Pillay Lynne: Limitation Bill — First Reading 
Pillay Lynne: Limitation Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:656;Page:5391] 
LYNNE PILLAY (Labour) 
: 
 It is a pleasure to stand and speak on the Limitation Bill. I will talk a little bit about the history of this bill because the previous speaker— 
Hon Steve Chadwick 
: Remind the member. 
LYNNE PILLAY 
: Yes I will remind the member. I see Chris Finlayson who I know was part of the reference group under the Labour Government while the Law Commission report was being considered. I think it is a bit rich for Simon— 
Simon Bridges 
: That’s all right. That’s my name. 
LYNNE PILLAY 
: —Mr Bridges; Simon Bridges—to stand in this House and say that the previous Labour Government did nothing on the issue. I think that the National Government could become quite renowned for its practice of racing bills through the House and not ensuring that consultation takes part. In fact I do not think the National members understand the word “consultation”. We have seen so many examples of that. My goodness! We are seeing the result of it with the super-city proposal are we not? Those of us who have been on select committees from time to time will have heard the absolute surprise in the chairperson’s voice when saying how great it is to have people coming along to make comments on the bill. It is absolutely ludicrous that the members on the other side of the House do not accept that it is appropriate that a bill gets the appropriate consultation before it gets to this stage. The Limitation Bill should undergo the scrutiny of the Law Commission with many people out there in the community and within the law fraternity and a reference group should consider it really carefully. 
I note that the bill is being referred to the very hard-working Justice and Electoral Committee— 
Paul Quinn 
: There you’re right! 
LYNNE PILLAY 
: Yes that is right. There is a lot of work before the committee. I assure everyone in this House that the Labour members on the committee will ensure that this bill is very very carefully scrutinised and we will listen very carefully to the points that are made by the submitters. 
I have talked very briefly but I would like to go over the background again. The consultation on the draft bill happened only in December 2007. Again I acknowledge the Law Commission and the hard work it does; its recommendations were published for comment in December 2007. Some significant issues were raised during that consultation period and as we know—well we certainly know on this side of the House—consultation is worth its weight in gold. It flushes out problems or unforeseen circumstances that may arise. I know it is not a view that the Government holds but it is very important. In this case it was deemed important enough for the Law Commission to convene a working group of key submitters and stakeholders. I think that the Hon Chris Finlayson—correct me if I am wrong; I think I see him nodding there quite proudly— 
Hon Christopher Finlayson 
: I was here to help. 
LYNNE PILLAY 
: He was there to help the Labour Government and he worked very hard and put a lot of time into it. So I know that Chris Finlayson sees this bill as the culmination of much work that was done over a considerable period. From what I have been told I believe the working group’s review resulted in the proposed new rules being restructured and refined and made simpler clearer and more comprehensive. 
In summary what does the bill do? It provides clearer and more comprehensive law on general civil limitation defences. One thing I will say is that it is about getting that balance it is about the right of people to take claims and it is about justice being served. But it is also about not letting stale claims just hang about and not be redressed. I think that for everybody whichever side they are involved on or sit on a degree of clarity and certainty is very important. This bill should—and the select committee will scrutinise whether it does—balance fairly the rights of claimants to have access to justice with the rights of defendants to not be disadvantaged by stale claims hanging around for long periods of time. 
The bill also makes some substantive improvements to the law on general civil limitation defences. As has been said it repeals and replaces the Limitation Act 1950. It provides general civil limitation defences to certain other claims including claims in respect of lands and goods. It makes the start date of the primary limitation period for most claims the date of the act or omission on which the claim is based rather than the date of accrual which is sometimes very difficult to identify. For almost all claims it retains the current primary limitation period of 6 years. It provides for exceptions to those periods for cases involving minority incapacity acknowledgment or part-payment and fraud. For money claims and certain other claims—for most of which time runs currently even if they are not reasonably discoverable—it introduces a 3-year late knowledge period. It can apply if the claim is made after its primary limitation period and the claimant has late knowledge of the claim. 
I see the members of the Justice and Electoral Committee looking quite excited about this bill coming before them. I know that all members will pay very strong attention to it. 
Simon Bridges 
: It’s up there with the Disputes Tribunals Amendment Bill. 
LYNNE PILLAY 
: It certainly is important as that bill. In the last Government the committee talked about the Sentencing Council Bill which was a very important piece of legislation before the Justice and Electoral Committee. It was based on a Law Commission report and was an excellent piece of work. Very sadly one of the first actions of the National Government was to disestablish the Sentencing Council which would have given a lot of transparency and clarity to sentencing. That saddens me; it meant that a lot of the work that was done at that time by the Justice and Electoral Committee which was chaired by a very good chair was a waste of everyone’s time. Sadly something that would have put a lot of consistency into our justice system did not happen. 
However this afternoon we are here to talk about the Limitations Bill. I strayed for a moment but not as much as the previous speaker Simon Bridges—not nearly as much. I look forward to this bill coming back to the House. I am absolutely sure that even with the consultation and even with the working group and the reference group which worked very comprehensively on the bill through the submission process something will be brought to the committee’s attention that may well improve the bill or flush out something that had not been noticed before. I really look forward to that. 
I have nothing more to say about this bill except that I look forward to its being referred to the Justice and Electoral Committee where it will receive the full scrutiny that it deserves.