Chauvel Charles: Duties of Statutory Officers (Census and Other Remedial Provisions) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Chauvel Charles: Duties of Statutory Officers (Census and Other Remedial Provisions) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:675;Page:20821] 
CHARLES CHAUVEL (Labour) 
: 
 Thank you Mr Chairman— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: What’s your Tahitian greeting? 
CHARLES CHAUVEL 
: Iaorana. The Minister in the chair the Minister of Statistics did not deign to reply to the concerns I raised about Part 1. I hope he will not take that approach to Part 2 given that this is the only scrutiny as I have said that this bill will get. I spoke to the Chief Parliamentary Counsel a couple of weeks ago. He is a fine man and he does a fine job. He told me that he was undertaking a task back in the United Kingdom and that he would be there for some time but that the Government had kindly agreed to facilitate his temporary return to the United Kingdom Public Service by arranging for him to continue in the role of Chief Parliamentary Counsel and for there to be an Acting Chief Parliamentary Counsel appointed in his place. 
If that is the reason that the National-led Government is rushing these provisions of the Legislation Bill through the House then I would have thought it would be incumbent on the Minister and on the Government to advise the House of that fact. There has been no such disclosure and no such attempt to explain that that might be the reason for this apprehended urgency to deal with the provisions in Part 2. I will recap those provisions. They update an antiquated piece of legislation and everybody agrees it is antiquated. It is legislation from the 1920s when Government departments were run in a very different way from the way in which they are run now. As I said earlier the Labour Opposition has no problem in substance with these provisions. We reported the Legislation Bill back to the House from the Regulations Review Committee unanimously and with support after having heard evidence from a number of senior officials former Chief Parliamentary Counsel and the Attorney-General as well. So there is no issue with the provisions themselves. 
Our question is why it is intended that these particular provisions of the Legislation Bill should be severed and brought to the House to be passed under urgency in the way that the Minister has brought them forward dressing them up with the legislation relating to the census in a bill entitled the Duties of Statutory Officers (Census and Other Remedial Provisions) Bill. I say well done to the Minister on his imaginativeness; it is always entertaining. But on this occasion it would be nice to know why it was thought necessary to deal with the matter under urgency. 
As Mr Mallard said in an earlier contribution we do not in this Parliament legislate in respect of individuals to their detriment. That would be a bill of attainder or legislation of that nature. It is unconstitutional; we do not do it. But if that principle is correct then also it would be inappropriate to say the least to legislate for the private benefit of any individual unless we were very clear about why that was being done. As I said earlier if that is what is being done here it ought to be done openly rather than in some sort of covert fashion. 
I would like to hear from the Minister about why the urgency is attached to the provisions concerning an Acting Chief Parliamentary Counsel and I would also like to know as would members on this side of the Chamber how these provisions might apply in practice if for example the current holder of the office of Chief Parliamentary Counsel is away for some time. What is the intended tenure of any Acting Chief Parliamentary Counsel? Might we be contemplating quite a long period of that person’s tenure: up to say 2 years? Is that not something that ought to be disclosed declared and debated openly at least in this Committee? As numerous speakers have pointed out this is the only occasion on which that discussion will be able to occur. I urge the Minister to use this one and only opportunity in the process that he has invoked to advise his fellow members of Parliament of the position in respect of this particular part.