Kiwiblog

It is no surprise that the Rt Hon David Carter has just been elected Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Labour put up Trevor Mallard as a candidate. Not sure that was the best way to try and get the Maori Party or Tau to vote for you

There were no proxy votes allowed for the election.

After the speeches of congratulation, Speaker Carter will go to Government House to present his credentials and the House adjourns until the week after next.

The vote was 62-52.

Idiot/Savant at No Right Turn blogged:

At the moment several African governments are progressing virulently homophobic legislation. There’s Uganda’s “Kill the Gays” bill, which would impose the death penalty for homosexuality and require reporting of homosexuals to the government. And in Nigeria there’s similar, though less brutal, legislation, which would (among other things) outlaw LGBT support groups.

Today Labour’s Charles Chauvel tried to move a motion expressing Parliament’s condemnation of this bigotry:

National vetoed it. 

I think this tells us exactly where National stands on gay rights. They’ll send John Key along to the Big Gay Out, but at their core they’re simply bigots, no different from Family First or the Sensible Sentencing Trust.

Idiot/Savant goes feral and sanctimonious so often, I’m not even surprised anymore. I doubt anyone takes his denunciations too seriously but in case they do, I thought I’d point out how Parliament operates.

A motion by a individual MP is basically never scheduled for debate or voting on. To have an MP’s motion considered, you need to seek permission of the House, and it takes just one individual MP to object to leave being granted. So if you want your motion voted on, then there is a process in place to ascertain in advance that the Government is happy for it to be put (so long as without debate). Basically you discuss it with your party’s whips, they discuss it with the Government whips, and they check with the Leader of the House. This process is widely known and is there precisely so opposition MPs can get non-controversial motions considered. The Government has actually been very accommodating of the rights of the minority through things such as negotiating extended sittings rather than forcing urgency on the House.

Now if we look at the draft Hansard for today, it says:

Su’a WILLIAM SIO (Labour—Māngere): I seek leave of the House to move a motion without notice and without debate about Cyclone Evan.

Mr SPEAKER: Is there any objection to that course of action being followed? There is none.

Su’a WILLIAM SIO: I move, That this House express its acknowledgment and support to the peoples and Governments of Samoa and Fiji after Cyclone Evan wreaked havoc on these islands just before Christmas last year, and in particular convey its condolences and sympathies to Samoa’s head of State, His Highness Tuiatua Tupua Tamasese Efi, Prime Minister the Hon Tuila’epa Aiono Sailele Malielegaoi, members of Samoa’s legislative assembly, and the people of Samoa for the loss of five lives, and to the families of the 10 people still missing when floodwaters drove through settlements in the Apia township, dragging people, homes, vehicles, and personal property out to sea and destroying power, water, and other infrastructure, including food crops, and note that for many families it is the first-time experience of losing literally everything, and acknowledge the resilient response of families, people’s organisations, and Governments in both the islands and in New Zealand to aid families and friends in need.

Motion agreed to.

[Continuation line: Chauvel motion]

POINTS OF ORDER

Motion Without Notice—

CHARLES CHAUVEL (Labour): I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I seek leave to move members’ motion No. 4 in my name, without debate.

POINTS OF ORDER

Motion Without Notice—

 Mr SPEAKER: Is there any objection to that course of action being followed? There is objection.

So Sio had no one object to his motion, but Chauvel did have an objection. Why? It’s simple. Sio followed the process and did his homework by letting the whips know in advance. Chauvel did not. If Chauvel had done the courtesy of letting the whips know in advance he was going to seek leave, then almost certainly he would have got it I suspect. So I/S should direct his rant towards MPs who grandstand rather than follow the process.

People may not be aware but if an MP seeks leave, the whips have only around two seconds to object. You don’t have time to read the motion and decide after a minute’s contemplation. This is why it is well known amongst MPs that you inform the whips in advance of your desire to put it to a vote, and the whips check with the Leader of the House.

I find it appalling that I/S uses the failure of an Opposition MP to follow the process, to label the Government as bigots. It’s pathetic.

Questions for Oral Answer.

Questions to Ministers. 2.00pm – 3.00pm.

1. Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement that “the Government has actively supported the filming of the Hobbit movies in New Zealand because of the enormous economic benefits they are bringing to the country, including the creation of around 3,000 jobs”?
2. DAVID SHEARER to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all the statements made in his prime ministerial speeches and in his Address in Reply speeches?
3. TODD McCLAY to the Minister of Finance: What will be the focus of the Government’s economic programme in 2013?
4. METIRIA TUREI to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement that “I am keen to see New Zealanders to be able to afford to buy a home”, given that the home ownership rate has continued to decline under his watch and home buying is becoming less affordable?
5. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister of Finance: Is he aware that anticipated Core Crown Revenue for the period 2012-2016 decreased by $13.2 billion between the October 2011 PREFU and the December 2012 HYEFU; if so, why has the Government lost $13.2 billion in projected revenue in little over a year?
6. COLIN KING to the Minister for Tertiary Education, Skills and Employment: What recent announcements has the Government made about boosting the number of people being trained in apprenticeships?
7. JACINDA ARDERN to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement “I am deeply concerned about every child in New Zealand who is in poverty”?
8. Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Prime Minister: Why didn’t he mention climate change yesterday when he outlined his Government’s priorities for the year in his statement to Parliament?
9. Hon ANNETTE KING to the Prime Minister: Following his decision to appoint a new Minister of Housing, what new policies, if any, does he expect his new Minister to implement to address the growing housing affordability issues in New Zealand?
10. NICKY WAGNER to the Minister responsible for the Earthquake Commission: What progress has been made in the repair of homes in Canterbury by the EQR Repair Programme?
11. CHRIS HIPKINS to the Minister of State Services: What were the factors that contributed to the strained relations that resulted in the resignation of Lesley Longstone as Secretary of Education?
12. JACQUI DEAN to the Minister of Corrections: What steps is the Government taking to improve prisoner employment training in New Zealand prisons?

Today Labour is asking five questions, The Greens have two questions, and New Zealand First have one question. Labour is asking about whether the Prime Minister stands by his statements, twice. Labour is also asking about a loss in projected tax revenue, housing affordability and the resignation of the Secretary of Education, Lesley Longstone. The Greens are asking about housing affordability and climate change. NZ First is asking about job creation by the film, “The Hobbit”.

Patsy of the day goes to  Jacqui Dean for Question 12 : What steps is the Government taking to improve prisoner employment training in New Zealand prisons?

Government Bills 3.00pm -6-00pm and 7.30pm until 10.00pm. 

1. Appropriation (2011/12 Financial Review) Bill - Third Reading

2. Patents Bill – Third Reading

3. Fisheries (Foreign Charter Vessels and Other Matters)  Amendment Bill - First Reading

The Appropriation (2011/12 Financial Review) Bill was read a first time in December 2012 by Bill English. The purpose of this bill is to confirm and validate financial matters relating to the 2011/12 financial year.

The Patents Bill was read a first time in May 2009 by Simon Power. Craig Foss is now the Minister in charge of the bill. 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.

The Fisheries (Foreign Charter Vessels and Other Matters)  Amendment Bill is being read a first time by Nathan Guy. This bill implements the Government’s decisions on the regulation of foreign charter vessels following allegations of mistreatment and underpayment of foreign crews.

John Key has announced:

Prime Minister John Key has announced the election of National’s new whips following the National Party Caucus this morning.

Mr Key says the new senior whip will be MP for Taupo, Louise Upston.

Louise Upston has been promoted to senior whip from junior whip after Mr Key announced last week that Michael Woodhouse will be a Minister outside Cabinet.

The new junior whip will be MP for Hamilton West, Tim Macindoe.

MP for Botany, Jami-Lee Ross, has also been appointed to the newly-created position of third whip.

The Remuneration Authority determined in its annual review last year that political parties with more than 45 MPs will have funding for a third whip.

Being a whip is pretty demanding job. A whip has to be in the House almost all the time, as they are the ones who have to make sure leave is not granted to any delaying tactic from the opposition (such as I seek leave for a 10 hour debate on the price of milk). If you don’t object within a few seconds, then bang the House has so resolved. They also allocate speakers to bills, grant leave to MPs who want to attend engagements during House sitting hours, and generally manage caucus discipline.

The senior whip almost invariably goes on to become a Minister in due course. I can’t recall the last time a National Senior Whip did not become a Minister.

Labour MP Chris Hipkins blogged yesterday:

Just before Christmas the Remuneration Authority released their determination regarding MPs pay. Naturally, all of the media focus was on the fact that MPs were getting a pay rise just before Christmas and it was to be back-dated. Personally I agree with the idea that MPs pay and entitlements should be set on a 3 yearly basis and changes should only come into force following each election, but that’s a discussion for another day.

Pleased to see Chris supports pay and entitlements being set that way. I’d advocated that position for a long time, and hopefully the Select Committee will recommend it when they report back on the MPs Remuneration Bill.

Hidden away in the determination was another interesting little change. Political parties with more than 45 MPs are now entitled to a second junior whip position. So with Michael Woodhouse taking on a ministerial role, and Louise Upston almost certain to step in the Chief Whip’s shoes tomorrow, National will now have to elect two new junior whips. The smart money seems to be on Tim McIndoe and my Breakfast TV sparring partner Jamie Lee-Ross.

Smart money indeed.

I agree with the decision to increase the number of whips big parties can have. It’s a big job and under MMP it’s getting even bigger. But it’s interesting the National government decided to implement the change now, rather than wait until after the next election, when it wouldn’t look quite so much like they were changing the rules to suit their own interests.

Chris is being a bit mischievous here. The Remuneration Authority decided, not the Government, that a party with over 45 MPs needs a third whip and will fund it. we’re not talking a huge amount of money by the way – a whip get $14,100 more than a normal MP.

