Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill

I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I want to bring your attention to something. I take umbrage at the assault on our character and how the member Tau Henare impinged on our good character as Māori when he was chastising us and abusing us across the Chamber. I think that is unbecoming for any member in this House. I feel deeply offended, close to mortally wounded by that sort of onslaught.

If the member feels that offence has been taken, then I ask the member to withdraw those comments that were made earlier, and that will end the matter.

💬 Chris Tremain: Point of order, Mr Chair.

The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): I have asked the member at whom this member has taken offence to withdraw and apologise.

I withdraw and apologise. I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I want to ask your advice. If a person deliberately mispronounces either my name or my language, then I have every right to take umbrage. I know that some members cannot, and some members can, and that most of the Māori members can. The member can pronounce it properly, because I have heard him before, and that is what I take umbrage at.

I hear what you are saying. There has been some heat in this over the last half hour. The member took offence; the member has apologised. The point has been very well made. Everyone should know to respect other people’s rights in this House. This is a House of Representatives where everyone should be treated fairly and without prejudice in any way. I ask all members—I am not referring to any particular member—to take on board what has been said and respect people’s rights.

I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson.

The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): I do not want to enter into further discussion on this.

And I want to say that at the time I was getting a rapid translation because my knowledge of Māori numbers does not go to 42. I apologise for the fact that I got it so badly wrong.

Hilary Calvert’s amendment to clause 18(3) as set out on Supplementary Order Paper 214 is ruled out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision to omit subclause (3). The next amendments in Hilary Calvert’s name to clauses 19 and 20 are ruled out of order.

The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 207 in the name of the Hon Christopher Finlayson to clause 21 be agreed to.

The next amendment in the name of Hilary Calvert to clause 21 as set out on Supplementary Order Paper 214 is out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision. The next amendments in the name of Hilary Calvert to clauses 22, 23, 24, and 25 are out of order. The next amendments in the name of Hilary Calvert to clause 26(1), (2), (2)(a) and (b) are out of order.

The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 214 in the name of Hilary Calvert to clause 26(2)(b)(i) and (ii) be agreed to.

I seek the leave of the House to make a correction to the Green Party votes on this part, the correction being to change the number from nine votes opposed to eight votes opposed.

The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): Referring to—

All votes taken on Part 2.

We will correct the vote accordingly. [Interruption] Sorry, I stand corrected. We need leave, because you are changing the vote. Leave is sought to change the votes from nine to eight. Is there any objection to that course of action? There is no objection.

The next amendment in the Minister’s name is to omit subclause (3) of clause 26, as set out on Supplementary Order Paper 207. The question is that the amendment be agreed to—

💬 Hon Darren Hughes: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I seek some clarification. I see that it has now come to 6 o’clock. Are you proposing to put the question on all the votes because we have now started at that point?

The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): Yes, because we moved into this stage on a closure motion, and on a closure motion the voting continues regardless of the time.

💬 Hon Darren Hughes: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. That is absolutely my understanding of it, so you are right to take that course of action. The difficulty is that a number of members will be out of the building over the dinner break, so if whips cast votes, we need to have certainty that that is correct. So it may be useful for you to draw this to the attention of party whips and advise their members not to leave the building. Without wishing in any way to cast aspersions, if members in the complex have not been following proceedings and are leaving, we cannot have confidence—

The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): I thank the member.

💬 Chris Tremain: Thank you for that advice. I was well aware that this may be the process, so 10 minutes ago we made it very clear to our members that we would be voting through.

The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): I thank the member. I will take the whips’ word that the votes that they cast are accurate votes, and we will leave it at that. I am sure that will satisfy everybody. [Interruption] We are still voting.

The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 207 in the name of the Hon Christopher Finlayson to clause 26(3) be agreed to.

The next amendment in the name of Hilary Calvert to clause 26(3) as set out on Supplementary Order Paper 214 is out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision. We now have more amendments in the name of Hilary Calvert, to clause 26(4) and (5).These are ruled out of order.

The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 207 in the name of the Hon Christopher Finlayson to clause 27 be agreed to.

