Connell Brian: Lawyers and Conveyancers Bill — In Committee 
Connell Brian: Lawyers and Conveyancers Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:629;Page:1529] 
BRIAN CONNELL (National—Rakaia) 
: 
 I would like to examine in a bit more detail the issue of the New Zealand Society of Conveyancers. Whilst I am on my feet I would like to thank the Minister in the chair Mark Burton for taking a call and satisfying my earlier concerns. But I have a couple of other concerns I would like to raise. 
In particular I am looking at clause 68(2)(a) which states: “The New Zealand Society of Conveyancers is a body corporate with perpetual succession and a common seal and except as provided in this Act has and may exercise—”—and here is the part that concerns me—“(a) all the rights powers and privileges and may incur all the liabilities and obligations of a natural person of full age and capacity;”. But when I turn the page I see clause 69 “Membership” which states: “but membership is voluntary and does not of itself—(a) impose on the members any liability in respect of any contract debt or other obligation made or incurred by the New Zealand Society of Conveyancers;”. It strikes me I say to the Minister in the chair that there seems to be a contradiction. Maybe the drafting of this passage is not right because in one section we are saying that there will be obligations and liabilities and in another section we are saying that there will not. 
The other issue I want to draw the Committee’s attention to is clause 70 “Regulatory functions”. Again I raised this matter in my last call and other speakers have also raised it but it is still something that does not satisfy me. How will this body self-regulate when essentially it will not have enough members to do so? It is a fundamental issue for which I have not heard a satisfactory answer thus far. The issue has been raised but how does a body do it? It just seems to be an impossibility. The spectre of someone coming before the disciplinary committee of this body—they will almost be judge and jury. They will be sitting there at the table and someone who raises an issue will probably then have to race down to the other end of the table to fill the chair and answer the question. Now I am taking it to a bit of an extreme but when we have six or seven or eight or nine people only on this body I see that as a significant issue. 
Another colleague raised the issue of what is a fit and proper person. 
Nathan Guy 
: It was me Brian. 
BRIAN CONNELL 
: Mr Guy raised it. He is an outstanding member for Otaki and he nearly brought about the upset of the century when he nearly took a very safe Labour seat from a reasonably incompetent and inexperienced member of the Government. But next time I am sure he will complete the act. 
Lindsay Tisch 
: He will. 
BRIAN CONNELL 
: I am sure he will. 
The issue I want to raise concerns clause 73A “Fit and proper person”. Paragraph (a) of subclause (1) states: “whether the person is of good character:”. It is OK to write that into legislation but who will test that? Who will determine that? Mr Guy raised that as a concern. The Minister has said nothing about it. Mr Fairbrother who took a call did not answer that question. The former member for Otago did not answer that question when he took a call. 
Paragraph (b) of subclause (1) states: “whether the person has at any time been declared bankrupt …”. Who will check that? Unsuspecting members of the public when they are engaged in what for most of them will be the only conveyancing activity in their life will put their trust in those people yet the public will have no prior determination as to whether those people can be trusted. The legislation as it is drafted does not call for those checks and balances. We have already been told when I raised this issue in relation to clause 68 that the body corporate of conveyancers will not impose any liabilities or obligations. The Minister in the chair will have to get to his feet and deal with that issue yet again. Paragraph (b) goes on to state: “or been a director of a company that has been put into receivership or liquidation: ”. They are easy things to say but they go to the core of credibility. How will we know that these checks and balances have been done? It remains a major issue of concern.