Of course a party could appoint as many whips as they want. They just won’t get paid extra, unless the Remuneration Authority agrees there is a need. In fact in the early 1990s National had a third whip because their caucus was so large.

This is like that the Greens don’t get two leaders’ salaries. I presume they split the extra pay between the two of them. So it is up to each party to work out what they need, but the Remuneration Authority decides the level at which you get extra funding for such roles.  So the current rules are:

• 1 to 3 MPs: No whip
• 4 to 24 MPs: One whip
• 25 to 44 MPs: Two whips
• 45+ MPs: Three whips

Graeme Edgeler blogs:

I read David Farrar’s post on the secrecy with which the New Zealand Teachers Council Disciplinary Tribunal conducts its hearings, and, like David, was disturbed with what I read in Kathryn Powley’s Herald on Sunday article. The Teachers Council Disciplinary Tribunal doesn’t just claim a power to suppress sensitive information, but rather has rules which automatically suppress all information, instead allowing people to seek official permission before publishing particular information.

David observed that “…the rule should be repealed or amended. If the Council won’t do so, then the enabling legislation should be amended.”

My first thought was to comment in agreement with his general observation: secrecy should not be the default position. My second, to point out that his proposed solution of amending the enabling legislation was excessive, when you could just ask Parliament to vote to disallow, or amend the rule – it’s the rule, not the primary legislation, that is the problem.

For some reason I thought the power of regulations review was about regulations made by Cabinet or core Government departments. But it seems not. So Graeme has taken action:

So instead of just writing a blog post, what follows below is a complaint I sent to Parliament’s Regulations Review Committee yesterday evening.

Any member of Parliament can move a motion to amend, or disallow a regulation, but the Regulations Review Committee is empowered to inquire into subordinate legislation, and a successful complaint to that Committee is a good way to get the rest of Parliament to take notice of your concerns. It operates on a more consensual basis than ordinary select committees, but the individual members of the Committee (currently three National and two Labour), have a special power that other members of Parliament don’t have. If one of them moves a motion of disallowance, the House has to vote on it, or the motion succeeds.

So if one or more members of that committee move to disallow the regulation, then it will be automatically disallowed unless the House schedules time to debate the motion.

It will be very interesting to see what happens. Will the Teachers Council amend their rule before the Regulations Review Committee considers the rule?

Claire Trevett at NZ Herald reports:

The Parliamentary Art Collection, value $12 million, includes an artwork in shagpile that can only be described as a piece of its time.

That time is 1981 – the year of the underarm bowling scandal, the Springbok Tour, and the first hints of the trend that shoulder pads and big hair will become. The piece, Variation in Apricot, is considered ‘textile art’. It reportedly feels like touching a dirty dog.

Arts Minister Chris Finlayson’s immediate reaction is sotto voce: “S***, that’s awful.”

Then he gets closer and sees the plaque that says it was donated by the National Party caucus wives in 1981 – when Robert Muldoon was the Prime Minister.

“Oh my God,” he says, shamefaced at slighting the taste of such a group of women. He slams into reverse and hunts for a more diplomatic adjective than ‘awful.’

“It certainly is a unique contribution to the art collection in Parliament.

Heh, too late.

Mr Finlayson has managed to find a spare 45 minutes between signing Treaty of Waitangi claim settlements – as Treaty Negotiations Minister – to take the Herald on a grand tour of the parliamentary collection.

There are more than 3000 pieces, including the big names: Grahame Sydney landscapes, four Colin McCahons, Len Castle, Ralph Hotere, Philip Trusttum, Brent Wong, Stanley Palmer, Frances Hodgkins, Dick Frizzell, and several by the ubiquitous Unknown Artist.

Mr Finlayson is not one to be seduced by the power of a name, however.

He is an honest, if brutal, critic, designating most pieces to the categories of either “boring” or “bleak”.

Honest, and brutal – that’s the Chris we know and love.

Prime Minister John Key’s favourite piece is Colin McCahon’s Koru. Mr Finlayson is kind about Koru, but possibly only because it is in the Speaker’s Lounge and the Speaker, Dr Lockwood Smith, is there when we drop in.

Mr Finlayson manages to muster up something about the admirable “texture” of the piece, which Dr Smith informs him is worth about $300,000.

But the Speaker was not there just five minutes earlier when Mr Finlayson trotted past two other McCahons – A Piece of Muriwai Canvas and Necessary Protection I – glanced up and sighed. “He’s a strange one, isn’t he? I just find it all a bit … bleak.”

I have to confess, that I once made a rather serious error with a McCahon at Parliament. It was around 2001 or 2002 and I was on the parliamentary ball committee and one of my jobs was to put up posters promoting the ball. I was in a bit of a hurry and having one of those days where I wasn’t concentrating much and pinned one of the posters onto a noticeboard on the 3rd floor of Parliament House, in the Opposition Leader’s corridor.

Except it wasn’t a noticeboard. It was a Colin McCahon painting that was worth around $300,000. I can’t recall which one it was (maybe A Piece of Muriwai Canvas) but there was a very anguished yell when someone discovered my mistake and I quickly removed the poster hoping no one else would notice the thumb tack marks in it. In my defence it really did look a bit like a notice board!

The year end adjournment debate often has a fair amount of humour. Some highlights from it:

Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister): … Grant Robertson summed it up best. He is 100 percent behind David. Are they not all? The question is: which David? That is the one we are worried about. That will be, of course, the question that David Shearer will be pondering as he cuts his turkey on Christmas Day. Does the have the numbers or is he in more trouble than Skippy in a bushfire? That is roughly where he is going. David Shearer knows one thing: David Cunliffe is not happy just being the MP for New Lynn. He is plotting and he is scheming and he is ringing the unions, and he is having barbeques all over the show, and, unlike David Parker, he can count to 14. He knows the magic number, and there he is. But I must say, as we go off to the parliamentary drinks tonight with the press gallery, can you imagine what it would have been like at the Labour Party caucus drinks? Goodness knows what happened when they started sending each other Christmas cards. What on earth did David Shearer write to David Cunliffe in his Christmas card? “Thanks for all your hard work DC and support during the year. Your loyalty means a lot to me.” Still, it could have been worse. They could still have Chris Carter in their caucus, and the truth is that Parekura Horomia thinks he still is in their caucus. Mind you, Parekura Horomia thinks Helen Clark is leaving the party and most of them wish that she was, including David Shearer. In February we have a real treat coming up, and that is the Labour Party equivalent of The X Factor . We know that one of them is getting voted off; we just do not know which one.

Heh. There was a bit of sport at the press gallery party last night, as some Labour MPs were asked if Clare Curran had worked out which author at The Standard they were

But let us give credit where credit is due. They ended the year with one policy. There was only the one policy—and the fact that it did not add up make sense is fair enough. Their policy was to build 100,000 homes for $300,000 each, mainly in Auckland. Not to worry that David Parker thinks it is 700,000 homes—that is OK. There is a minor possible drawback and that is that the home does not come with a section—as long as you are happy with that—or the section does not come with a home. They will be clouds floating above Auckland, and those homeowners will walk off the steps, and they will think they are Felix Baumgartner. They will be falling 60,000 feet to terra firma.

Sadly, basically true. No way will you get homes for under $300,000 in Auckland unless you do something about land prices.

So it took me a year—I am prepared to accept that—but I have finally worked out what green growth is. It is this: printing $20 bills. That is green growth under a Labour-Greens Government. You can only imagine it—Russel Norman as the Minister of Finance ringing Bellamy’s: “I will have a mung bean burger with double alfalfa. Add in a bowl of fries and $5 billion and get it my office by this afternoon.”

I wonder how large a donation Xerox will be making to the Green Party for the election campaign!

Then there is New Zealand First. They ended the year with a lovely caucus singalong. It went a bit like this: “Eight in the bed and Winston said, roll over, roll over. So they all rolled over and one fell out, there were seven in the bed and Winston said: Who’s next?”.

Classic. And I suspect every NZ First MP has a copy of today’s Truth with the story on their former colleague.

I will not start with the Mana Party, because let us be honest—Hone just did what he does best. He got arrested in 2012 and that was it.

Heh.

But Shearer was in good form also.

Finally, thank you to the press gallery for what can only be described as fair and balanced reporting of my first and honeymoon year. I love your work as much as you say you love mine.

Great jibe.

For the Government this is the year its members would like to forget, and many of them have tried very hard to do exactly that. The year 2012 will be described as the year of the brain fade—the year that the PM’s memory suddenly went “Dot-gone”. It is the year that has spawned a whole new lexicon of one-liners, like, if you can recall: “I can’t remember; I don’t recall; I haven’t read that report; I don’t have that piece of paper with me”; and, my personal favourite: “That’s one person’s recollection.” I have another movie idea for Warner Bros and it is called “Partial Recall”. It started with John Banks and John Key having that cup of tea together over a year ago.

Nice.

John Banks continued the theme. He did not remember meeting Dotcom, despite being flown to his mansion in a helicopter for dinner, and meeting Dotcom’s wife, whom he described as the most beautiful woman in the world. I can tell you that if I had said that to another woman, in the presence of my wife, she would never let me forget.

Too true.

And Banksie has fun also:

The ACT Party has had a great year in this Parliament. No leadership spills, no dissension, no waka jumping, and a united caucus—no waka jumping, no leadership spills, and a united caucus.

Ha.

And on a more serious note, for those who think that the House is merely about question time, Gerry Brownlee said:

I want to pay tribute to all members of the Business Committee. I acknowledge Trevor Mallard as the shadow Leader of the House for his contribution in changing what I think has been the way in which we sensibly look at business that we are not divided on—Treaty settlement bills are a perfect example. The progress that is now being made, that really is the fruition of many, many years of work across different Governments, is, I think, a splendid example in the way in which Parliament can work when these provisions are used appropriately. It also means that Parliament this year has sat for the equivalent of 35 weeks – plus. Given that our constitutional arrangements require us to sit for 30 weeks, that indicates a very significant extra commitment from members.