The next amendment in the name of Hilary Calvert to clause 28(1)(b) is out of order. The next amendment in the name of Hilary Calvert to clause 28(1)(c) is out of order. The next—

💬 Hon John Boscawen: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I have been following your rulings on amendments that are out of order, and I can understand why some of these have been ruled out of order, but I am rather surprised that the second of Hilary Calvert’s amendments to clause 28(1)(c) has been ruled out of order, where she proposes that “and passengers” be omitted and substituted with “passengers and other goods or persons”. It seems to me that the addition or the words “goods or persons” changes the meaning of that—

The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): We are not on that one. I said we are on clause 28(1)(c) of Supplementary Order Paper 214. That is the one you are querying; we have not got to the one that you are mentioning.

💬 Hon John Boscawen: There are actually two amendments to clause 28(1)(c), and I am speaking to the second.

The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): I have not put that one yet. In the format in front of us, we are talking about Hilary Calvert’s amendment to clause 28(1)(c)—to omit “crew equipment” and substitute “equipment and crew”, as set out on Supplementary Order Paper 214. That is out of order. The one you are referring to is the next one, and we have not got to that one yet.

💬 Hon John Boscawen: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I absolutely understand that, so I simply ask that when you rule amendments in or out, you go on to refer to them in a bit more detail, because you earlier ruled out Hilary Calvert’s amendment to clause 28(1)(b), and she actually had two of them. When you said the amendments to clause 28(1)(b) was being ruled out, effectively you were ruling both of them out together. So when you rule out the amendment to clause 28(1)(c), we at this end of the Chamber do not know whether you are ruling out one or both. What I was seeking to clarify was that it seemed to me that the amendment to clause 28(1)(c) was perfectly reasonable, which you have now agreed it is because you are prepared to put the question on it.

The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): The previous amendment to clause 28(1)(c) is out of order, and we now move to the one that you are referring to, which is a further amendment to clause 28(1)(c). The question is that Hilary Calvert’s amendment to clause 28(1)(c) to omit “and passengers” and substitute “passengers, and any other goods or persons”, the amendment to subclause (1)(d) to omit “for a convenient time”, and the amendment to subclause (1)(e) to omit “temporarily”, as set out on Supplementary Order Paper 214, be agreed to.

💬 Hon John Boscawen: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. Why are you taking the vote on each of those amendments as one question, when previously you have taken the vote on those amendments clause by clause? I realise that the Minister can ask for his amendments to be put as one Supplementary Order Paper, but Hilary Calvert is entitled to have her amendments treated individually.

The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): That is a good question. These are all related, and they are grouped together, and that is why it is being done this way. It is up to the discretion of the Chair, and that is how we have done it.

💬 Hon John Boscawen: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. In drafting these amendments, we originally put in separate Supplementary Order Papers for each amendment. The Clerk’s Office said to us that that consumed a lot of paper, so we were asked whether we could submit the amendments together on the one Supplementary Order Paper, which we have done. So there are several amendments on one Supplementary Order Paper, and it seems to me that had we not done that, you would have taken the votes separately. I ask that you take the votes separately on the amendments to clause 28(1)(c), (d), and (e).

The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): It does not matter which Supplementary Order Paper the amendments are on. That is irrelevant. I will put the question, which I have just outlined.

The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 214 in the name of Hilary Calvert to clause 28(1)(c) relating to passengers, clause 28(1)(d), and 28(1)(e) to omit “temporarily” be agreed to.

The next amendment in the name of Hilary Calvert to clause 28(1)(e) to omit “wind or weather” and substitute “weather or winds” is out of order.

The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 214 in the name of Hilary Calvert to clause 28(2) be agreed to.

The next amendments in the name of Hilary Calvert to clause 28(3) to (5) are out of order. The next amendments to clause 29, on Supplementary Order Paper 214, are out of order.

The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 207 in the name of the Hon Christopher Finlayson to omit the heading above clause 30 and clauses 30 and 31 be agreed to.

The next amendments in the name of Hilary Calvert to clauses 30 and 31, as set out on Supplementary Order Paper 214, are out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision of the Committee. The amendments in the name of Hilary Calvert to clause 32(1) to the definitions of “dispose of”, “freehold interest”, “interest”, and “lesser interest” are ruled out of order.

The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 214 in the name of Hilary Calvert to clause 32(1) to omit “of the Crown” from the definition of “Minister” and substitute “for Land Information” be agreed to.

