Parliament Today 27 August 2013

August 27th, 2013 at 12:53 pm by Jordan.M

From DPF: If you watch question time today, I’d love you to comment below and score the three leadership contenders out of 10 for how you think they did, as they have a question each.

Questions for Oral Answer.

Questions to Ministers 2.00-3.00PM.

  1. JAMI-LEE ROSS to the Minister of Finance: What progress is the Government making in building a more competitive and productive economy and how is this helping New Zealand families?
  2. Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements relating to Government policy?
  3. GRANT ROBERTSON to the Prime Minister: Is he satisfied with the performance of his Minister for Tertiary Education, Skills and Employment, and are there any areas of his performance that need to improve?
  4. COLIN KING to the Minister of Education: What recent announcements has she made about investment in education?
  5. Hon SHANE JONES to the Minister for Economic Development: Does he stand by his statement “The New Zealand economy is, of course, the sum of its regional economies and that is why the Government is placing huge emphasis on assisting each region”?
  6. BRENDAN HORAN to the Minister for Primary Industries: What is the best estimate he or his Ministry have, if any, of the economic value of recreational fishing including direct and indirect employment?
  7. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Prime Minister: Does he have confidence in all his Ministers?
  8. JAN LOGIE to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements?
  9. SCOTT SIMPSON to the Minister of Justice: What recent reports has she received on progress with the Drivers of Crime programme?
  10. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister of Finance: Does he agree with the Prime Minister that “first-home buyers are a priority for the Government”, if so, why are houses more unaffordable for young New Zealanders now than six months ago?
  11. CLAUDETTE HAUITI to the Minister of Health: What reports has he received on the latest national health target results?
  12. Hon RUTH DYSON to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements?

Today the Labour Party are asking five questions. Grant Robertson is asking the Prime Minister about the performance of Steven Joyce in the Tertiary Education portfolio. Shane Jones is asking about Economic Development.  David Cunliffe is asking the Prime Minister whether he has confidence in all his Ministers. David Parker is asking the Minister of Finance about first home buyers. Ruth Dyson is asking whether the Prime Minister stands by all his statements.  The Greens are asking two questions. Russel Norman is asking whether the Prime Minister stands by all his statements relating to government policy, Jan Logie is asking whether the Prime Minister stands by all his statements. Independent MP Brendan Horan is asking about Snapper quotas ( I would also note that the three Labour Leadership contenders are being given a chance to ask an important question each today).

Patsy of the day goes to Claudette Hauiti for Question 11 to the Minister of Health, Tony Ryall: What reports has he received on the latest national health target results?

Government Bills 3.00PM-6.00PM and 7.30PM- 10.ooPM

1. Insurance (Prudential Supervision) Amendment Bill - Committee Stage

2. Resource Management Reform Bill -Committee Stage

3. Bail Amendment Bill -Committee Stage

4. Public Finance (Fiscal Responsibility) Amendment Bill – Committee Stage

5. Patents Bill -Committee Stage

The Insurance (Prudential Supervision) Amendment Bill is being guided through the house by the Minister of Finance, Bill English. The bill seeks to amend the Insurance (Prudential Supervision) Act 2010, which established a licensing and prudential supervision regime for insurers operating in New Zealand. It would also make a consequential amendment to the Reserve Bank of New Zealand Act 1989.

The Resource Management Bill is being guided through the house by the Minister for the Environment, Amy Adams. his is an omnibus bill that proposes amendments to the Resource Management Act 1991, the Local Government (Auckland Transitional Provisions) Act 2010, and to the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987. The bill aims to make improvements to the consenting regime, provide for the delivery of the first combined plan for Auckland, provide further powers to make regulations, and to make technical and operational changes.

The Bail Amendment Bill is being guided through the house by the Minister of Justice, Judith Collins. This bill seeks to amend the Bail Act 2000, the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families Act 1989, the Sentencing Act 2002, the Bail Amendment Act 2011, the District Courts Act 1947, the District Courts Amendment Act 2011, and the Summary Proceedings Act 1957, in order to improve public safety and enhance the integrity of New Zealand’s bail system. The bill seeks to introduce a reverse burden of proof for offenders charged with serious violent offences and class A drug dealing offences, and provides for district court judges to deal with bail matters of defendants charged with drug dealing offences.