An extra five weeks is significant.

Also a nice sledge from Nikki Kaye:

I also want to acknowledge some of my constituents in this House: David Cunliffe, Denise Roche, and Winston Peters. My office is always open, if you have any issues that you want to chat about.

Lockwood noted:

In 2011 we had no members’ bills introduced into the House; this year there have been 34.

Partly because Grant Robertson is no longer filibustering his own bills!

Questions for Oral Answer.

Questions to Ministers. 2.00pm – 3.00pm.

1. TODD McCLAY to the Minister of Finance: What progress has the Government made with its economic programme in 2012?
2. Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his promise to New Zealanders that “I expect high standards from my Ministers … if they don’t meet the standards I set then obviously I will take action if necessary”?
3. DAVID SHEARER to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements and have confidence in the statements of all his Ministers?
4. NICKY WAGNER to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: How is the Government delivering a strong and effective recovery for greater Christchurch following the earthquakes?
5. CHARLES CHAUVEL to the Minister of Justice: What are the specific “assumptions” based on “incorrect facts” demonstrating some “misunderstanding of New Zealand law” that she alleges are contained in the report of Justice Binnie concerning the application by Mr Bain for compensation for wrongful conviction and imprisonment?
6. Dr PAUL HUTCHISON to the Minister of Health: What progress has the Government made on its national preventive health targets this year?
7. Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS to the Prime Minister: Why does he have confidence in the Minister for Whānau Ora?
8. KRIS FAAFOI to the Minister of Police: Is she committed to all of her promises in regards to the New Zealand Police?
9. TIM MACINDOE to the Minister of Justice: What progress has been made towards achieving Better Public Services across the justice sector?
10. HONE HARAWIRA to the Minister of Education: Does she accept the finding of the Children’s Commissioner’s Expert Advisory Group on Solutions to Child Poverty that a government funded food programme in low-decile schools is a simple, do-able, and low-cost solution to help children in poverty learn and achieve at school, and the recommendation that Government design and implement such a programme; if not, why not?
11. CHRIS HIPKINS to the Minister of Education: Does she believe that her consultation process around the possible closure of residential special schools provided all those affected with an opportunity to have a meaningful say and have that say properly considered; if so, why?
12. MELISSA LEE to the Minister for Social Development: What progress has the Government made in 2012 to shift the focus of our welfare system to one that is active, work focused and delivers better outcomes for New Zealanders?

Today Labour is asking four questions, the Greens, New Zealand First and Mana have one question each. Labour is asking about if the Prime Minister stands by all his statements, the David Bain compensation report by Justice Binnie of Canada, promises to the Police and the reversal of the decision to close a residential special school. The Greens are asking about standards of conduct for Ministers. Mana is asking about food in schools to combat child poverty.

The final patsy of the day for the year goes to Dr Paul Hutchison for Question 6: What progress has the Government made on its national preventive health targets this year?

Adjournment Debate 3.00pm -5.00pm.

This is the last sitting day for the year, so no bills will be debated. What follows is the adjournment debate, which may go for up to two hours.

Questions for Oral Answer 2.00pm – 3.00pm

Questions to Ministers.

1. DAVID SHEARER to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement “I am deeply concerned about every child in New Zealand who is in poverty”; if so, why has the number of children living in material hardship grown under his watch?
2. TODD McCLAY to the Minister of Finance: What measures has the Government taken to support vulnerable New Zealanders through the aftermath of the domestic recession and global financial crisis?
3. METIRIA TUREI to the Prime Minister: When he said “we don’t want to see any New Zealand child suffer … children don’t get to make choices, they’re often the victim of circumstance” does that mean he will take tangible steps to ensure children don’t suffer because of circumstances beyond their control?
4. Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS to the Prime Minister: Does he have confidence in the Minister of Immigration?
5. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister of Finance: Compared to 2012, does the Reserve Bank forecast the New Zealand dollar (as measured by the Trade Weighted Index) to strengthen or weaken in the next two years, and does he believe this will make New Zealand exporters more competitive or less competitive?
6. DAVID BENNETT to the Minister for Economic Development: How is the Government encouraging the sustainable use of natural resources to support jobs and grow the economy?
7. Hon MARYAN STREET to the Minister of Health: Is he satisfied with the state of children’s health in New Zealand; if not, why not?
8. COLIN KING to the Minister of Energy and Resources: What recent announcement has he made about Block Offer 2012?
9. EUGENIE SAGE to the Minister for the Environment: Does she agree with the New Zealand Freshwater Sciences Society in relation to freshwater that “failure to act with decisiveness and urgency risks further environmental degradation and erosion of our international environmental reputation”; if not, why not?
10. Hon LIANNE DALZIEL to the Minister for Building and Construction: How quickly will he respond to the building performance, assessment and construction recommendations of the Royal Commission of Inquiry into Building Failure caused by the Canterbury Earthquakes?
11. NICKY WAGNER to the Minister for Building and Construction: What is the Government doing in response to the Canterbury Earthquakes Royal Commission’s full report?
12. CLARE CURRAN to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements?

Today Labour have five questions, the Greens have two and New Zealand First has one.  Labour are asking about child poverty, the strength of the New Zealand dollar, children’s health, Canterbury building failures and a general question to the Prime Minister on whether he stands by all his statements. The Greens are also asking about child poverty and pollution of freshwater. Winston is asking the Prime Minister if he has confidence in the Minister of Immigration.

Patsy question of the day goes to Colin King for Question 8: What recent announcement has he made about Block Offer 2012?

Government Bills 3.00pm -6-00pm and 7.30pm until 10.00pm. 

1. Appropriation (2011/12 Financial Review) Bill - Second reading

2. Resource Management Reform Bill - First reading

3.Sale and Supply of Alcohol Bill (Alcohol Reform) Amendment Bill – Third reading

4.Local Government (Alcohol Reform)  Amendment Bill – Third reading

5.Summary Offences (Alcohol Reform) Amendment Bill – Third reading

The Appropriation (2011/12 Financial Review) Bill was read a first time in December 2012, introduced to the House last month by Minister of Finance Bill English. The purpose of this bill is to confirm and validate financial matters relating to the 2011/12 financial year.

The Resource Management Reform Bill is being read for the first time and was introduced by Amy Adams at the beginning of December 2012. The aim of the Bill is to amend the Resource Management Act 1991 (the RMA), the Local Government (Auckland Transitional Provisions) Act 2010, and the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 to delivers some fast, discrete improvements to the consenting regime, provide for the delivery of the first combined plan for Auckland, provide further powers to make regulations, and make technical and operational change.

The Alcohol Reform Bill was introduced by Simon Power in 2010, as the then Minister of Justice. Judith Collins, the current Minister of Justice is now guiding the legislation through the house. The bill implements the Government’s decisions on the reform of alcohol legislation; decisions made in response to the Law Commission’s 2010 report on alcohol. The bill has now been split into three parts, amending three different pieces of legislation.

Oral Questions 2.00 pm -3.00 pm

Questions to Ministers.

In today’s questions, National MPs are asking five, Labour four, the Greens two, and New Zealand First one. Labour are asking about education, the deficit, the TPP and conflicts of interest. The Greens are asking about the TPP and foreign aid. New Zealand First are asking about PSA.

Patsy of the day goes to Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga for question number 8; What recent update has he received on Transpower’s North Island Grid Upgrade?

Government Bills 3 pm – 6 pm

1. Alchol Reform Bill - Committee stage (continued)
2. Appropriation (2011/12 Financial Review) Bill - second reading
3. Human Rights Amendment Bill - Interrupted debate on first reading

The Alcohol Reform Bill was introduced by Simon Power in 2010, as the then Minister of Justice. The bill implements the Government’s decisions on the reform of alcohol legislation; decisions made in response to the Law Commission’s 2010 report on alcohol.

The Appropriation (2011/12 Financial Review) Bill was read a first time on Tuesday, introduced to the House last month by Minister of Finance Bill English. The purpose of this bill is to confirm and validate financial matters relating to the 2011/12 financial year.

The Legislation Bill was introduced in October last year by Simon Power. This bill enables the establishment of a full-time Disability Rights Commissioner within the Human Rights Commission, and makes changes to the role and structure of the Commission.

Bill talks on the Green Party photocopier!

Oral Question 2.00 pm – 3.00 pm

Questions to Ministers.

1. JAMI-LEE ROSS to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on the competiveness of New Zealand’s business sector?
2. ANDREW WILLIAMS to the Minister of Trade: Does he stand by his statement on the Trans-Pacific Partnership that “It’s going to be big. It’s going to be significant and it’s going to help New Zealanders find well-paid jobs”; if so, on what evidence does he base this claim?
3. DAVID SHEARER to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement “…You can trust us. If we say we’re going to do something we do it. If we don’t, we don’t … that’s why I’ve stuck to my guns and I haven’t campaigned on one thing and done something different.”?
4. METIRIA TUREI to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement regarding investor state disputes procedures proposed in the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement that “An exclusion solely for Australia and not for everybody else is unlikely to be something we would support”; if so, why?
5. SIMON O’CONNOR to the Minister for Tertiary Education, Skills and Employment: What progress has the Government made to improve the viability of the Student Loan Scheme?
6. JACINDA ARDERN to the Minister for Social Development: How many times, if any, has the Transition to Work Grant, or similar funds, been used by Work and Income New Zealand to purchase tickets to Australia for job seekers who have found work there?
7. SHANE ARDERN to the Minister for Primary Industries: What announcements has he recently made on boosting innovation in the New Zealand primary sector?
8. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by his statement regarding migration to Australia “What’s the point of standing in the airport crying about it?”; if so, how many people have left permanently for Australia since he took office in November 2008?
9. TIM MACINDOE to the Minister for Social Development: What announcements has she made on the Expert Advisory Group on Information Security, who will oversee the development of the initiatives in the Government’s White Paper for Vulnerable Children?
10. CHRIS HIPKINS to the Minister of Education: Does she agree with all of the statements the Prime Minister has made regarding food in schools?
11. MOJO MATHERS to the Associate Minister of Health: Other than the LD50 test, will he rule out other animal tests for the pending psychoactive substances testing regime?
12. NICKY WAGNER to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: What progress is the Government making with rebuilding and repairing residential homes in Christchurch?

