Hutchison Paul: Protection of Personal and Property Rights Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Hutchison Paul: Protection of Personal and Property Rights Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:642;Page:11818] 
Dr PAUL HUTCHISON (National—Port Waikato) 
: 
 Thank you for the opportunity to speak on Part 1 of the Protection of Personal and Property Rights Amendment Bill. This bill has arisen out of the Law Commission’s paper:  
Misuse of Enduring Powers of Attorney 
 in 2001. As I noted yesterday it is now 2007—an extraordinary time in fact 6 years since that paper—and finally this bill has come into Parliament. It does seem that it has taken a very long time for this Labour Government to finally get this legislation before the Committee given that it has the support of Her Majesty’s most loyal Opposition. National regards this as a reasonable bill but we are very concerned that it has taken so long to be brought here and that perhaps reflects quite directly on just how lackadaisical this Labour Government has become. 
I note that there is a curious statement about commencement in clause 2. It states: “This Act … comes into force 1 year after the date on which it receives the Royal assent (unless it is earlier brought into force on a date appointed by the Governor-General by Order in Council).” It does seem curious given the very long gestation of this bill after the commission’s report that it could be another year before the legislation comes into force. I would certainly exhort the Government to make sure that it actually is brought into use far earlier than that date. Perhaps the Minister in the chair the Hon Mita Ririnui may take a call and assure us that his Government will bring that about. 
Part 1 is really involved with miscellaneous amendments around persons who may apply for exercise of the court’s jurisdiction and it revolves around repealing paragraph (f) of section 7 and substituting the following paragraph: “where the exercise of the Court’s jurisdiction is sought in respect of any person who is a patient or a resident in any place that provides hospital care rest home care or residential disability care within the meaning of the Health and Disability Services (Safety) Act 2001 the principal manager of that place:”. It is important to point out that some have thought that this bill is to be confined to just the elderly whereas clearly and as I know my learned colleague Kate Wilkinson has mentioned earlier this bill does indeed apply to young and old. It applies to those who are disabled and to those in the whole spectrum of either mental disorders or physical incapability that may occur. So it is not just confined to one particular area; it is broad in its perspective. 
Clause 5 “Persons who may apply for exercise of Court’s jurisdiction” states: “Section 26 is amended by repealing paragraph (g) and substituting the following paragraph: (g) where the exercise of the Court’s jurisdiction is sought in respect of any person who is a patient or a resident in any place that provides hospital care rest home care or residential disability care within the meaning of the Health and Disability Services (Safety) Act 2001 the principal manager of that place:” Once again these miscellaneous amendments in Part 1 are important to make sure the coverage of the bill is comprehensive. 
Might I say once again that it is of concern to National that this bill has taken so long to come through—something like 6 years after the commission’s paper on the  
Misuse of Enduring Powers of Attorney 
. That is a lot of time and it does as I say reflect very badly on the Labour Government that probably tens of thousands of New Zealanders have not had the opportunity to benefit from this bill. 
Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.