Shanks Katrina: Insolvency Practitioners Bill — First Reading 
Shanks Katrina: Insolvency Practitioners Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:666;Page:13547] 
KATRINA SHANKS (National) 
: 
 It is my pleasure to stand and talk to the Insolvency Practitioners Bill tonight. In fact it is not very often that we get a bill before us that is exactly what the title says it is. This bill is literally about insolvency practitioners and it is good to see the title of the bill reflects what the bill is about. 
This bill is part of the National-led Government’s focus on improving the integrity of our financial systems which is really important. It is important that we boost investor confidence and that investors have confidence in our markets. It is especially important after the collapse of some finance companies that there is integrity and that investors know that if an insolvency practitioner is going to look at a firm they can have confidence that it will be done with integrity. 
I would like to respond to the comments of the previous speaker Lianne Dalziel. She made a couple of really interesting comments and I am really interested to see what will happen in the select committee when we tease out some of the issues that she raised tonight. It was really interesting to listen to the previous Minister speak. She had the commerce portfolio and tried to implement the initiative. She tried to turn it into a bill but she never managed to get to that stage because of advice that she received previously. Now National has this legislation which is in the same form that it was when the previous Minister looked at it and the same issues still sit around it. I am really interested to tease out some of the issues that the previous Minister Lianne Dalziel spoke about. 
Lianne Dalziel talked about why we need legislation for such a small number of people. In effect from my understanding there are only about 100 insolvency practitioners in New Zealand like Lianne said and of those a very small percentage are not particularly good. So if this bill addresses only 5 percent then that works out to be five practitioners which is really interesting. I ask whether the bill is a sledgehammer for a walnut or whether there is more to it. I cannot wait to see the debate within our own select committee when we address those issues and get advice on them. If we are serious about boosting confidence in our companies and in our finance sector we need those types of frameworks in place. 
When I looked through this bill I thought we should just put it through as a regulation instead of creating a bill for such a small number of people. But then we have to ask where the framework would be in order to have that regulation. It would most probably have to be in the Companies Act but it is not in there. So there is a real purpose for having this bill in place—to ensure that we have a type of register in place. 
When we talk about a register it is really a reverse register. It is a register for those practitioners who are barred or are not allowed to practise as insolvency practitioners as opposed to a register to show who is a practitioner which is quite unique. When we look at it we see that it is quite creative. It keeps down the costs for all those practitioners because they do not have to register. It is also very easy to find someone who cannot practise because there will be such a small number of them on the register. 
I am looking forward to the debate we will have at the select committee. I am looking forward to hearing the submitters who will come forward and talk to some of the issues that have already been raised tonight. I commend this bill to the House.