Parliamentary Debates (Hansard) - New Zealand Parliament

16 May 2009 Local Government (Auckland Reorganisation) Bill 3675
Sitting suspended from 1 p.m. to 2 p.m.
Hon David Parker: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I apologise to Hone
Harawira, who has the call. I have deliberately raised my point of order at this point,
rather than interrupt him when he resumes his speech. We are considering new parts to
this bill, and I express a concern that the time being allowed for the consideration of
these parts is obviously a lot less than the time allocated for earlier parts that were put
forward by the Government.
I make the point that it is the Opposition’s right to put forward new parts, and to have
them properly debated. It is, of course, proper of the Chair to cut off debate when no
new points are being raised and where there is undue repetition. That, of course, Mr
Chair, is within your rights, but I suggest that in respect of some of the closure motions
that were moved earlier in the morning, we are verging on having debate cut off before
all points have been exhaustively covered by speakers.
I know there is a tension here between the Government getting its business through
and the Opposition delaying it, but I suggest that it is the right of Opposition members
to act as we are acting. That Opposition members are able to exercise their rights to the
limits of the Standing Orders, particularly in urgency, is an important check against the
powers of the Government, and I ask you, Mr Chairperson, to consider that in your
rulings this afternoon.
Hon Gerry Brownlee: Mr Chairperson, an interesting point of order has been put to
you by the Hon David Parker, but it directly challenges your authority in the Chair. I
simply remind the Committee that it was the Hon David Parker who this morning told
anybody who was here to listen, or anybody listening in, that the Labour Party was in
fact engaging in a filibuster on this bill. I would have thought that that was a clear
indication to everybody that most of the matters being dealt with at the moment are not
serious. They are simply vexatious and frivolous, and they are being put forward by
Labour to try to prolong the debate today.
The other thing is that if we were engaged in an actual debate on this bill, that debate
might be interesting, but the vast majority of time spent on this bill has been spent on
dealing, through the vote process, with the extensive range of frivolous amendments put
forward by Labour. Some 8,000 amendments, I think, have now been dealt with in one
way or another. The real point, though, is that National thinks that continued challenges
to the Chair are completely unacceptable, and should not continue to be a feature of this
debate.
Hon David Cunliffe: Mr Chairperson, I think it is important at this junction that the
Committee consider very carefully, under your guidance, the way forward. In the first
place, I submit to you that the point of order raised by my colleague David Parker in no
way trifled with your rulings. It sought a clarification from you, and it asked, at your
discretion, that you take into account the various factors as we go forward. I echo the
strongly expressed sentiments of my colleague David Parker in this respect.
The second point is that the Leader of the House has, in his submission, failed to
distinguish between amendments and parts. The submission of David Parker
specifically related to parts, not clause amendments, and asked that parts be fully
debated. As is well known to you, Mr Chairperson, and to the Leader of the House,
amendments to clauses—
Hon Gerry Brownlee: The member should read the Standing Orders.
Hon David Cunliffe: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson.
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker): I know what the point of order will be. I
ask the Leader of the House to let the member make his point of order. If I feel he is
getting off the point, I will stop his point of order.