Power Simon: Civil Aviation Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Power Simon: Civil Aviation Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:615;Page:11352] 
SIMON POWER (National—Rangitikei) 
: 
 The commencement and purpose clauses of the Civil Aviation Amendment Bill are fairly good indications of what is contained in the legislation. By that I mean that the purpose clause itself sets out firstly that the purpose of the bill is to implement the mutual recognition agreements which we on this side of the Chamber will be exploring in some detail during the course of the Committee stage. 
Secondly the purpose of the bill is to deal with certain types of unruly behaviour that may occur on an aircraft by providing penalties for that behaviour. Members will be aware that when the House considered this matter during the second reading I raised a number of concerns about the way in which that portion of the bill was drafted in respect of unruly behaviour and whether an adult having control over a minor was to be included in that legislation and in those offences. We will certainly be asking the Minister in the chair the Hon Harry Duynhoven to take a call and answer some questions on the nature of the care and protection of a child whether well-behaved or unruly who is the charge of an unruly adult. 
Thirdly the bill provides for “civil liability for delay suffered by passengers during domestic carriage”. My understanding of this particular portion of the bill is that currently there is provision for civil liability to be incurred by an airline in respect of delays and resultant economic loss—loss of opportunity one presumes and the like. However what this particular provision in the bill does is codify in a clear and substantial way the manner in which those particular charges and liabilities are to be dealt with and in fact—if memory serves and the Minister may want to correct me if I am wrong on this—the remedies that flow from those liabilities being enforced against a domestic airline carrier. 
I believe that the provisions contained in Part 2—without wanting to pre-empt the debate on that particular part which we will get to shortly—provide a large and wide-ranging scope of subjects given the nature of those three areas that I have just outlined. 
As we turn our minds and our thoughts for one moment to the commencement date one presumes that the Minister has a grand scheme in place. It is a pretty confusing commencement date because on the one hand—and I know that my colleague Brian Connell the MP for Rakaia is very keen to explore this particular point in a little more detail—we have sections 4(1) 5 6(1) and 7 etc. coming into force on 31 December 2003 or an earlier date as appointed by the Governor-General by Order in Council. So some sections come into force on that date. I see my honourable colleague nodding frantically because of course his knowledge in these areas far surpasses mine. That chunk is to come into force on 31 December 2003—well that will not happen. Presumably those particular sections will come into force on the date appointed by the Governor-General. The rest of the Act comes into force on 1 March. 
John Carter 
: That’s not that far away. 
SIMON POWER 
: Well it is not that far away as the senior whip quite rightly points out in my ear. We know that there are only 28 days in this month— 
Hon Harry Duynhoven 
: There are 29 actually. 
SIMON POWER 
: My 5 years in this Parliament have been a blur. One would presume that the Minister has a grand plan for 1 March. This legislation will have to be moved very promptly indeed unless the Minister has tabled an amendment. Has the Minister tabled an amendment on the commencement date? He has. 
Hon Harry Duynhoven 
: I’m coming to that. 
SIMON POWER 
: He is coming to that. The Minister will take a call on an even more confusing aspect of the commencement date. We have some sections that came into force last year presumably making them retrospective now in the event that the Governor-General does not give her consent until after 1 March. What happens if the Governor-General does not give her consent until after 1 March? Has the Minister thought through what is clearly a confusing and difficult issue for him in the early days of the Committee stage of this bill? One would hope that he would take the opportunity to clarify these issues because he has not got off to a good start. He has not got off to a good start at all.