Today National is asking five questions, Labour four, Greens two and New Zealand First one. Labour is asking about trust, the  Transition to Work grant, people moving to Australia and food in schools. The Greens are asking about the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations and animal testing.  New Zealand First is also asking about the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations.

Patsy of the day goes to Shane Ardern for Question 7: What announcements has he recently made on boosting innovation in the New Zealand primary sector?

Government Bills 3.00 pm – 6.00 pm and 7.30 pm – 10.00 pm

1. Appropriation (2011/12 Financial Review) -First reading

2. Callaghan Innovation Bill - Third reading

3. Family Court Proceedings Reform Bill - First reading

4. Public Finance (Fiscal Responsibility) Amendment Bill - First reading

5. Criminal Procedure Legislation Bill - First reading

The  Appropriation (2011/12 Financial Review) Bill was introduced by Bill English in November 2012. The purpose of this bill is to confirm and validate financial matters relating to the 2011/12 financial year.

The Callaghan Innovation Bill (formerly the  Advanced Technology Institute Bill) was introduced by Steven Joyce in September 2012. The aim of this bill is to establish a new statutory Crown entity, the Advanced Technology Institute (ATI), with the purpose of supporting businesses, primarily in the manufacturing sector and services sector, to improve their competitiveness and growth through science and technology-based innovation and its commercialisation.

The Family Court Proceedings Reform Bill was introduced by Judith Collins in November 2012. This bill implements the Government’s decisions resulting from a review of the Family Court conducted by the Ministry of Justice.

The Public Finance (Fiscal Responsibility) Amendment Bill was introduced by Bill English in August 2012.  The aim of this Bill is to amend the “fiscal responsibility provisions” of the Public Finance Act 1989 (the Act) to “ensure” that they “continue to be a sound guide for fiscal policy”.

The Criminal Procedure Legislation Bill was introduced by Chester Borrows in October 2012. This Bill contains technical amendments required to ensure that the legislative intent of the Criminal Procedure Act 2011 (the 2011 Act), and related legislation arising from the dividing of the Criminal Procedure (Reform and Modernisation) Bill, is made clear and can be applied as intended by the judiciary, prosecutors, and defence counsel. Additionally, without the greater specificity and clarity provided by the proposed amendments, the full and effective implementation of the 2011 Act and the benefits sought to be achieved may not be fully realised.

TV3 reports:

Minister of Transport Gerry Brownlee in Parliament yesterday compared Auckland’s plan for a city rail link to the infamous monorail episode of The Simpsons.

In response to questions from Labour MP Phil Twyford on the impact of the city’s growing traffic woes, at first Mr Brownlee disputed the economic benefits of the proposed rail link, and questioned the impact it would have on congestion.

But towards the end of his answer, Mr Brownlee slipped in a reference to the classic Simpsons episode Marge vs the Monorail.

“I would consider hiring Lyle Lanley and associates to do a scoping study for us on the city rail link,” he said.

“I know that they’ve done some very good work on some of the projects in Brockway, Ogdenville and North Haverbrook, and if they think this stacks up, we’ll give it some consideration further.”

In the Simpsons episode Lanley is revealed to be a conman, building a cheap and nasty monorail which begins to fall apart on its maiden trip.

Mr Brownlee’s quip appeared to go completely over the heads of other MPs in Parliament. …

Marge vs the Monorail first aired in 1993, and was penned by talk show host and comedian Conan O’Brien. It is often cited as one of the long-running series’ greatest episodes.

It’s a great sledge when the other side don’t even realise they have been sledged.

Oral Questions 2.00 pm – 3.00 pm

Questions to Ministers.

1. METIRIA TUREI to the Minister for Social Development: When she said in her response to the 2010 Taskforce for Action on Sexual Violence, that it was important to “consider future funding options to ensure the sector has greater certainty”, did she intend for that to mean funding may be cut?
2. Hon TAU HENARE to the Minister of Finance: What contribution is the screen industry making to the New Zealand economy?
3. Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS to the Prime Minister: What advice has he received about a new agreement between the New Zealand Government and China Southern Airlines in respect of visa processing?
4. DAVID SHEARER to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement on rheumatic fever that “Tackling this disease is something I am personally championing. It’s so important to achieve results in this area, that I’ve made it one of our top 10 results areas”?
5. Dr CAM CALDER to the Minister of Health: What progress is the Government making on the national health targets?
6. CATHERINE DELAHUNTY to the Minister of Education: What evidence, if any, has she received that creating bigger, super schools in Christchurch will benefit students and their communities?
7. MIKE SABIN to the Minister for Social Development: How is the Government supporting communities to make a difference for New Zealand’s most vulnerable children?
8. IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY to the Minister of Defence: Has he read all the Defence Force reports regarding the accident involving a RNZAF Iroquois on ANZAC Day 2010; if so, what action has he taken?
9. Hon Dr NICK SMITH to the Minister of Energy and Resources: What is the Government’s response to the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment’s recently released interim report on fracking?
10. Hon MARYAN STREET to the Minister of Health: Is he satisfied that his health targets are working for those that need them the most?
11. NIKKI KAYE to the Minister of Education: What is the Government doing to raise educational achievement for Pasifika students?
12. CHRIS HIPKINS to the Associate Minister of Education: What is the difference between a trial and a test when it comes to ICT systems in light of his answer to a supplementary question on Oral Question No 10 yesterday?

Today National is asking five questions, Labour four, Greens two and New Zealand First one. Labour are asking about rheumatic fever policy,  Defence Force accidents, health targets and Novopay.  The Greens are asking about sexual violence  treatment funding and Christchurch schools. New Zealand First are asking about the China Southern Airlines special visas.

Patsy of the day goes to Nikki Kaye for Question 11: What is the Government doing to raise educational achievement for Pasifika students?

Government Bills 3.00 pm – 6.00 pm and 7.30 pm – 10.00 pm

1. Advanced Technology Institute Bill-Committee stage  (cont.)

2. Financial Reporting Bill - First reading

3. State Sector and Public Finance Reform Bill – First reading

4. Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill  - Third reading

The Advanced Technology Institute Bill was introduced by Steven Joyce in September 2012. The aim of this bill is to establish a new statutory Crown entity, the Advanced Technology Institute (ATI), with the purpose of supporting businesses, primarily in the manufacturing sector and services sector, to improve their competitiveness and growth through science and technology-based innovation and its commercialisation.

The Financial Reporting Bill was introduced by Craig Foss in July 2012. The aim of this Bill is to repeal and replace the Financial Reporting Act 1993 (the 1993 Act) and, in particular, to continue the External Reporting Board and define its functions and powers, provide for the issue of financial reporting standards and auditing and assurance standards and provide for auditor qualifications and other standard provisions relating to financial reporting duties under other enactments

The State Sector and Public Finance Reform Bill was introduced in August 2012. This bill amends the main statutes governing the management of the State sector and public finances in New Zealand.

The Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill was introduced by David Carter in May 2012. It aims to reform the law relating to local government in New Zealand by amending the Local Government Act 2002

Oral Questions 2.00 pm – 3.00 pm.

Questions to Ministers

1. JOHN HAYES to the Minister of Finance: What steps is the Government taking to address the long-standing problem of housing affordability in New Zealand?
2. Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement that the Household Labour Force Survey shows that “over the last four years, the number of jobs in manufacturing is roughly about the same”, given that the survey shows employment in manufacturing has declined by 31,600 in the four years to September 2012?
3. DAVID SHEARER to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement that “Yes, there is a housing issue in New Zealand”?
4. Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS to the Minister for Whānau Ora: Is the Whānau Integration, Innovation and Engagement Fund open to individuals who do not have New Zealand citizenship or residency; if so, how many non-residents have received grants from the Fund since 2010?
5. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister for Economic Development: Does he accept the findings of the most recent Household Labour Force Survey that show the unemployment rate at its highest level in 13 years; if not, why not?
6. CHRIS AUCHINVOLE to the Minister of State Services: What recent announcements has the Government made regarding public service office accommodation in Wellington?
7. Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM to the Minister for Climate Change Issues: What projections, if any, have been done on the impact of his amendments to the Emissions Trading Scheme on forestry?
8. Hon ANNETTE KING to the Minister of Housing: Does he agree with all of the Prime Minister’s statements on housing?
9. Hon PETER DUNNE to the Minister of Transport: What factors led to the Government announcement last Wednesday to proceed with the construction of the Transmission Gully Highway as a public-private partnership?
10. CHRIS HIPKINS to the Associate Minister of Education: Was he aware, before he signed off on the decision for Novopay to go live, that the Ministry of Education’s survey of trial Novopay users found only 37 percent of them believed they were ready for its introduction; if not, why not?
11. MELISSA LEE to the Minister of Veterans’ Affairs: What is the Government doing to help veterans attend significant commemorations of their service?
12. GRANT ROBERTSON to the Prime Minister: Was the subject of Kim Dotcom raised in his recent discussion with US President Barack Obama; if so, by whom?

Today National is asking three questions, Labour five, Greens two,  New Zealand First and United Future have one each. Labour are asking about housing twice, unemployment, the Novopay issue and Kim Dotocom. The Greens are asking about unemployment in manufacturing and the effect of the Emissions Trading Scheme on forestry.  New Zealand First is asking about Whanau Ora. United Future are asking about the construction of Transmission Gully.

Patsy of the day goes to Chris Auchinvole for Question 6: What recent announcements has the Government made regarding public service office accommodation in Wellington?

