Connell Brian: Lawyers and Conveyancers Bill — In Committee 
Connell Brian: Lawyers and Conveyancers Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:629;Page:1525] 
BRIAN CONNELL (National—Rakaia) 
: 
 I was not intending to take a call when I came to the Chamber but I was so intrigued by the arguments that have been put forward that I felt I should take up the challenge of trying to put a layperson’s interpretation on these proceedings. 
Dr Richard Worth 
: Tell us what you think. 
BRIAN CONNELL 
: Before I do so I have to say that when the previous speaker David Parker said that he felt some of the arguments were superficial I thought I was going to be educated. But he took the word “superficial” to new heights—I thought his argument was superficially superficial if I could put it that way. I am still waiting to understand exactly what points he was trying to make; they have not yet registered with me but I am sure that speakers with legal training could put his speech in some kind of perspective. 
From a layperson’s perspective I cannot understand why the Minister in the chair the Hon Mark Burton has been convinced to support Part 5. I ask the Minister what in the submissions convinced him that we need to create in legislation a special place for four five eight or nine people. That seems to me to be highly irregular. The Minister said that he took advice from colleagues. Well Minister you are in the chair now and I would expect that you would be— 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Order! 
BRIAN CONNELL 
: I apologise for bringing the Chairperson into the debate. I would expect the Minister to take a call to elucidate why he feels it is so important to support this legislation. 
The previous speaker gave the Committee the view that if conveyancing was not done through this conveyancing body then our conveyancing practices would be put at risk. I have to say that I have been totally satisfied with the conveyancing experiences I have had through the legal people whom I have retained. From time to time I have a small concern about some of the fees that come my way but that is an issue I take up with the people concerned. I certainly do not think it is necessary to put in place new legislation when there is no problem to remedy. Who in the Chamber would want anyone who is not competent to handle his or her conveyancing matters? I am not at all convinced that the bill would provide that certainty. I say again that the Minister in the chair should get up and take a call to convey that he is comfortable that that certainty can be provided. 
When my colleague Kate Wilkinson was on her feet she made a very very good point that conveyancing these days is not just to do with residential conveyancing. Some of it is very complex. I would like to take comfort that the conveyancing structures have been put in place and that the professionals who are handling conveyancing—particularly in my own affairs if I can use that example—are giving me the very best advice possible. 
Hon Member 
: Tell us about your affairs. 
BRIAN CONNELL 
: I am not sure that I want to tell the Committee about my commercial affairs or anything else in that regard but I am concerned that if I require my conveyancing affairs to be dealt with then I want them to be attended to in the very best way. 
What is the recourse if things go awry? The first thing people will do is see their solicitor. I do not believe that it is possible to have a body of eight or nine people who self-regulate. It simply cannot be done. It is just a matter of scale and the scale will not be there to enable that to happen. The New Zealand Law Society gave the very best submission on the matter when it said that it simply is not necessary to do this. Why does the Government feel that it can ignore that advice and bring to the Chamber as part of a bigger piece of legislation Part 5 which represents six or seven people? I say to the Minister that he has some explaining to do and when he gets the opportunity to do so I will be very appreciative because I believe that this is becoming quite a significant issue. National will support other parts of the bill but Part 5 is a concern.