Tirikatene RinoRINO TIRIKATENE (Labour—Te Tai Tonga): I am pleased to take a call on clause 1 of the Statutes Repeal Bill and can I commend the Government Administration Committee for its work in examining this bill. There are 132 to 137 give or take pieces of legislation or parts thereof that are to be repealed. I know we are dealing with the title but I will just canvass some general comments on the bill. Whilst I am not a member of this committee I do support in principle the fact that we do have a lot of redundant pieces of legislation on our many voluminous copies of statute books that are on the bookshelves within Parliament. This bill goes a long way to I guess cleaning up a lot of those redundant pieces of legislation.The subject matter of the legislation in this bill is quite broad. It deals with things like fishing vessels and loans the Y2K computer bug and various finance Acts so it is quite ad hoc in terms of the Acts that have been identified for repeal under this bill. I would just like to know how comprehensive is the list of Acts contained within this bill because there may be hundreds more that need to be repealed. I note that there is nothing in the bill that includes any Māori legislation and I know that there has been quite a lot of Māori legislation over the past 175 years. Surely some of that archaic or redundant legislation could have been included within this bill.I am just curious as to how comprehensive it is or has it just been cherry-picked? I think it is quite lazy on the part of the Government if it is going to be doing a statutes repeal bill to not just take selected pieces of legislation. If it is going to do the job properly it should do a complete sweep of all the legislation that is currently in force and really do a comprehensive vetting or culling of certain pieces of legislation. I am just not convinced that even though there are 130-odd pieces of legislation in this bill that is comprehensive or that there is any clear policy around it. That has been touched on by my colleague Chris Hipkins because I am sure that many legal academics will be studying Sir Kenneth Keith's submission. We could get into a whole lot of mental gymnastics around when a bill is repealed and when the repealing of that repeal bill is repealed and when a bill is actually ultimately repealed.As a case in point I was just scanning my eyes through this bill and if we look at the Fisheries Act there is a repeal of—The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): I just interrupt the member. I made a ruling earlier on for the Hon David Parker that those are things that come up later because they are in schedule 1—that is clause 3 schedule 1. We are actually only on the title. That is what we should be referring to.RINO TIRIKATENE: Thank you. I will pick up on those points when we get to those clauses. Just concentrating on the title this is about the repeal of statutes and as I mentioned earlier the scope of the bill is bit unclear because there are a whole lot of ad hoc pieces of legislation but we do not know how comprehensive that is or how comprehensive the exercise has been. I do want to—and I am sure we will pick it up later—go into those finely tuned legal issues around when a bill is actually repealed and also go into discussions later on around the sentencing council.