Government Bills 3.00 pm – 6.00 pm and 7.30 pm – 10.00 pm

1. Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill - Committee stage (cont.)

2. Advanced Technology Institute Bill – Committee stage (cont.)

3. Legislation Bill- Committee stage

4. International Finance Agreements Amendment Bill -Committee stage (cont.)

The Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill was introduced by David Carter in May 2012. It aims to reform the law relating to local government in New Zealand by amending the Local Government Act 2002

The Advanced Technology Institute Bill was introduced by Steven Joyce in September 2012. The aim of this bill is to establish a new statutory Crown entity, the Advanced Technology Institute (ATI), with the purpose of supporting businesses, primarily in the manufacturing sector and services sector, to improve their competitiveness and growth through science and technology-based innovation and its commercialisation

The Legislation Bill was introduced by Chris Finlayson in June 2010. The aim of this Bill is to modernise and improve the law relating to the publication, availability, reprinting, revision, and official versions of legislation and to bring this law together in a single piece of legislation

The International Finance Agreements Amendment Bill was introduced by Bill English in October 2011. This Bill, which amends the International Finance Agreements Act 1961 (the Act), provides for New Zealand to recognise changes to the Articles of Agreement of the International Monetary Fund (the Articles), which are the governing documents of the International Monetary Fund (IMF)

[DPF comment: Very interesting that the lead question from the Government isn't a patsy, but on housing affordability - presumably reflecting a belief that Labour's policy is full of glaring holes and doesn't add up. I approve. I think the Government should use more of its questions to attack the Opposition's dopey policies, rather than patsies to Ministers]

Oral Questions 2.00 pm -3.00 pm

Questions to Ministers.

1. GRANT ROBERTSON to the Minister for Tertiary Education, Skills and Employment: How many Modern Apprenticeships were being undertaken as at December 2011, and what percentage increase or decrease is this compared with December 2008?
2. TE URUROA FLAVELL to the Minister of Health: Does the Government believe that it is acceptable that two out of three Māori and Pacific Island diabetics die from diabetic complications, compared to one in three Pakeha diabetics; and what actions has he taken to reduce the inequities in light of fresh predictions that by 2020 one in six Māori and Pasifika adults will have diabetes?
3. DAVID BENNETT to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on progress in lifting New Zealanders’ household savings and reducing household debt?
4. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Minister for Economic Development: Has the Government changed its position in relation to the recommendations of the Pure Advantage green growth reports given its rejection of Pure Advantage’s first report?
5. MARK MITCHELL to the Minister for Social Development: How will the new Child Protect Line, discussed in the Government’s White Paper for Vulnerable Children, better protect New Zealand’s children?
6. Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS to the Minister of Immigration: What assurances can he give that international criminals will not be entering New Zealand through the China Southern Airlines frequent flyer scheme?
7. CHRIS HIPKINS to the Associate Minister of Education: Does he take ministerial responsibility for the problems with the Novopay system; if not, why not?
8. CHRIS AUCHINVOLE to the Minister for the Environment: What recent announcements has she made in relation to the Community Environment Fund?
9. Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Minister of Finance: Does he agree with the Pure Advantage report released today that “green growth represents a huge opportunity for all Kiwis to prosper”; if so, what will he do to put New Zealand on a green growth pathway?
10. Dr PAUL HUTCHISON to the Associate Minister of Health: What is the Government doing to ensure the ongoing provision of hospice services in our communities?
11. CLARE CURRAN to the Minister for Economic Development: Does he stand by all his statements about manufacturing in New Zealand?
12. SCOTT SIMPSON to the Associate Minister of Transport: What progress can he report on the Government’s Vehicle Licensing Reform Project?

In today’s questions, National MPs are asking five, Labour four, the Greens one, the Maori Party one and New Zealand First one. Labour are asking about apprenticeships, the Pure Advantage report and education. The Greens are also asking about the Pure Advantage report. New Zealand First are asking about visitors’ visas, again, having used their one question yesterday on a similar issue. The Maori Party is asking about diabetes.

Patsy of the day goes to Mark Mitchell for question number 5; How will the new Child Protect Line, discussed in the Government’s White Paper for Vulnerable Children, better protect New Zealand’s children?

Sitting Hours

Sitting hours for the House were extended and the House sat from 9 am to 1 pm today. This was for the third readings for the Ngāti Manuhiri Claims Settlement Bill and the Ngati Whatua Orakei Claims Settlement Bill.

Government Bills 3 pm – 6 pm

1. Lawyers and Conveyancers Amendment Bill – third reading
2. Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill – second reading
3. Legislation Bill – Committee stage (continued)

The Lawyers and Conveyancers Amendment Bill was introduced by Simon Power in 2010, as the then Minister of Justice. The Bill amends the principle Act to restore the rank of Queen’s Counsel (QC) and restrict eligibility for appointment to that rank, amend the provisions relating to a conveyancing practitioner holding non-voting shares of an incorporated law firm and require the power of attorney which a lawyer or conveyancing practitioner in sole practice must give to enable the donee to conduct the practice as an agent during any periods in which the lawyer or conveyancing practitioner is an undischarged bankrupt.

The Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill was introduced to the House in May by David Carter. The sets about implementing the first half of the eight policy goals described in former Minister Nick Smith’s Bettter Local Government document.

The Legislation Bill was read a first time in 2010, introduced by Chris Finlayson. The purpose of this bill is to modernise and improve the law relating to the publication, availability, reprinting, revision, and official versions of legislation in a single piece of legislation.

Oral Questions 2.00 pm – 3.00 pm

Questions to Ministers

1. Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement that the Household Labour Force Survey is “the most rigorous form of measuring employment in the economy”; if so, what were the Survey’s results for unemployment for the last four quarters?
2. DAVID SHEARER to the Prime Minister: Does he still think his Government is “on the right track”?
3. MAGGIE BARRY to the Minister of Finance: What progress is the Government making in getting back to surplus and reducing future borrowing?
4. JACINDA ARDERN to the Minister for Social Development:Does she stand by all her answers to Oral Question No 9 yesterday?
5. Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS to the Minister of Immigration: Is he satisfied that Immigration New Zealand’s visitor visa processing system is robust and effective; if so, why?
6. MIKE SABIN to the Minister for Social Development: What further announcements has she made on the Children’s Teams, part of the Government’s White Paper for Vulnerable Children?
7. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Minister for Economic Development: Is he satisfied that the policy initiatives undertaken by his Ministry are adequately tackling the problem of unemployment; if not, why not?
8. DENISE ROCHE to the Minister for Tertiary Education, Skills and Employment: Was he referring to the SkyCity Convention Centre, which is the subject of an inquiry by the Auditor-General, when he told the House, “in relation to the International Convention Centre, they have sought to stop, which is the reason right now for 1,000 less jobs in this country”?
9. CHRIS HIPKINS to the Associate Minister of Education: Does he stand by his statement “Yes I do have confidence in Novopay”?
10. JACQUI DEAN to the Minister of Corrections: What steps has the Government taken to protect communities from high-risk offenders?
11. DARIEN FENTON to the Acting Minister of Labour: When will he begin the process of consulting on the minimum wage for 2013?
12. KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI to the Minister of Internal Affairs: How many New Zealanders have applied for a passport online since the launch of the Online Passport Renewal Service?

Today there are five questions from Labour, four from National, two from the Greens and one from NZ First. There are also two Members Questions regarding the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009 (Application to Casinos) Amendment Bill from Green MP Denise Roche.

Labour are asking on welfare reforms, Novopay, the state of the economy and twice on employment. The Greens are asking on employment and SkyCity, and NZ First are asking on visitors’ visas.

Patsy of the day goes to Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi for Question 12; How many New Zealanders have applied for a passport online since the launch of the Online Passport Renewal Service?

Private and Local Bills 3.00 pm – 6.00 pm

1. Waitaki District Council Reserves and Other Land Empowering Bill – second reading
2. South Taranaki District Council (Cold Creek Rural Water Supply) Bill – second reading

1. Land Transport (Admissibility of Evidential Breath Tests) Amendment Bill – interrupted debate on first reading
2. Conservation (Natural Heritage Protection) Bill – first reading
3. Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009 (Application to Casinos) Amendment Bill – first reading

The Waitaki District Council Reserves and Other Land Empowering Bill was introduced by Jacqui Dean and revokes the reservation of Part Lot 7, DP 6425 (the Palmerston Showgrounds) under the Reserves Act 1977 and vests ownership of the land in the Waitaki District Council absolutely.

The South Taranaki District Council (Could Creek Rural Water Supply) Bill was introduced by Chester Borrows and  seeks to establish a process by which the council may obtain the authority to transfer the Cold Creek Rural Water Supply Scheme to Cold Creek Community Water Supply Limited.

The Land Transport (Admissibility of Evidential Breath Tests) Amendment Bill was introduced by Scott Simpson  and amends the Land Transport Act 1998 to broaden the circumstances where a positive evidential breath test is admissible evidence in a prosecution under the Act. Under present law a positive evidential breath test is not admissible in evidence if the suspect has elected to have a blood test.

The Conservation (Natural Heritage Protection) Bill will be introduced by Jacqui Dean and aims to encourage compliance with enactments administered by the Department of Conservation by increasing penalties to better protect natural and historic resources and protected wildlife. The main changes the Bill makes to the existing law are to both increase the penalties, and implement a consistent approach to penalties across the main enactments administered by the Department of Conservation.

The Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009 (Application to Casinos) Amendment Bill will be introduced by Metiria Turei. The purpose of this Bill is to ensure that the proceeds of crime spent in, and laundered through, casinos are returned to those from whom they have been stolen or acquired.