The next amendments in the name of Hilary Calvert are to the definition of “Minister” in clause 32(1), as set out on Supplementary Order Paper 214. These are out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision. We have amendments in the name of Hilary Calvert to clause 32(1) to the definitions of “reclaimed land”, and “reclaimed land subject to this subpart”. These are out of order.

The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 214 in the name of Hilary Calvert to clause 32(2) be agreed to.

The amendments in the name of Hilary Calvert to clauses 33 and 34 as set out on Supplementary Order Paper 214 are out of order.

The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 207 in the name of the Hon Christopher Finlayson to clause 35 be agreed to.

The next amendment in the name of Hilary Calvert to the heading to clause 35 as set out on Supplementary Order Paper 214 is out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision not to change to the Minister for Land Information. The next amendment in the name of Hilary Calvert to clause 35(1) as set out on Supplementary Order Paper 214 is out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision to omit subclause (1). The next amendment in the name of Hilary Calvert to clause 35(2)(a) is out of order.

The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 214 in the name of Hilary Calvert to clause 35(2)(b) be agreed to.

The next amendment in the name of Hilary Calvert to the heading to clause 36 is out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision not to change to the Minister for Land Information. The next amendments in the name of Hilary Calvert are to clause 36(1) and (2) to omit “Minister may” and substitute “Minister for Land Information may”. These are out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision not to change to the Minister for Land Information. The next amendments in the name of Hilary Calvert to clause 36(1), (2)(a) and (b), and (3) are out of order. The next amendment in the name of Hilary Calvert to clause 37(1) as set out on Supplementary Order Paper 214 is out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision not to change to the Minister for Land Information.

The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 214 in the name of Hilary Calvert to clause 37(2) be agreed to.

The next amendments in the name of Hilary Calvert to clause 38(3)(b), and to clause 38(4) to omit “any person” and substitute “any person or group”, are out of order. The amendments in the name of Hilary Calvert to clause 38(3)(c) and (4) to omit “the Minister” and substitute “Minister for Land Information” are out of order as being inconsistent with a decision not to change to the Minister for Land Information.

The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 214 in the name of Hilary Calvert to clause 38(5), (6), and (7) be agreed to.

The next amendment in the name of Hilary Calvert to the heading to clause 39 as set out on Supplementary Order Paper 214 is out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision of the Committee.

The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 214 in the name of Hilary Calvert to clause 39(1), (1)(a), and (b) be agreed to.

The next Hilary Calvert amendments are to clause 39(1)(c), (d), (e), (2), (2)(a), (b), (d), and (g) as set out on Supplementary Order Paper 214. These are out of order.

The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 214 in the name of Hilary Calvert to clause 39(2)(e) and (f) be agreed to.

The next amendments in the name of Hilary Calvert are to clause 40(1). These amendments are out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision of the Committee. The amendment in the name of Hilary Calvert to clause 40(1) to substitute “Minister for Land Information’s” as set out on Supplementary Order Paper 214 is out of order as it is inconsistent with a previous decision of the Committee. We now have Hilary Calvert’s remaining amendments to clause 40 to substitute or reorder words. These are out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision not to change to Minister for Land Information. The next amendment in the name of Hilary Calvert to the heading to clause 41 is out of order. The next amendment in the name of Hilary Calvert to clause 41(1) to substitute “Minister for Land Information” is out of order as it is inconsistent with a previous decision of the Committee.

The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 214 in the name of Hilary Calvert to clause 41(1) to omit “notify the applicant” and substitute “notify the applicant within ten working days” be agreed to.

The remaining amendments to clause 41 in the name of Hilary Calvert are out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision of the Committee.

The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 207 in the name of the Hon Christopher Finlayson to clause 42 be agreed to.

We have an amendment in the name of Hilary Calvert to the heading to clause 42. This is out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision of the Committee.

The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 214 in the name of Hilary Calvert to clause 43(1) to omit “3 months” and substitute “4 months” be agreed to.

The remaining amendments to clause 43 in the name of Hilary Calvert are out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision of the Committee. We now have amendments in the name of Hilary Calvert to the heading of clause 44 and clause 44(1) to (3). These are out of order. The next amendment in the name of Hilary Calvert to clause 44(3), to substitute “Minister of Conservation”, is out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision of the Committee.

