the lack of safety and care for children. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000789\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003EThis is what the Human Rights Commission said: \u201CThe Commission understands there is doubt to as to whether staff in LACs would be required to undergo a police vetting check. We welcomed the Minister\u2019s reassurance during the Bill\u2019s First Reading that it was not the Bill\u2019s intention to remove vetting, and we strongly recommended that such checks remain mandatory\u201D. That did not happen. The Human Rights Commission was warning us. We had solid evidence from the Human Rights Commission and the New Zealand Educational Institute, which said more or less the same thing\u2014that it was a cause for worry. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000790\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003ELouise Upston mentioned that she is OK about it because she goes to a gym and her gym has a glass panel. There is no requirement in the legislation for children to be visible from a gym. There are lots of gyms and lots of shopping centres that do not have that facility. The person responsible for the children is not required to have a police check. Would that not be the first thing that we would want to do if we had someone looking after our children? Would we not like to know that that person is not a child abuser? I would like to know that. I would like to think that I could leave my children at a gym and not have to ask about that. I would like to think I would not have to ask whether the person who is looking after my child has been vetted and is OK to look after my child. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000791\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003ELet us look at it another way. Why do we not have a sign outside all of these limited attendance centres saying: \u201CPlease note that the Government accepts no responsibility.\u201D? Why do we not have a sign saying: \u201CThis person not been vetted for child abuse. This person does not necessarily have a first aid certificate. This person may leave children unattended while they go to the bathroom. This person does not necessarily have any qualifications or any knowledge about children and childcare.\u201D? Let us have a sign outside every limited attendance centre saying that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000792\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003EThis legislation is effectively saying that this Government accepts no responsibility. This bill is an appalling bill. It goes backwards. [Interruption] I say to Louise Upston that it has nothing to do with over-regulation. That is complete nonsense. It has nothing to do with over-regulation, but it has everything to do with the safety of young people in this country. In a country that has some of the highest levels of child abuse in the world, we are enabling child abusers to go into these sorts of centres and wreak havoc. I do not believe that Louise Upston actually wants that to happen, but that is what this bill will do. That is what the Minister of Education is allowing to happen. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000793\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003EWhen the first instance of child abuse happens, I wonder what the Minister will say. It will be very interesting to hear what the Minister will say. She will say: \u201CIt is not my fault. It is the parents\u2019 fault. They knew that nobody there knew how to look after children. The parents knew that nobody there was trained. The parents should have known that nobody there knew anything about first aid.\u201D That is what will happen.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000794\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003EAs Mr Mallard said, with this legislation we are opening the doors for child abusers and rapists to be in places like this and to abuse our children. I do not think it is good enough. It is kind of ironic that this Government has also brought in national standards\u2014uselessly, I would argue. My child\u2019s report arrived the other day, under the new national standards reporting facility. It is incomprehensible. I have no idea what it says compared with what it said a year ago\u2014absolutely no idea. The Government is bullying schools to bring in national standards, but it is completely leaving out the most important thing, which is the safety of our children. It is absolutely appalling.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022 data-id=\u0022d1b299097b14456093b66c1753dbe34d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000795\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d1b299097b14456093b66c1753dbe34d\u0022\u003EJO GOODHEW (National\u2014Rangitata):\u003C/span\u003E If ever there was an opportunity to see the philosophical differences between members on that side of the House and members on this side, now is the time. I will not spend a lot of time on the Education Amendment Bill (No 2), because I think a lot of it has been said, but the one thing that I want to finish on is very simply\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226415068efe644057b544818d2fd73b0a\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: I know that there is a degree of strong feeling about this bill, but a constant barrage is out of order. Members should look at Speaker\u2019s ruling 63/4. It does not stop members from making a point, but a constant barrage is disorderly.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000797\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b5dcaa0683ed4d04aa7244b138bd57c7\u0022\u003EJO GOODHEW\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you for your assistance, Mr Assistant Speaker. I want to put a very simple point on the record. Members on this side of the House believe in rational thought. We believe in people taking responsibility for themselves. We believe that people who go into business want to protect their businesses, and that people who are in the business of looking after young children, albeit for just a short period of time, will run police checks on the people who work for them. It does not need to be regulated or legislated. They will make sure they know how to give first aid; it does not require a law. Members on this side of the House, unlike members on the other side of the House, know that it will happen without those people being told to do it. That is probably a very good place to finish.