Oral Questions 2.00 pm – 3.00 pm

Questions to Ministers

1. KATRINA SHANKS to the Minister of Finance: How is the Government’s economic programme helping New Zealand families by increasing savings, keeping interest rates low and minimising cost of living pressures?
2. DAVID SHEARER to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements on jobs and employment?
3. TIM MACINDOE to the Minister for Social Development: What announcements have been made as part of the Government’s White Paper for Vulnerable Children to take stronger action against child abusers?
4. GRANT ROBERTSON to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement “What we do environmentally matters a great deal, but we also want jobs and we also want to make sure we’re not prioritising that over everything else. I think we’ve got that balance about right”?
5. JONATHAN YOUNG to the Minister of Energy and Resources: What recent announcement has been made about Block Offer 2013?
6. Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Minister for Tertiary Education, Skills and Employment: Was the Prime Minister correct when he said on 12 October 2012 that “our unemployment rate’s not rising”; if so, why?
7. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by his statement in September 2010 that “there is no doubt that unemployment has peaked”?
8. TODD McCLAY to the Minister for Climate Change Issues: What steps is he taking to ensure the environmental integrity of the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme?
9. JACINDA ARDERN to the Minister for Social Development: Does she stand by her statement that “the Government is taking an active, work-based approach” to her welfare reforms?
10. BARBARA STEWART to the Minister of Health: Is he satisfied that District Health Boards have done enough to promote understanding of the Pharmacy Services Agreement?
11. Dr JACKIE BLUE to the Minister of Health: What is the Government doing to promote awareness and support those with hepatitis C?
12. Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM to the Minister for Climate Change Issues: Has he received any advice on the impact on New Zealand trade resulting from his decision not to sign up to the Second Commitment Period under the Kyoto Protocol; if so, what was it?

Today there are five questions from National, four from Labour, two from the Greens and one from NZ First.

Labour are asking on welfare reforms, the environment, and twice on employment. The Greens are asking on employment and the Kyoto Protocol, and NZ First are asking on the Pharmacy Services Agreement.

Patsy of the day goes to Katrina Shanks for Q1: How is the Government’s economic programme helping New Zealand families by increasing savings, keeping interest rates low and minimising cost of living pressures?

Government Bills 3.00 pm – 6.00 pm and 7.30 pm – 10.00 pm

1. Lawyers and Conveyancers Amendment Bill – committee stage
2. Electronic Identity Verification Bill – committee stage
3. Identity Information Confirmation Bill – committee stage
4. Legislation Bill – committee stage (cont.)
5. Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill – second reading

The Lawyers and Conveyancers Amendment Bill was introduced by Judith Collins and restores the rank of QC as well as restricting eligibility for that rank to barristers sole. It passed its second reading by 63 votes to 56. Labour, the Greens, NZ First and Mana all voted against.

The Electronic Identity Verification Bill and Identity Information Confirmation Bill were introduced by Chris Tremain and  set out the regulatory framework for the administration and application of the new “RealMe” online identity verification service. It passed its second reading with unanimous support.

The Legislation Bill was introduced by Chris Finlayson to modernise and improve the law relating to the publication, availability, reprinting, revision, and official versions of legislation and to bring this law together in a single piece of legislation. It passed its second reading with unanimous support.

The Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill was introduced by David Carter and amends the principal Act’s purpose to explicitly target cost-effectiveness, as well as making a raft of other amendments relating to the operation of local government. It barely passed its first reading by 61 votes to 59, with  Labour, the Greens, NZ First, the Māori Party and Mana all voting against. The Local Government and Environment Committee reported it back to the House on 30 October.

EDIT: Have changed the post to reflect that the Legislation Bill committee stage is the only one of the four that is being continued – I had inaccurately labelled the other three as continued. – speters

Questions for Oral Answer 2.00pm 3.00pm

Questions to Ministers.

1. Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR to the Prime Minister: Did Hon Kate Wilkinson have Ministerial responsibility for the departmental errors during her term as Minister of Labour which partially contributed to the deaths of 29 miners at Pike River?
2. TODD McCLAY to the Minister of Finance: What steps is the Government taking to support jobs as part of its programme to build a more productive and competitive economy?
3. RICHARD PROSSER to the Minister for Primary Industries:Does he have confidence in the Director-General of the Ministry for Primary Industries?
4. Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Minister of Finance: What are the estimated costs to the taxpayer resulting from the Climate Change Response (Emissions Trading and Other Matters) Amendment Bill?
5. JACINDA ARDERN to the Minister for Social Development:Does she stand by all her statements relating to the departure of the Ministry of Social Development Deputy Chief Executive, Janet Grossman?
6. SIMON O’CONNOR to the Minister of Science and Innovation:How is the Government using science to address some of the biggest challenges facing New Zealand?
7. PHIL TWYFORD to the Minister of Transport: What assurances did Hon Steven Joyce give Snapper CEO Miki Szikszai in relation to Snapper’s participation in the Auckland integrated ticketing arrangement when they met on 3 March 2012?
8. IAN McKELVIE to the Minister of Justice: What is the Government doing to further protect victims from their attackers?
9. CLARE CURRAN to the Minister for Communications and Information Technology: What percentage of New Zealand homes did the Government commit in 2008 would be connected to Ultra Fast Broadband within 10 years?
10. SHANE ARDERN to the Minister of Health: What progress is the Government making on improving the regulation of natural health products?
11. KEVIN HAGUE to the Minister of Health: Does he regard the input and engagement of clinicians and the public to be critical to the achievement of his targets for DHB performance?
12. TRACEY MARTIN to the Minister of Education: Is she satisfied with the way schools are funded?

Today there are four questions to ministers from National, four from Labour, two from the Greens and two from New Zealand First.

Labour is asking about Pike River and the Ministerial Responsibility relating to the tragedy, the departure of an Ministry of Social Development Deputy Chief Executive, Snapper’s participation in the Auckland integrated ticketing and the Ultra Fast Broadband roll out.  The Greens are asking about the Emissions Trading Scheme and DHB Performance. NZ First are asking about the Ministry for Primary Industries and school funding.

Patsy of the day goes to Shane Adern for Q.10  What progress is the Government making on improving the regulation of natural health products?

Government Bills 4.00pm to 6.00pm and 7.30pm to 10.00pm.

1. Climate Change Response (Emissions Trading and Other Matters) Amendment Bill. (Third Reading, Continued)

2. Advanced Technology Institute Bill.  (Second Reading)

3. State Sector and Public Finance Reform Bill.  (First Reading)

The Climate Change Response (Emissions Trading and Other Matters) Amendment Bill  is being guided through its Third Reading by Tim Groser. The aim of this Bill is to amend the Climate Change Response Act 2002 (the Act) to modify the emissions trading scheme (ETS), provide further regulation-making powers and to make “technical and operational changes.

The Advanced Technology Institute Bill was first introduced by Steven Joyce in September 2012. The aim of this Bill is to establish a new statutory Crown entity, the Advanced Technology Institute (ATI), with the purpose of supporting businesses, primarily in the manufacturing sector and services sector, to improve their competitiveness and growth through science and technology-based innovation and its commercialisation.

The State Sector and Public Finance Reform Billis being introduced for the first time by Jonathan Coleman. This bill amends the main statutes governing the management of the State sector and public finances in New Zealand.

Andrea Vance reports:

A row has broken out over school children being allowed to sit in MPs’ chairs.

Speaker Lockwood Smith wrote to all political parties yesterday saying there had been complaints about unruly behaviour during private tours. MPs often show school children and other guests around the debating chamber when Parliament is not sitting.

In the edict, Dr Smith said he had “a number of issues and concerns raised by the Parliamentary Service about the behaviour of members’ guests”.

He wants party whips to remind MPs: “No staff, members’ guests or visitors are to sit in the seats in the chamber at any time . . . desk phones are not to be used and guests should not handle the microphone.”

But Labour whip Chris Hipkins has hit back, saying the ban was “unnecessarily draconian”.

I agree with Chris. Since I was a child, kids and others have been unofficially allowed to sit on MPs Chairs – so long as they are respectful. I recall the thrill at sitting in the PM’s Chair, and even trying the Speaker’s Chair out for size. And when many years later I was a staffer and did private tours, I would allow guests to do the same – again so long as they were respectful.

Strictly speaking, the rules say guests should not sit in MPs’ chairs. But Mr Hipkins said: “It’s a nice thing to be able to do.

Yeah it is officially against the rules, and Lockie is just reinforcing the rules. But it would be a good rule to loosen up, or in the interim turn a but of a blind eye to – unless there is some serious harm being caused.

Oral Questions 2.00pm to 3.00pm

Questions to Ministers

1. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by his answer on Tuesday regarding jobs “I think that the number of 170,000 may come from the initial Budget forecast for 2009, perhaps. I cannot remember the year exactly.”?
2. Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM to the Minister for Climate Change Issues: Given the recent loss of Māori Party support for his Climate Change Response (Emissions Trading and Other Matters) Amendment Bill, will he consider working with opposition parties on amendments to improve it?
3. LOUISE UPSTON to the Minister of Finance: How is the Government’s infrastructure programme contributing to building a more competitive economy?
4. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Minister for Economic Development: Does he agree with the NZIER shadow board that “the growth outlook for the second half of 2012 looks weak and unemployment remains stubbornly high.”?
5. IAN McKELVIE to the Minister for Social Development: What announcements has she made to review Child Youth and Family’s complaints process?
6. Hon MARYAN STREET to the Minister of Health: What progress has been made in the delivery of the Prime Minister’s Youth Mental Health Project announced in April of this year with an extra $11.3 million provided to support it?
7. JACQUI DEAN to the Minister for the Environment: What reports has she received on the time taken for decisions on notified consents issued under the Resource Management Act 1991?
8. GARETH HUGHES to the Minister of Foreign Affairs: Why did New Zealand pull out of a joint proposal with the United States to create a marine reserve in Antarctica’s Ross Sea?
9. Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by the answers he gave yesterday to supplementary question 5 on Oral Question No 7 and supplementary question 3 on Oral Question No 12?
10. NICKY WAGNER to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: What progress has the Government made to support repairing damaged houses and infrastructure following the Canterbury earthquakes?
11. SUE MORONEY to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement on 3News last night, on the subject of Business New Zealand’s assertion that women need retraining when returning to employment after extended parental leave that “no. It wouldn’t be my view”?
12. JAMI-LEE ROSS to the Minister of Immigration: What is the Government doing to ensure that New Zealanders have first priority for jobs in the Canterbury rebuild?

