Subordinate Legislation Confirmation Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSubordinate Legislation Confirmation Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2015. Volume:706;Page:5081. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Subordinate Legislation Confirmation BillFirst ReadingDebate resumed.DAVID CLENDON (Green):I am pleased to take a brief call on this bill in order to confirm that the Greens will be supporting its referral to the Regulations Review Committee. These bills are necessary and important. Some might call them a necessary evil given the intensity and the detailed work that must sit behind them.Andrew Bayly: Oh how could you say that? That is unfortunate.DAVID CLENDON: I must compliment Mr Bayly on his obvious enthusiasm for the task. His positive attitude is to be complimented I think. If I may digress momentarily I will point out that Mr Bishop in extolling the virtues of the Regulations Review Committee—which are undoubtedly many—referred to it as a “bipartisan” way of operating. Given the make up of the committee one hopes that it is actually a “multipartisan” approach that that committee takes.Hon David Parker: You’re welcome to join.DAVID CLENDON: I certainly am not Mr Parker; no. The only aspect of this bill about which we are unsure is that it is normally the practice for these bills—validation and confirmation bills—to go through the House under the auspices of Standing Order 325 which effectively means that where the matters contained in the bill are limited solely to confirmation and validation matters the first reading is without debate. The bill is then sent off to the select committee immediately for the serious and no doubt detailed work that will be done there. It then comes back for a second reading which is debated. Then the third reading is held forthwith without debate unless for some unusual reason the bill goes through the Committee stage. So generally speaking the grunt work if you like is done at the select committee level with only one reading in the House.So we are simply unsure as to why the Minister has chosen to include matters that are out of scope for a validation and confirmation bill—namely the amendments to the Legislation Act which are no doubt well intentioned and which may be very necessary and important. It is just not clear to us why he has not chosen simply to create an amendment to the Legislation Act and leave the validation and confirmation stuff to go through under Standing Order 325. However we will see how that resolves itself in the course of the Regulations Review Committee hearing which we will participate in and we look forward with interest to seeing how this eventually pans out in the House.DENIS O’ROURKE (NZ First):I am very glad that I am speaking in this debate after Mr Bayly otherwise I am sure I would not be nearly as excited about this bill as I am now. Indeed if I could only remember what he said I think I would be more excited still. However New Zealand First does support the bill which validates and confirms subordinate legislation made under various Acts that will lapse if not affirmed and which may need validation. I rely very much on the work of the Regulations Review Committee which has said: “We found no reason that the orders and regulations should not be confirmed or validated and confirmed.” I am sure that it has been through the bill in fine detail and that—Hon David Parker: That was what we said last year.DENIS O’ROURKE: That is fine. As long as they have deliberated on it and we can rely on what they say that is fine.Chris Bishop: It’s a new bill Denis.DENIS O’ROURKE: Anyway the point is this: New Zealand First has examined this bill—this bill—and we are satisfied that the various clauses relating to the legislation or regulations being confirmed or validated should be agreed upon. There are nine of them and I believe that everything contained in the bill is appropriate. We find no reason to question anything that is included in the bill. They are appropriate measures for a subordinate legislation bill. Accordingly we shall be voting in favour.NUK KORAKO (National):Tēnā koe e te Mana Whakawā. I stand to take a short call in support of this bill. I too am really confident in it going to the Regulations Review Committee. I had a great opportunity to actually attend a meeting of this committee one morning. It was well chaired and it was oozing with collegiality—I thought that I was in the Māori Affairs Committee. Anyway the final thing that I can say about this bill is he iti he pounamu. It is small but it is pounamu. I commend it to the House. Kia ora.POTO WILLIAMS (Labour—Christchurch East):I rise along with my colleagues in the House just to say that yes this bill is small but perfectly formed. It will validate and confirm those pieces of legislation that we need to confirm in order for them to remain valid. We commend this bill to the House.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Your chance if you want to speak.Ian McKelvie: Not for long Mr Assistant Speaker. But as an old pupil of the Regulations Review Committee and as a farmer—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I call Ian McKelvie.IAN McKELVIE (National—Rangitīkei):Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker. So as an old pupil of the Regulations Review Committee and as a farmer—and most of the business of this bill concerns farmers—I certainly have a great deal of pleasure in supporting it as it goes through the House. Thank you.Bill read a first time.Bill referred to the Regulations Review Committee.