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022490ccdbf-7c22-4e12-98f2-f3aa08f8e676\u0022 data-id=\u0022309d43a578464c228ec156d4abef6f1c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000798\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022490ccdbf-7c22-4e12-98f2-f3aa08f8e676\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022309d43a578464c228ec156d4abef6f1c\u0022\u003EIAIN LEES-GALLOWAY (Labour\u2014Palmerston North):\u003C/span\u003E I am slightly surprised to be on my feet and taking a call on the Education Amendment Bill (No 2). People who are regular watchers of Parliament will know that Labour has taken up its full number of calls, but the Government\u2014in particular, the Government\u2019s junior partner, the ACT Party\u2014for some bizarre reason has chosen not to take its calls on a bill that you rightly pointed out, Mr Assistant Speaker Roy, is raising a lot of passion and a lot of concern. I think the Government should be taking its full number of calls to explain to the public why this bill is a good bill, to explain why it is urgent, and to explain why putting New Zealand\u2019s children at risk of harm is such a good idea\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000799\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b3d0fe409bea4485808773e9da338945\u0022\u003EDavid Shearer\u003C/span\u003E: Under urgency.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000800\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022490ccdbf-7c22-4e12-98f2-f3aa08f8e676\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002293a4a0d2088145e5ae0771b68dbcce59\u0022\u003EIAIN LEES-GALLOWAY\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014under urgency. This Government is shirking its responsibilities and it does not even have the guts to stand up and tell New Zealand why it is doing so.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000801\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022490ccdbf-7c22-4e12-98f2-f3aa08f8e676\u0022\u003EAs has been made quite clear by Opposition members, we oppose this bill. Although it has a number of fairly inconsequential matters in it, a number of things in it are of such consequence that it is clear we have to oppose this bill. One key area is the exemption of limited-attendance centres from early childhood education licensing standards, and, in particular, the requirement for those taking care of young children to undergo a police check to make sure they are of good enough character and do not have anything in their history to suggest they are unfit to take care of small children. The other area of particular concern to us is, of course, the hereditary entitlement for children who would not ordinarily qualify to go to a school within a certain zone to be bumped up the list. Jo Goodhew mentioned ideological differences; I suppose that the idea of inherited entitlement is an ideological position of National. It fits quite well with those members, so it does not come as much of a surprise. [Interruption] What was that, Colin? Mr King has something to say.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000802\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226f1d9d1272bb45828fbb99bffd873d3a\u0022\u003EColin King\u003C/span\u003E: It fits very well with yourself\u2014entitlement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000803\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022490ccdbf-7c22-4e12-98f2-f3aa08f8e676\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223a0e7b3071f44c9e956cd0505d2a8890\u0022\u003EIAIN LEES-GALLOWAY\u003C/span\u003E: The member has lost me. He has lost most people in New Zealand, to be fair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000804\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022490ccdbf-7c22-4e12-98f2-f3aa08f8e676\u0022\u003EI will address some of the comments made by Louise Upston. I have had a chance to spend some time with Louise Upston away from Parliament, and I know that she is passionate about education, but I thought that some of her contributions on this bill were, at times, somewhat nonsensical. She started off with the old chestnut that the Government is spending more than ever before on education. That is absolutely true. It is true because every single year every single Government spends more on education than it did the year before. It is just like health. The question is whether that increased funding is keeping up with inflation and whether it even allows the system to stand still. It does not matter whether the Government is spending more; Governments always will. That is one thing we can rely on. Death, taxes, and Governments spending more on health and education\u2014those are the three certainties in life. But to get up and crow about it and say it is something special that this Government has achieved may show that the Government has achieved so little that its members need to crow about something as insignificant as that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000805\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022490ccdbf-7c22-4e12-98f2-f3aa08f8e676\u0022\u003ELouise Upston went on to say that trades academies will be able to function with more flexibility. That is not true. The policy legislated for in this bill, first of all, did not particularly need legislation, anyway. It is one of the schizophrenic parts of this bill. On the one hand the Government seeks through this bill to cut red tape, but on the other hand the bill is unnecessarily bureaucratic with regard to its provisions for secondary and tertiary education. Trades academies will not be able to function more flexibly. Ms Upston\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000806\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a68928ea-9dd8-4a30-8e2c-a0f49dfc8bea\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221114793090064cebbc090489626a43c6\u0022\u003ELouise Upston\u003C/span\u003E: Mrs.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000807\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022490ccdbf-7c22-4e12-98f2-f3aa08f8e676\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022220d91c81e3e41468b4f2dde0c26428b\u0022\u003EIAIN LEES-GALLOWAY\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014OK, Mrs Upston\u2014talked about many members having recently attended prize-givings around the country, and that is true. I have, and probably just about every other member has. I have seen plenty of awards being handed out by trades academies and industry training organisations to school students who have been engaging in the transition phase between secondary school and trades or tertiary education. A number of students have been studying at university level, as well, which is pleasing to see.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000808\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002212726510475f4f968b410c71744ae5cf\u0022\u003ESue Moroney\u003C/span\u003E: Not new.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000809\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022490ccdbf-7c22-4e12-98f2-f3aa08f8e676\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229c0c4b6477bb48fbb976977d4c6266ba\u0022\u003EIAIN LEES-GALLOWAY\u003C/span\u003E: It is not new. Louise Upston said it was a very important policy that National had stood on at the last election. Well, that is interesting, because it was Labour policy. If National members are proud of Labour policy, then that is good news. We will take that one, and notch up another one for Labour.