Today there are 5 questions towards ministers from National, 4 from Labour, 2 from the Greens and 1 from New Zealand First

Labour are asking about the jobs forecast in budget 2012, economic growth and unemployment, youth mental health and paid parental leave.

Green’s are asking about the Climate Change Response (Emissions Trading and Other Matters) Amendment Bill and Marine Reserves in the Ross Sea.

New Zealand First are asking the Prime Minister about answers he gave in regards to Kim Dot Com in Parliament on Wednesday. In particular the answer he gave to question 7.

“When did he first learn of a German resident living in the Chrisco mansion in the Prime Minister’s electorate?” 

Pasty of the day

Today’s pasty of the day goes to question 7 from National asking about reports received on consents issued under the RMA

“JACQUI DEAN to the Minister for the Environment: What reports has she received on the time taken for decisions on notified consents issued under the Resource Management Act 1991?”

Government Bills 3.00pm to 6.00pm

1) Climate Change Response (Emissions Trading and Other Matters) Amendment Bill- 2nd reading – 12x 10 min speeches – 3.00pm to 4.00pm

This bill is designed to amend the Climate Change Response Act 2002 which deals with the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) in New Zealand via proposed changes including operational and technical changes to the ETS as a result of the review of the scheme conducted in 2011. One of the proposed changes is the intention to remove the requirement for our agriculture sector to be involved in the scheme from 2015. In addition, the bill gives forest owners more flexibility especially for forests planted before 1990.

2) Taxation (Annual Rates, Returns Filing, and Remedial Matters) Bill- 3rd reading – 12x 10 min speeches – 4.00pm to 5.00pm

This bill is designed to set the tax rates for the 2012/2013 year as well as minor changes to the filling and storage of tax returns. In addition, it amends acts such as the Kiwisaver Act 2006

3) Financial Markets Conduct Bill- 2nd reading – 12x 10 min speeches – 5.00pm to 6.00pm

This bill is designed to merge several other pieces of legislation into one act with the primary purpose of the bill is to promote  confidence in the financial markets for investors, business and customers of financial services products. In addition, this bill contains sections on how financial services products can be sold and adds additional regulation to people working in this sector including new rules for misleading or false statements.

SUBMISSION OF DAVID FARRAR ON THE
MARRIAGE (DEFINITION OF MARRIAGE) AMENDMENT BILL TO THE GOVERNMENT ADMINISTRATION SELECT COMMITTEE

About the Submitter

1. This submission is made by David Farrar in a personal capacity. I would like to appear before the Committee to speak to my submission.
2. While not a detail I would normally include in a submission, I am heterosexual, so have no self-interest in this bill.

Overall Bill

3. I submit in support of the bill proceeding. To quote Dr Paul Hutchison, “I simply cannot construct a strong enough intellectual moral health or even spiritual argument against it … and the reverse is very much the case.” This bill will allow a couple of the same sex to marry each other, which I believe to be good for the couple, good for the institution of marriage, and good for New Zealand. I do support some amendments being made to clarify the impact of this bill on other Acts of Parliament

Equality

4. A same sex couple is of course different to a couple of the opposition gender. But this doesn’t mean that the law should discriminate in not allowing same sex couples to marry. Same sex couples fall in love, commit to each other, form households and raise children – the core of being a family. The law should allow such couples to marry. Why would we want an adult couple desiring marriage to not be able to marry?
5. Some argue that as a same sex couple can’t produce children naturally, that they should be ineligible to marry. I do not accept this argument as many married couples are infertile, choose not to have children, or have children from past relationships. We don’t ban woman who have reached menopause from marrying, and now should we ban same sex couples.

Strengthening Marriage

6. I think marriage is a wonderful institution, and the benefits of marriage are well documented. I believe allowing a same sex couple to marry, hence committing to each other for life, strengthens the institution of marriage.
7. I would like to quote three conservative leaders as to why same sex marriage is good for marriage. US Solictor-General (for George W Bush) Theordore Olsen has said “Many of my fellow conservatives have an almost knee-jerk hostility toward gay marriage. This does not make sense, because same-sex unions promote the values conservatives prize.Marriage is one of the basic building blocks of our neighborhoods and our nation. At its best, it is a stable bond between two individuals who work to create a loving household and a social and economic partnership. We encourage couples to marry because the commitments they make to one another provide benefits not only to themselves but also to their families and communities. Marriage requires thinking beyond one’s own needs. It transforms two individuals into a union based on shared aspirations, and in doing so establishes a formal investment in the well-being of society.

   The fact that individuals who happen to be gay want to share in this vital social institution is evidence that conservative ideals enjoy widespread acceptance. Conservatives should celebrate this, rather than lament it.”

   and“I understand, but reject, certain religious teachings that denounce homosexuality as morally wrong, illegitimate, or unnatural; and I take strong exception to those who argue that same-sex relationships should be discouraged by society and law. Science has taught us, even if history has not, that gays and lesbians do not choose to be homosexual any more than the rest of us choose to be heterosexual.

   To a very large extent, these characteristics are immutable, like being left-handed. And, while our Constitution guarantees the freedom to exercise our individual religious convictions, it equally prohibits us from forcing our beliefs on others. I do not believe that our society can ever live up to the promise of equality, and the fundamental rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, until we stop invidious discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

8. UK Conservative PM David Cameron: “But for me, leadership on families also means speaking out on marriage. Marriage is not just a piece of paper. It pulls couples together through the ebb and flow of life. It gives children stability. And it says powerful things about what we should value. So yes, we will recognise marriage in the tax system.
   
   But we’re also doing something else. I once stood before a Conservative conference and said it shouldn’t matter whether commitment was between a man and a woman, a woman and a woman, or a man and another man. You applauded me for that. Five years on, we’re consulting on legalising gay marriage.
   And to anyone who has reservations, I say: Yes, it’s about equality, but it’s also about something else: commitment. Conservatives believe in the ties that bind us; that society is stronger when we make vows to each other and support each other. So I don’t support gay marriage despite being a Conservative. I support gay marriage because I’m a Conservative.

9. Former Australian Liberal Party Leader Malcolm Turnbull said “Families are the foundation of our society and I am firmly of the view that that we would be a stronger society if more people were married – and by that I mean formally, legally married – and fewer were divorced. …And I have to say that I am utterly unpersuaded by the proposition that my marriage to Lucy, or indeed any marriage, is undermined by two gay men or two lesbians setting up house down the road – whether it is called a marriage or not.

   Regrettably, this aspect of the debate is dripping with the worst sort of hypocrisy, and the deepest pools are all too often found among the most sanctimonious.
   
   Let us be honest with each other. The threat to marriage is not the gays. It is a lack of loving commitment – whether it is found in the form of neglect, indifference, cruelty or adultery, to name just a few manifestations of the loveless desert in which too many marriages come to grief.”

10. I agree with Messrs. Cameron, Turnbull and Olsen that allowing same sex couples to marry will strengthen the institution of marriage.

Welcoming diversity

11. Adolescence is a difficult time for many teenagers, and gay/lesbian teenagers especially can find it more challenging than most as they wonder whether there is something “wrong” with them as they are not attracted to the opposite sex like most of their peers are. We see the results of this in the significantly higher levels of suicide amongst gay and lesbian teenagers. The 2007 Auckland University study of around 9,000 secondary school students found 20% of youth attracted to the same (or both) sex attempted suicide in the last year. This is an appallingly high figure.
12. Knowing that despite their “different” sexual orientation, that one day they can love and marry someone will I think send a very powerful message to young gay and lesbian New Zealanders that there is nothing wrong in being different, and that the Parliament of New Zealand has said so by allowing same sex couples to marry.

Tradition

13. One argument against allowing same sex couples to marry is that this goes against the traditional definition of marriage.
14. This is no surprise. Up until 27 years ago, it was a criminal offence for a homosexual man to even have consensual sex with another adult man. So of course there is no recent tradition of same sex marriage.
15. If we go back far enough to be very traditional, I would point out that In the 1^st century AD Emperor Nero is reported to have married a male slave. Later in 342 AD Emperor Constantius II outlawed same sex marriage with a penalty of execution. This suggests that there were a number of same sex marriages prior to that.
16. Regardless marriage has in fact changed significantly over time. I follow with some examples.
17. Traditionally the age of marriage was the onset of puberty. In the 12^th century European canon law documented by Gratian allowed marriage from the age of seven onwards, and stayed in force religiously until 1918. In 1689 a nine year old Mary Hathaway was married in the US.
18. Interracial marriage was banned in the US until the California Supreme Court over-turned this in 1948 and then the US Supreme Court in 1967. The ban was not removed from the Alabama state constitution until the year 2000.
19. Married couples were prohibited from using contraception in the US until 1965.
20. Traditionally under English common law, a married woman had no legal identity outside that of her husband, until laws started to change in 1839. It wasn’t until 1981 that a married woman in the US had equal property rights with her husband.
21. I hope these examples show that the nature of marriage, and the eligibility of two people to marry, has changed over time and I think we would all agree for the better. Tradition should not trump equality.

