Salesa Jenny; Upston Louise; Radhakrishnan PriyancaCHARITIES AMENDMENT BILLIn CommitteeDebate resumed from 31 May.Part 1 Amendments to Charities Act 2005 (continued)CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): Members we come now to further consideration of the Charities Amendment Bill. When we were last debating this bill we were debating Part 1. Part 1 is the debate on clauses 3 to 30 and the Schedule: Amendments to Charities Act 2005". The question is that Part 1 stand part.Hon LOUISE UPSTON (National—Taupō): Thank you Madam Chair. Just wanting to ask the Minister in the chair about clause 13A and specifically what was envisaged in terms of the information that could be prevented or restricted from being released just so that there is clarity around what was intended from the inclusion of this clause please? So I would like further clarity of that section and perhaps—to allow the Minister time to consider that if I can just bring to the committee some of the issues that have been raised in this process and why there is some significant frustration with the charity sector with this legislation. Of course I do want to put on record that it is National Volunteer Week and it is predominantly volunteers who are involved with the charitable sector that will be on the receiving end of this somewhat disappointing piece of legislation. And volunteers—21 percent of New Zealanders volunteer in some way shape or form and they really add to the richness of the communities that we live in. So I do want to specifically just put on record from Sue Barker Charities Law who is a specialist in this field and the view that there is a very large disconnect between how the Department of Internal Affairs views the Charities Act and how the vast bulk of the sector actually views it. The submissions—and we heard from many organisations—made it very clear that the fundamentals of the Act are not sound and that the definition of "charitable purpose" is not working well and that was why when the Labour Party announced a first-principles review or promised it in 2017—it was welcomed by the sector and their view was that the first-principles review is very much needed if the intent was to support charities to continue their vital contribution to community wellbeing. The National Party definitely wants to put on record that we want to ensure that charitable organisations are able to focus on their charitable works as opposed to another regulatory burden; an oversight that it is unclear whether it will add any value.So the question that Sue Barker Charities Law put in her submission which is perhaps the question I can ask the Minister in the chair is: how can we determine whether the Act is fit for purpose when we do not have agreement on what that purpose is? And that's fair to say so it would be good to have a view from the Minister in the chair about that as well as my earlier question very specifically about 13A and about the intention of that particular inclusion: what was envisaged what problem was going to be solved and is there any appeal if information should be disclosed that is not?Hon PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN (Minister for the Community and Voluntary Sector): Thank you Madam Chair. Firstly I'll just say very quickly—I totally agree with the member's sentiment around the amount of valuable work the volunteers do and that it is National Volunteer Week. In fact it's over 50 percent of New Zealanders who volunteer and I'll just say a very huge thankyou to them all. The point that the member raised—or the clarification that was sought—was around clause 13A which amends section 25 of the Act. That gives the chief executive (CE) discretion to remove information from the register if the CE considers there would be for example safety implications therein. So if it is considered to be in the public interest that information is either prevented or restricted the CE has the ability to do so and that's what clause 13A is about."