O'Connor DamienHon DAMIEN O'CONNOR (Labour—West Coast - Tasman): While it might be at the end of the debate I guess the very start clauses 1 and 2 are arguably the most important parts of a piece of legislation. I know that people who come into Parliament or have anything to do with us often look at the books the huge volume of books that we have out in the back here in the lobbies around Parliament and through the offices and they go to look for legislation based on the title of the legislation relating to the interests that they have; in this case it would be land.So there are a couple of questions that I have here actually and it might require perhaps a further call I have to say. The first one is that the title clause clause 1 says: This Act is the Land Transfer Act 2016." Well I believe it is 2017 now. Given that the commencement date of the piece of legislation may in fact be 2017 or 2018 it is something that needs to be clarified. While this has been a lengthy process and these are quite important issues that have been considered very carefully I think we should have the date of the bill actually when it finally—The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): I am now going to interrupt the member. The member has been here for some time and I am sure he realises that the process involves that being changed by a clerical decision in the Clerk's Office rather than here. I think the member is almost certainly aware of that and might be having us on.Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR: Thank you Mr Chairman. I guess it is good to have an assurance on that. That is important. But that is the piece of legislation before us that we are currently discussing in the Committee tonight.Can I then go to the substance of the title itself because having heard the debate and going through the issues that have been raised it might be more appropriate to call the legislation the "Land Security Bill". What it does do and I think there has been careful consideration and general consensus is it does update a piece of legislation that started out in 1952 with a few amendments. It updates it it brings it into the modern world and it is about security. I think that transfer was the issue back then when you had to ensure a paper system that allowed I guess the tracking of the transfer of that. Now with the new modern systems that this piece of legislation in fact confirms endorses and upholds of course at the push of a button we have records and computers and databases that actually can record the transfer. But what we have been talking about is the security of the ownership of that: be it through mortgagee sales or through some other rorting the potential for a person's property rights in the ownership of a piece of property to be undermined. I think the committee and the members in this Chamber have done a really good job to go through and point to some of those things. So we could in fact amend—I am not proposing to put a Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) on the table I have to say but the bill could be better titled the "Land Security Bill" of 2017—or 2016 subject to the Clerk's Office to change; I appreciate that.If we go through then to the objectives in clause 3 the purpose as is pointed out does more than just ensure safe transfer. I am referring to clause 3 on the basis that the purpose should be properly reflected in the title clause clause 1. The purpose is about transfer; I accept that but it is also about the security which I have mentioned before and compensation for any loss and the one that I do have issue with is that it says here that the purpose is the register of land. I have to say it is the partial register because the refusal of the Government to accept—The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): Just come back to clause 1.Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR: Yes well the refusal of the Government to accept an SOP that would have included registration of foreign owners means that we do not have an accurate register of land in this country because we are not going to register where the people come from or indeed where we can get hold of them. So given that our topic—[Bell rung] Mr Chairman?The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): The Hon Damien O'Connor.Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR: Thank you Mr Chairman. They are real issues and I appreciate the wisdom of the Chair in accepting what might seem pedantic issues to many watching and in the Chamber. This is the crucial part of the legislation: firstly what it is called and then when it is commenced. I have not even started on clause 2.But in clause 1 if we are truly to reflect the purpose of the Act in its title and to assist people in trying to find this piece of legislation when over the next 50 years they go to the books and they go to records to try to find it then as I say it would be better to be the "Land Security Bill" and I think it might be "Land Security and Register Bill". If we are to have a truly accurate register of land then we should say so up front. But of course then picking up on my point that actually we are not registering everyone perhaps it would be inappropriate to have "Register". It could be the "Land Security and Partial Register Bill". These are legitimate points that can be tabled in the Committee. If the Minister was of the mind to accept these then he is indeed in a position to go and change that even at the last minute. We could have perhaps a change of heart from the Government.I say that I am a bit disappointed having heard the debate understanding the importance of this for Māori for farmers for homeowners and for everyone in the country who wants the property rights to be upheld—not perhaps in some of the ways that the Magna Carta Society would have it but understanding that we are passing through in our lives we deal with property and we want some right of ownership and control and security before we pass it on to whomever. So when we get this legislation or when we are changing it we have got to get it right. There are a few SOPs that have been kicked out that would have improved it. I am disappointed at that. But I guess in the end to have the same boring old title as was laid down in 1952—the Land Transfer Act—does not actually truly reflect the new focus that this bill actually offers land security or property rights security and partial register of land title. I rest my case."