Brownlee Gerry: Standing Orders—Sessional 
Brownlee Gerry: Standing Orders—Sessional 
[Volume:669;Page:16421] 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I seek leave to move a motion notice of which was lodged this morning relating to the adoption of the changes to the Standing Orders recommended by the Standing Orders Committee for the registration of members’ pecuniary interests. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is no objection. 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: I move  
That Chapters 3 and 8 and Appendix B of the Standing Orders be read as if amended in the manner set out in Appendix 1 of the report of the Standing Orders Committee on the Review of Standing Orders relating to pecuniary interests (I.18A) with effect from 1 January 2011. 
 The Standing Orders Committee has reviewed the Standing Orders relating to the pecuniary interests of members of Parliament and has recommended a number of changes to these provisions. The motion adopts the committee’s recommendations by way of a sessional order with effect for the round of annual returns due in February next year. 
The referral of this review followed a unanimous recommendation of the Privileges Committee in September 2008. The Standing Orders Committee heard evidence from Dame Margaret Bazley Registrar of Pecuniary Interests of Members of Parliament who made a number of suggestions for improving and clarifying the requirements for the declaration of pecuniary interests. After presenting her submission Dame Margaret was appointed to advise the committee on the review. The committee also heard from Lyn Provost Controller and Auditor-General. 
The register is a public record of specified financial and other interests that are personal to each member. It provides information of any interest or other material benefit that a member holds or may receive that might reasonably be thought by others to influence his or her actions as a member of Parliament. The purpose of the register is to strengthen public trust and confidence in the parliamentary process by improving transparency openness and accountability. The Privileges Committee’s report emphasised such principles and the Standing Orders Committee’s recommendations incorporate them more fully in the House’s rules. 
Some new requirements have been recommended—for example members will now be required to declare an interest in trusts of which they are trustees without having a beneficial interest. Members must also declare a beneficial interest in a trust regardless of whether it is a fixed or discretionary interest. Recommendations also clarify requirements for the declaration of real property and paid activities. The committee’s recommendations mean that some additional areas of interest may be declared that are not strictly of pecuniary or financial benefit to members. For this reason the committee has proposed that the name of the register be amended to “Register of Pecuniary and Other Specified Interests”. 
A significant new development is the introduction of a new procedure for members to request that the registrar conduct an inquiry into a member’s compliance with the obligations to make returns. On receiving a request the registrar will then consider whether to conduct such an inquiry. This means that the Speaker will no longer be involved in the consideration of such matters. After conducting an inquiry the registrar will have the ability to report to the House that a question of privilege is involved but that outcome would result from only the most serious situations. In many cases matters may be resolved through the correction of returns. That is a course not currently available to the Speaker when considering matters of privilege. 
The registrar’s new inquiry role replaces that previously accorded to the Auditor-General. It is worth noting that the Auditor-General never exercised that function as there were doubts about whether there was sufficient statutory power to do so. However the Auditor-General will support the registrar when required. 
In recommending this new procedure the Standing Orders Committee was concerned to prevent its use for the making of frivolous or vexatious requests for inquiries into members’ interests. A member wishing to make a request must have reasonable grounds to do so. A member who makes a request without those reasonable grounds will risk being held in contempt of the House. 
The sessional order will have effect for the 2011 returns. In the light of experience from the returns process the Standing Orders Committee will consider how these recommendations should be adopted as permanent amendments to the Standing Orders. 
In addition to those notes I point out that the process of members recording their pecuniary interests has been in place for just a few years. I think it is fair to say that some members in fact a large number of members have been overly cautious about what they put in there to the point that we now get registers of “interest” as opposed to necessarily “pecuniary interests”. So in many ways the changes codify what has become a practice for members anyway. It is fair to say that most members have erred on the side of caution when making their returns to the extent that some members appear to have interests far in excess of the actual benefit that may come from them simply because they felt that some association with an organisation real property or any range of other financial instruments might somehow be required to be recorded under the provisions. This arrangement effectively confirms that so that there can be no doubt in the public’s eyes about who has what interest and where. 
The registrar’s right to inquire is good because in most of these cases MPs will have made just simple omissions without any desire to hide stuff. I suggest that if any large pecuniary interest was being concealed or if there was even a hint of that New Zealand is a small enough country for people to know about it and for that matter to make its way into the system and for there to be considerable concern expressed about that. But there will be cases where people do not declare things simply because they do not know about them. A case could be perhaps of a defunct insurance company that had small residuals left over. People may not even remember owning a particular policy but at some later point they are contacted by an investigating organisation to see whether they are the person named on that policy and then a small payment is made out to them. That policy may not have been declared in the register but it was not deliberately concealed. That is the sort of thing that can be very easily sorted out by the registrar. But if it is a bigger matter then the Auditor-General stands by to assist in that process and ultimately everything comes back to the House for the Privileges Committee to deal with. I do not want to make any further comments. 
I believe that it is a positive move for the House to adopt this sessional order.