Auchinvole Chris: Sullivan Birth Registration Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeAuchinvole Chris: Sullivan Birth Registration Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 09 April 2014. Volume:697;Page:17083. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]CHRIS AUCHINVOLE (National):In relation to this Sullivan Birth Registration Bill it is indeed a great pleasure to follow on from Louisa Wall who has so ably championed the bill during its passage through the House. It is great to be here now with the third reading of this bill approaching closure for one Rowen Sullivan’s journey through a labyrinthian experience of battling through a miasmic maze of legislative procedure. For Rowen’s family to be so gracious as to pass on the comments that Louisa carried for them is a tremendous tribute to the love they have for Rowen’s natural mother. They have done it for someone who actually is not here any more but who would none the less have taken great satisfaction and comfort from knowing that true love had its way. It is not though an unduly complex legislative situation that Rowen faced because as Rowen and her family explained to the Government Administration Committee when we met them and to Louisa who championed the bill within Parliament for Rowen it was the situation that surrounded her family that was complex.I want at this stage just to reflect briefly on our role as parliamentarians in assisting individual people with complex situations because I think that when the bill was initially introduced there was some feeling that it was quite a narrow bill it had a limited level of interest it would not affect very many people—or worse would it set a precedent? And there were all those sorts of legislative questions we ask about things in the normal process of a bill. But I think we are here—and this is a good example of assisting someone in I guess a complex situation not of their own making—because there is no way in the world that anybody else could address this particular situation.I recall a take-home comment from a constituent on the West Coast who was having a problem with his immigration status at the time. This was in 2005. He was told that his situation was complex which was why he was experiencing delays in the response from the Immigration Service. He appealed to me as an MP with the question—and this was the take-home message that I got from it—“Do Government departments in New Zealand do only simple things?”. I guess when we heard that this was a complex situation I remembered that and I thought well here is a good opportunity to get involved in something that is not just simple. That was in 2005. There have been considerable advances in the Immigration Service since then and indeed in every other branch of the Public Service as I am sure Mr Twyford would agree.In Greymouth quite recently I understand an award was given to the ACC office there following a survey of client satisfaction that showed an overwhelmingly positive response. That is a good thing to hear about and a good thing to happen. Similarly with this particular bill I think there has been a very good response and a good result and it has been a pleasure to be part of the committee under the chairmanship of the Hon Ruth Dyson to reach this point.So let us go back to Rowen’s complex situation for members who have not been directly involved and the circumstances that the Government Administration Committee set itself to resolve along with the Government departments involved. I will just go through if I may some key background points for members so that they can understand the seeming complexity. My apologies to members of the family who have got to hear it yet again. However Rowen Sullivan’s parents from birth were Diane Sullivan her birth mother and Diane Sullivan’s female partner Doreen Shields. Diane Sullivan died in 2010 when Rowen was 17 years old. Doreen Shields chose not to adopt Rowen while Diane Sullivan was still alive as this would have required the removal of Diane Sullivan’s—that is the birth mother’s—name from Rowen Sullivan’s birth certificate. Doreen Shields instead applied to be an additional guardian. This expired on Rowen Sullivan’s 18th birthday.You can see how the individual bits of legislation cut in at various points without the intention of dispossessing anybody of their mother. There was no intentional nastiness in this; it was just the way it played out. Doreen Shields applied for an adoption order following the death of Diane Sullivan. The order was made on 15 January 2013.Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi: What was the date?CHRIS AUCHINVOLE: 15 January 2013. However the order required that Diane Sullivan’s name be removed from Rowen Sullivan’s birth certificate. This must have been a huge wrench when that occurred. Had Diane Sullivan and Doreen Shields been able to legally marry they would have been able to jointly apply to adopt Rowen. If this had occurred they would both have been named as her parents on her birth record. Following the Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Act 2013 which by coincidence was passed through the same select committee same-sex couples have been able to marry and therefore to apply jointly to adopt children. In fact what happened was that Rowen was caught between two legislatures no birth registration in New Zealand and changes in adoption laws as they apply to same-gender couples.The select committee resolved to make some changes to the original bill following consideration and representations from the Department of Internal Affairs and it would be quite remiss of any member of the committee if we did not follow Louisa’s comments and comment on the depth of information that officials have provided throughout this bill as it proceeded through the select committee. There have been really good levels of discussion and really good interesting points. Let us if we may just consider some of these. The Government Administration Committee recommendations have proposed that the bill be passed with the following amendments: “that the title of the bill be changed to the ‘Sullivan Birth Registration Bill’.” That is because the title of the bill as introduced—here we go—the Sullivan Birth Certificate Bill could be misleading as its passage would not directly effect change to Rowen Sullivan’s birth certificate. And so we had this really intriguing debate. What is a birth certificate? It is simply a reflection of a birth registration. If you just change a birth certificate that does not change the registration. If you lose that birth certificate and you apply for a copy you go back to where you were before. It was really quite intriguing.There were other changes that we had to bring in just to bring everything to the situation that we are now in which is being able to say as members on both sides of the House and I would imagine from all parties of the House would like to say—and I would like to say it from the point of view of the select committee—job well done. It is a delight to hear that the family are well-pleased with the result because as I say they have introduced the fact that it is not really Rowen who is delighted; it has been done for someone who has passed on and I think that it is great that we have been able to assist in such measure. Thank you.