te Heuheu Georgina: Arbitration Amendment Bill — In Committee 
te Heuheu Georgina: Arbitration Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:639;Page:9780] 
Hon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU (National) 
: 
 For the benefit of those listening I want to give just a reminder of the main provisions of the Arbitration Amendment Bill. Of course these provisions arise from recommendations of the New Zealand Law Commission in 2003. I have already covered the underlying themes and these themes continue those of the Arbitration Act. I will make reference to the issues of new section 14A “Arbitral proceedings must be private”. These are very important amendments and obviously no changes should be made to them; they fall totally in line with the themes of the Act itself. New section 14B is entitled “Arbitration agreements deemed to prohibit disclosure of confidential information”. The interpretation clause covers the definition of “confidential information” in relation to arbitral proceedings as being “information that relates to the … proceedings or to an award …”. They include statement of claims; statement of defence—the pleadings—any evidence supplied to the arbitral tribunal whether documentary or otherwise; any notes made by the arbitral tribunal of oral evidence or submissions given before the tribunal; any transcript of oral evidence or submissions; any rulings of the tribunal; and any award of the tribunal. That is a very important provision and it is all geared no doubt towards encouraging the participation of parties in the process which is seen to be a private way of dealing with matters and minimising approaches to the judicial system. 
There is not a blanket ruling on the disclosure of confidential information. There will be times when there are limits placed on that prohibition and the tribunal itself under new section 14D is also given the power to allow disclosure of confidential information but only in “certain circumstances” which are set out as follows: if a question arises as to whether confidential information should be disclosed other than as authorised and if at least one of the parties agrees to refer that question to the tribunal concerned. 
As I say these provisions are geared towards encouraging participation to make sure there is consistency with laws in other jurisdictions and to increase powers for the tribunal to get participation. 
The only other matter that I will refer to has been reasonably well covered already by colleagues and that matter is the issue dealt with at the beginning of the debate: the control of the tribunal in relation to witness subpoenas. Here one can see the Justice and Electoral Committee at work. The committee recommended that clause 8(1) be deleted. That clause deals with the subpoenas and proposes to amend article 27(1) of schedule 1 of the Act “so that when a party seeks the court’s assistance to take evidence that party will no longer be required to first seek the approval of the arbitral tribunal.” The committee recommended the removal of the clause because it considered it important that parties be required to seek approval on the basis that this would enhance the tribunal’s control over the arbitration process and also maintain current practice. 
All in all I say these are very good provisions and very good amendments recommended by the committee and I am pleased to have made this contribution.