The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 214 in the name of Hilary Calvert to clause 44(5) be agreed to.

Amendment not agreed to.

We now have an amendment in the name of Hilary Calvert to clause 44(6) to substitute “Minister for Land Information”. This is out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision of the Committee. The next amendment in the name of Hilary Calvert is to clause 45(2) to substitute “Minister for Land Information”. This amendment is out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision of the Committee. Hilary Calvert’s amendments to clause 45(2) to substitute or reorder words that do not alter the meaning of the provision are also out of order.

The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 214 in the name of Hilary Calvert to clause 45(2) to omit “the Crown” and substitute “the Crown within 21 days of being incurred” be agreed to.

Amendment not agreed to.

The next amendment in the name of Hilary Calvert to clause 45(3) is out of order. We have an amendment to clause 45(3) to substitute “the Minister of Conservation” in the name of Hilary Calvert. This is out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision of the Committee.

The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 214 in the name of Hilary Calvert to omit clause 45(3)(b) be agreed to.

Amendment not agreed to.

The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 207 in the name of the Hon Christopher Finlayson to clause 45 be agreed to.

We now have amendments to clause 45(4). These are out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision to omit and substitute this subclause.

The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 214 in the name of Hilary Calvert to clause 45(5)(c) be agreed to.

Amendment not agreed to.

The next amendments in the name of Hilary Calvert are to clause 45(5)(d) and (e). They are out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision of the Committee.

The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 214 in the name of Hilary Calvert to clause 45(6) be agreed to.

Amendment not agreed to.

The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 207 in the name of the Hon Christopher Finlayson to omit clause 46(1) and (2) and substitute new clause 46(1) and (2) be agreed to.

The next amendment in the name of Hilary Calvert to clause 46(1) and (2) is out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision of the Committee. We have amendments in the name of Hilary Calvert to clause 46(3) to (5). These are out of order as they are inconsistent with a previous decision of the Committee.

The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 214 in the name of Hilary Calvert to clause 46(6) to omit “on” and substitute “as soon as practicable within 5 days of” be agreed to.

Amendment not agreed to.

We have amendments in the name of Hilary Calvert to clause 46(6). These are out of order. The next amendment in the name of Hilary Calvert is to the heading of clause 47. This is out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision of the Committee.

The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 214 in the name of Hilary Calvert to the heading of clause 47 to omit “iwi or hapū, or public” and substitute “hapū, iwi and the public” be agreed to.

Amendment not agreed to.

The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 214 in the name of Hilary Calvert to clause 47(1) to omit “notice” and substitute “notice within 20 days” be agreed to.

Amendment not agreed to.

We have the remaining amendments in the name of Hilary Calvert to clause 47(1). These are out of order. We now move to the amendment to clause 47(2) in the name of Hilary Calvert. This is out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision of the Committee.

The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 207 in the name of the Hon Christopher Finlayson to clause 47(4) to (7) be agreed to.

We have an amendment in the name of Hilary Calvert to clause 47(4) to (7) as set out on Supplementary Order Paper 214. This is out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision of the Committee.

The question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon David Parker to insert new clauses 47A and 47B be agreed to:

to insert the following new clauses after clause 47:

47A Matters relating to common marine and coastal area

(1) To avoid doubt, the jurisdiction of the High Court to hear and determine any claim for a protected customary right or customary marine title, that was removed by the Foreshore and Seabed Act 2004, is restored.

(2) This includes, but is not limited to, the restoration of the jurisdiction to determine the appropriate threshold for the establishment of a protected customary right or customary marine title.

47B Customary interest inalienable

No person has the capacity to alienate any protected customary right or customary marine title, or to dispose by will of any such interest.

Before we commence the debate on Part 3, two votes need to be amended because they were incorrectly announced. I will just run through those now. The vote on the question to amend the definition of “mana tuku iho” in clause 7 was announced as Ayes 47 and Noes 73. The correct result was Ayes 5 and Noes 115. The vote on the question to omit the words from the definition of “planning document” in clause 7 was announced as Ayes 47 and Noes 73. The correct result is Ayes 5 and Noes 115. The record in each case will be corrected. No outcome was changed.

Part 3 Customary interests