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000810\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022490ccdbf-7c22-4e12-98f2-f3aa08f8e676\u0022\u003EWith regard to limited-attendance centres and glass panels, Louise Upston focused a lot on the fact that her gym has a glass panel and she can see her children through it. First of all, this bill is not just about centres at gyms; it is also about centres at shopping centres. The weight of responsibility should not sit on parents\u2019 shoulders when they go to a shopping centre. Parents should not have to figure out whether the centre has employed someone who is capable of taking care of their children. They should have that certainty. Parents should have the certainty\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000811\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002246698febc1494c709233ccf4a5401dc7\u0022\u003ESue Moroney\u003C/span\u003E: Anne Tolley says they should just ask them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000812\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022490ccdbf-7c22-4e12-98f2-f3aa08f8e676\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d758163fc14946b8bc345ce6b73eac70\u0022\u003EIAIN LEES-GALLOWAY\u003C/span\u003E: That is right; Anne Tolley says they should just ask: \u201CExcuse me, are your staff members child sex offenders? Could you tell me about that, please?\u201D. I would like to see the Minister of Education going into a centre and asking that question. Parents should not have to ask that question. They should have certainty available to them. The Government is saying to parents that the Government takes no responsibility. If something goes wrong and a parent\u2019s child is abused, the Government says: \u201CThat\u2019s your fault. That\u2019s your responsibility. You should have taken more care about where you left your children.\u201D That is absolutely wrong. It is far too much to leave up to parents. Parents should have certainty. The Government should create an environment where parents have certainty.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000813\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022490ccdbf-7c22-4e12-98f2-f3aa08f8e676\u0022\u003EJo Goodhew said that businesses will not want to put themselves at risk. I think that is a fair call. For the most part, businesses will not want to put themselves at risk. But these provisions are not about early childhood centres that have an interest in the well-being of children; they are about businesses that have nothing to do with children whatsoever\u2014be it a gym, a shopping centre, or whatever it is. They are not people whose bread and butter trade is dealing with children and the safety of children. When the squeeze goes on, as in the post-recession times we are in at the moment when costs are being cut and people are looking for every last little place where they can cut costs, maybe it will be overlooked; maybe the police vet that National members say the business will take responsibility for will be overlooked. Why? Because the business does not need to do it. It is a cost that it does not have to include, and overlooking it might just help make the bottom line look a little better.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000814\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022490ccdbf-7c22-4e12-98f2-f3aa08f8e676\u0022\u003EI agree that 99.9 percent of the time things will go smoothly, but would the Minister like to be the parent of the child involved in that 0.01 percent situation? Would the Minister like to be the parent of that child?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000815\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002227f1b3ce71f346f38cb838cc2d95ed94\u0022\u003EHon Anne Tolley\u003C/span\u003E: Ask the centre.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000816\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dfa851f0-ef7b-4834-bc41-1b3b645a3495\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022df513a4487f3408aa7195db236194dd7\u0022\u003EDavid Shearer\u003C/span\u003E: Pass the buck!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000817\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022490ccdbf-7c22-4e12-98f2-f3aa08f8e676\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002269300f5de05042aead09ad16db2e66ec\u0022\u003EIAIN LEES-GALLOWAY\u003C/span\u003E: Yes. The Minister says that it is not her responsibility as the Minister of Education, as a Minister of the Crown in this Government, to create an environment in New Zealand where children are safe and where parents have certainty about the safety of their children. \u201CIt\u2019s not my responsibility.\u201D, says the Minister of Education. How about that for a message to the parents of New Zealand. The Government says it is not prepared to ensure the safety of children in New Zealand. That is the message the Government is giving in this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000818\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222efa46cb9adc4b1db408f8a45c9c1751\u0022\u003EHon Anne Tolley\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s not right.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000819\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022490ccdbf-7c22-4e12-98f2-f3aa08f8e676\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223f4e5e5fbaae4721adf63e987f4ccbf3\u0022\u003EIAIN LEES-GALLOWAY\u003C/span\u003E: That is absolutely right. That is the message that you are sending to New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000820\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fdcae1546540409798214f9032d06270\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy)\u003C/span\u003E: Order!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000821\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022490ccdbf-7c22-4e12-98f2-f3aa08f8e676\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d09aba4bdfbd41d0afa36d4929118594\u0022\u003EIAIN LEES-GALLOWAY\u003C/span\u003E: I am sorry; that is the message that the Minister is sending, certainly not you, Mr Assistant Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00226cc20112bfee4d23b10883d6c6d2e1d5\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 Education and Science Committee by majority be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 51\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\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=\u00229ab17313e24746f9a95375e46c6d7863\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 Education Amendment Bill (No 2) be now read a second time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 69\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; M\u0101ori Party 5; United Future 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 51\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill read a second time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000822\u0022\u003EThe House adjourned at 5.55 p.m. (Thursday)\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2010111656a7d53c42a1460f8113771f34b8659e000823\u0022\u003E\u003Cbr\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n  \u003C/body\u003E\n\u003C/html\u003E"