Huo Raymond: Student Loan Scheme Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Huo Raymond: Student Loan Scheme Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 19 March 2013. Volume:688;Page:8669. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
RAYMOND HUO (Labour) 
: 
 Thank you Mr Chair— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Did you call? 
RAYMOND HUO 
: Yes I did— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: Raymond Huo has the call. 
RAYMOND HUO 
: —I did. You made the right observation during question time because I watched the tape again and it proved Mr Trevor Mallard was correct and the Speaker was wrong but that is a different matter. 
The Minister of Revenue talked about sustainability but from a historical perspective the Student Loan Scheme Amendment Bill (No 2) is not a good example of sustainability. Instead the Government is tinkering to fix its previous tinkering attempts which have gone wrong. 
My colleague Dr David Clark has just covered the issue regarding the “Henry VIII” clause and I apologise for interrupting his good speech. Although Labour supports the overall intent of this bill we are opposed to clause 39(4) which inserts an unnecessary regulation-making power. There is a very good opinion article by Professor John Burrows regarding this particular issue. I reckon that all the members should have a good look at this article to appreciate the nature and scope of this regulation-making power because any unnecessary regulation-making powers should be approached with caution. 
I also note the Finance and Expenditure Committee’s view that the changes the bill would make to the 2011 Act are complex. They involve amendments to previous amendments that have not yet come into force the repeal of provisions that were to come into force in the future and interrelationships between provisions that would be amended or appealed at different points in time. There is also the challenge of ensuring that the Inland Revenue Department’s computer system implements the amendments accurately. There is a relatively high risk that unforeseen issues or unintended consequences may emerge in the transition to this legislation creating a need for regulations. I am very pleased to hear the Minister just confirm that in terms of technology the department could cope with those issues. But this seems to confirm what the Hon David Cunliffe just said in his previous speech which is that this bill was introduced by the “Minister of Small Changes”. 
Some of the other select committee recommendations focus on inserting new provisions to correct errors made in previous student loan scheme legislation passed by National. Not only is the Government tinkering around the edges of the major student loan issues with this bill but now it is using tinkering to fix its previous tinkering attempts that have gone wrong. For example under the Student Loan Scheme Act 1992 repayment obligations under $20 were not collected and were written off. The 2011 Act changed this so that small amounts remain part of a borrower’s loan balance for future collection. However because the department has not been able to update its computer system chasing such small loans would actually end up costing it more than it would save. The select committee therefore recommended amending clause 22 of this bill to reinstate the old provision. This bill was introduced not only by the “Minister of Small Changes” but also by the “Minister of Tinkering”.