The Public Finance (Fiscal Responsibility) is being guided through the house by the Minister of Finance, Bill English. This bill would add a number of new principles of responsible fiscal management and associated requirements to the fiscal responsibility provisions of the Public Finance Act 1989.

The Patents Bill is being guided through the house by the Minister of Commerce, Craig Foss. This Bill is designed to replace the Patents Act 1953 and update the New Zealand patent regime to ensure that it continues to provide an appropriate balance between providing adequate incentives for innovation and technology transfer while ensuring that the interests of the public and the interests of Maori in their traditional knowledge are protected.

Tags: ,

7 Responses to “Parliament Today 27 August 2013”

  1. Mr Nobody NZ (396 comments) says:

    It will be interesting to see Cunliffe’s performance with the question that Shearer asked how many times?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. kiwi in america (2,336 comments) says:

    Only caught the last bit of Robertson’s question period so hard to gauge. Jones was a 5/10 and Cunliffe maybe 5.5/10. Key was having a field day barely able to contain his glee at exploiting Labour’s situation. With Cunliffe it was like shooting fish in a barrel!

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Lindsay Addie (1,105 comments) says:

    I saw the end of Q time and got to say it finished a bit early at around 2.45pm.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. seabreezeent (31 comments) says:

    To be honest JK needs to get a new joke writer, quite a few went down like lead balloons today, he actually managed to make the opposition look quite appealing.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. OneTrack (1,977 comments) says:

    Groan. And here I was looking forward to DPFs question time summary knowing I wasn’t going to be looking at Shearers stupid numpty question anymore. And I see a bunch of wankers have taken over where he left off. They obviously believe he set a good example and they should follow in his footsteps. With a bit of luck, with the same result.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Steve (North Shore) (4,327 comments) says:

    Seems Question Time is just cork soakers time, for wasting time.
    Why so many questions that mean nothing, other than the next question which could be any question?
    ” Does he stand by all his statements?”
    ” Does he stand by all his statements?”
    ” Does he stand by all his statements?”
    ” Does he stand by all his statements?”
    “Does he have confidence in all his Ministers?”
    “Does he have confidence in all his Ministers?”

    Gets kind of boring, why not just ask the question that you want to find the answer to, and then fuck off?
    You Polititians are due for a fucking big overhaul

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. kiwi in america (2,336 comments) says:

    Steve
    Those pro forma questions have been part of PQ for decades. They are a deliberate tactic to catch the PM or relevant Minister off guard because, unlike the UK Parliament Question Time where only the PM can answer and there is no warning on the questions so the PM must answer off the cuff, NZ PQs are submitted in writing a few days in advance primarily to give the ministry concerned an opportunity to access statistics to help shape the minister’s answer. The majority of Opposition back or mid front bench questions are on a specific topic and so the relevant minister and his/her staff can bone up on the answers. However a question “Does he stand by all his statements” gives no clue as to usually the LOO or Opposition Party Leader’s line of questioning and so no specific pre-PQ research can be undertaken by the PM’s staff. Most of these generic questions are targeted at the PM in an attempt to force an error, flush out some hitherto hidden potential landmine or in any other way embarrass the government. It forces the PM (and usually key other Ministers such as English and Joyce) to game a number of scenario answers based on any number of issues of the day likely to be fodder for an Opposition attack. The first supplementary question will indicate the line of questioning taken and trigger the Minister to switch his/her answers to rebut the line of the attack. Usually key documents with countering quotes or key statistics assisting in rebuttal are brought to the House with the PM and senior Ministers in anticipation the likely line of questioning.

    Key and other National front benchers used the exact same questioning techniques when Labour was last in power. This tactic does not in anyway reflect badly on Shearer or his successor other than Shearer was unable to make any substantive breakthrough during PQs on Key. With the GCSB, Shearer’s taking up of Key’s invitation to meet privately on the GCSB amendment spoke volumes for his likely gut instinct which was to honour the long held tradition of bipartisanship over security and intelligence issues and that the highly political campaign that Labour waged against the GCSB was not one that Shearer was deeply committed to and it showed in his lack of real intensity on this issue in the House.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.