Religious v Civil Marriage

22. Some people advocate that ideally the state should not decide who can or can’t marry. That marriage is primarily a religious institution, and that the state should merely register civil unions, and allow couples to get a “blessing of marriage” from a religion should they wish to.
23. I agree that this would be an ideal situation, respecting the origins of marriage as a religious ceremony. If an MP wishes to put up a bill abolishing marriage as a civil institution, then that would be good, and I would advocate for its passage,
24. However the reality is that marriage is a state institution in pretty much every country on Earth, and that it is unlikely to ever not be a state institution in New Zealand. While it remains a state institution, I believe it would be wrong to deny the institution of marriage to same sex couples.
25. PM John Key recently said that in politics you don’t start with a blank slate of paper, you start with the real world. In the real world marriage is a state institution, and rejecting same sex marriage on the basis that the state shouldn’t decide at all who can get married is turning a blind eye to the fact that the state does decide, and is likely to always do so.

Amendments

26. It is unclear to me whether this bill as currently worded would allow a married same sex couple to adopt under the Adoption Act 1955. I note a gay or lesbian individual can currently adopt, but not jointly with their partner.
27. The definition of adoptive parent in s2 of the Adoption Act refers to a husband and a wife. However in s3(2) it refers to “2 spouses jointly” being able to apply for an adoption order. I suspect a court would have to decide which clause takes precedence, which will mean uncertainty.
28. To remove uncertainty, I propose that this bill be amended with the addition of a clause stating that a married couple should be treated as eligible to jointly adopt under the Adoption Act. Arguably such a clause could be worded to apply to any other Act which refers to married couples, spouses or husbands and wives.
29. A benefit of having a specific clause amending the Adoption Act is it would allow MPs to vote explicitly on both the issue of same sex marriage and same sex (as a couple) adoption. I would advocate Parliament votes in favour of both.
30. Some people have expressed a concern that churches could be forced to marry same sex couples in contravention to their religious beliefs. I agree this is undesirable. I do not regard this as likely, and note neither does the Human Rights Commission. To remove doubt, I recommend an explicit clause be inserted to state no religious body, or minister of religion shall be required to perform a marriage ceremony in violation of their religious beliefs, nor provide facilities for such a ceremony unless that facility is available to the general public.
31. Another concern is that it is an offence under s56 of the Marriage Act to allege that “any persons lawfully married are not truly and sufficiently married” and that this could capture someone saying that a same sex marriage is not in the eyes of their religion a “true” marriage. I recommend the select committee look at amending or repealing s56 to minimize this perceived risk. I note there has never been a prosecution (it appears) under s56, and other laws such as defamation may be sufficient to repeal it safely.

Thank you for considering this submission. I would like to make an oral submission in support, and look forward to appearing.

David Farrar

Oral Questions 2.00 pm -3.00 pm

Questions to ministers.

1. DAVID BENNETT to the Minister of Finance: What measures has the Government taken to support families through the global financial crisis?
2. DAVID SHEARER to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement on asset sales “It’s a minor delay, but in the overall scheme of things, sometimes the longest way home is the fastest way home”; if so, is he still confident that his asset sales schedule is on track?
3. KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI to the Minister for Economic Development: What is the Government doing to encourage businesses to invest, and grow jobs?
4. JACINDA ARDERN to the Minister for Social Development:Does she have confidence in Work and Income’s approach to privacy and the security of information?
5. Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement, “We’re not environmental bandits. If we don’t believe drilling can take place in a way that is environmentally sustainable and wouldn’t put at undue risk the environment, we wouldn’t go with it.”; if so, why?
6. Hon NANAIA MAHUTA to the Associate Minister of Education: How many teachers and support staff were incorrectly paid in the latest pay cycle and what is the total amount of outstanding pay still owed to teachers and support staff due to errors in the Novopay system?
7. Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS to the Prime Minister: When did he first learn of a German resident living in the Chrisco mansion in the Prime Minister’s electorate?
8. Peseta SAM LOTU-IIGA to the Minister for Social Development: What changes will the White Paper for Vulnerable Children make to better support professionals working with children?
9. CATHERINE DELAHUNTY to the Minister of Education: Will any newly merged or reopened schools in Christchurch be expected to use some community facilities that are ordinarily provided on-site at a school?
10. CHARLES CHAUVEL to the Prime Minister: When will he be informed of the Inspector-General’s findings concerning the three cases where the Government Communications Security Bureau has been unable to assure him that its actions have been lawful, and how will he communicate those findings to the House?
11. Dr JIAN YANG to the Minister for ACC: How will the Government improve accidental injury outcomes for under-six-year-olds?
12. GRANT ROBERTSON to the Prime Minister: Has Hon John Banks satisfied the Cabinet Manual requirement of upholding the highest ethical standards in his political and personal capacity?

Today there are four questions to Ministers from National, five from Labour, two from the Greens and one from NZ First.

Labour are asking about asset sales, Work and Income information security, the teacher payroll system, the GCSB and John Banks. The Greens are asking about deep sea oil drilling ,the Christchurch schools restructuring and NZ First is asking about Kim Dotcom.

Patsy of the day goes to Dr Jian Yang for Q.11: How will the Government improve accidental injury outcomes for under-six-year-olds?

General Debate  Twelve five minute speeches

Government Bills 4.00 pm – 6.00 pm and 7.30 pm – 10.00 pm

1. Alcohol Reform Bill-Committee Stage (continued)

2.Taxation (Annual Rates, Returns Filing, and Remedial Matters) Bill (Third Reading)

3. Financial Markets Conduct Bill  (Second Reading)

The Alcohol Reform Bill seeks to implement the Government’s decisions on the reform of alcohol legislation; decisions made in response to the Law Commission’s 2010 report on alcohol. Specifically, it seeks to limit the sale of alcohol from grocery stores and creates an offence of being on licensed premises outside of licensed hours.

The Taxation (Annual Rates, Returns Filing, and Remedial Matters) Bill sets the annual income tax rates for the 2012/13 year, introduces amendments to the requirements for filing and storing of tax returns and amends other acts and regulations such as the KiwiSaver Act 2006.

The Financial Markets Conduct Bill was first introduced into the house last year under the former Minister of Commerce Simon Power, and is now being guided through the house by Craig Foss.  It seeks to reform the regulation of financial market conduct to promote confident and informed participation in New Zealand’s financial markets.

Oral Questions 2.00 pm – 3.00 pm

Questions to Ministers

1. Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Prime Minister: At his meeting with the boss of American oil giant Anadarko in November 2011, was the issue of making deep sea oil drilling a permitted activity under the EEZ legislation raised?
2. DAVID SHEARER to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement “we’re trying to change the economic picture to encourage more New Zealanders to stay”; if so, how many people have migrated to Australia since he took office?
3. SCOTT SIMPSON to the Minister of Finance: What steps are being taken to improve housing affordability, as part of the Government’s wider economic programme?
4. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by his statement regarding Australia that “It has been a bit of a safety valve for jobs for people who can’t find jobs here”; if so, what advice, if any, has he received on the effects of emigration on the level of unemployment in New Zealand?
5. MELISSA LEE to the Minister for Social Development: What announcements has she made on ensuring those working with children recognise and report suspected child abuse, as part of the Government’s White Paper for Vulnerable Children?
6. Hon LIANNE DALZIEL to the Minister of Education: Will she extend the consultation timeframe for Christchurch schools which are proposed to be merged or closed, to enable them to fully engage with their communities; if not, why not?
7. NICKY WAGNER to the Minister of Education: What steps is the Government taking to ensure meaningful consultation with school communities in Greater Christchurch?
8. CHARLES CHAUVEL to the Prime Minister: Since he assumed ministerial responsibility for it, has the Government Communications Security Bureau undertaken surveillance of any person who is a citizen or resident of New Zealand, other than Mr Kim Dotcom?
9. Dr CAM CALDER to the Associate Minister of Health: What progress has been made on the introduction of a comprehensive clinical assessment tool for older people in rest homes?
10. Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM to the Minister for Climate Change Issues: Does he stand by his comment of 17 October 2012 that, “We need to make sure that New Zealand continues to do its fair share, alongside other countries, to combat the effects of climate change…”?
11. MIKE SABIN to the Minister of Customs: What is the Government doing to combat the smuggling of precursors used to manufacture methamphetamine?
12. ANDREW WILLIAMS to the Minister of Finance: Is reducing the current account deficit a priority for the Government?

Questions to Members

1. DENISE ROCHE to the Member in charge of the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009 (Application to Casinos) Amendment Bill: Why did the member draft the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009 (Application to Casinos) Amendment Bill?
2. DENISE ROCHE to the Member in charge of the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009 (Application to Casinos) Amendment Bill: What is the purpose of the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009 (Application to Casinos) Amendment Bill?

Today there are five questions to Ministers from National, four from Labour, two from the Greens and one from NZ First. Denise Roche of the Greens is asking two questions to Metiria Turei on her casino bill.

Labour are asking on the economy and Australia twice, Christchurch schools, and Dotcom. The Greens are asking on deep sea drilling and climate change, and NZ First are asking on the current account deficit.

Patsy of the day goes to Scott Simpson for Q3: What steps are being taken to improve housing affordability, as part of the Government’s wider economic programme?

Government Bills 3.00 pm – 6.00 pm and 7.30 pm – 10.00 pm

1. Alcohol Reform Bill – committee stage (cont)
2. Taxation (Annual Rates, Returns Filing, and Remedial Matters) Bill– third reading
3. Legislation Bill – committee stage

The Alcohol Reform Bill seeks to implement the Government’s decisions on the reform of alcohol legislation; decisions made in response to the Law Commission’s 2010 report on alcohol. Specifically, it seeks to limit the sale of alcohol from grocery stores and creates an offence of being on licensed premises outside of licensed hours.

The Taxation (Annual Rates, Returns Filing, and Remedial Matters) Bill sets the annual income tax rates for the 2012/13 year, introduces amendments to the requirements for filing and storing of tax returns and amends other acts and regulations such as the KiwiSaver Act 2006.

The Legislation Bill was introduced by Chris Finlayson in 2010 to modernise and improve the law relating to the publication, availability, reprinting, revision, and official versions of legislation and to bring this law together in a single piece of legislation. It passed its second reading with unanimous support.