As of November 2011, this website is no longer being kept uptodate. It contains NZ Parliament debates from November 2005 to November 2011. TheyWorkForYou.co.nz is volunteer run, and has been in operation since November 2006.

Government Superannuation and National Provident Funds, Petition—Hearing of Submissions

Wednesday 28 September 2011 Hansard source (external site)

Robertson1. GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central) Link to this
to the Chairperson of the Commerce Committee

Further to her answers to Oral Question No 2 to Members yesterday, has she called a meeting of the Commerce Committee to hear submissions on the petition of Allen Hair, on the annuities payable to members of the Government Superannuation Fund and the National Provident Fund; if not, why not?

DalzielHon LIANNE DALZIEL (Chairperson of the Commerce Committee) Link to this

I can confirm that I have not called a meeting of the Commerce Committee to hear submissions on the petition of Allen Hair, and will not be doing so before the rising of the House; I cannot, under Standing Orders, explain why not.

RobertsonGrant Robertson Link to this

Can she confirm her answer yesterday that she put a motion to the committee to call for the submissions to be heard before the House rises?

DalzielHon LIANNE DALZIEL Link to this

Yes, I can confirm—

SmithMr SPEAKER Link to this

I have not called the member yet.

MallardHon Trevor Mallard Link to this

I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I could not hear it, but I can anticipate the advice you are getting. I would like to remind you that this is a matter of a Speaker’s ruling, and we had a very good Speaker’s ruling on this issue yesterday.

SmithMr SPEAKER Link to this

It could perhaps be that the Speaker may have erred a fraction yesterday, which I am very happy to explain. The question would be permissible if it asked whether the member had lodged a notice of motion, but if the question is asking whether the member put a motion to the committee, that matter would have taken place in the confidential proceedings of the meeting, and the question is therefore not in order. The dilemma for the Speaker is that the Speaker cannot know whether a notice of motion was lodged, and that is why sometimes the Speaker will allow a question. However, on this occasion I suspect that a notice of motion was not lodged. I will give the member the chance to reword his question if he wishes to word it in that way and refer to a notice of motion.

RobertsonGrant Robertson Link to this

Can she confirm the answers she gave to question to member No. 2 yesterday?

SmithMr SPEAKER Link to this

No, that is not what I invited the member to do. I invited the member, should he choose to, to reword his question. I think we probably should move on now to question to member No. 2.