Tisch Lindsay: Subordinate Legislation (Confirmation and Validation) Bill (No 3) — Second ReadingThird Reading 
Tisch Lindsay: Subordinate Legislation (Confirmation and Validation) Bill (No 3) — Second ReadingThird Reading 
[Volume:643;Page:13221] 
LINDSAY TISCH (National—Piako) 
: 
 We are fortunate to have someone of the calibre of Dr Richard Worth who chairs the Regulations Review Committee. We have seen today how he has been able to crystallise and articulate the essence of such important legislation—legislation that to most minds is of a technical nature and does not really inspire many to be part of this debate. But it is important to realise that regulations and orders can expire and that they need to be rolled over. Even if we do not have an interest specifically in the regulation before us we can look behind at the policy that drives these sorts of regulations. Those who have a mind to do so will see what the policy decisions are that have promulgated the regulations we have before us. This Subordinate Legislation (Confirmation and Validation) Bill (No 3) is important legislation and there is much to take in. I said that this is a technical bill but we are asked this afternoon to allow departments through the clauses in the bill to be able to operate and carry on their functions. Subordinate legislation has a time frame on it that is going to expire— 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: Really! 
LINDSAY TISCH 
: That is why we are here I say to the Minister. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: I have always said the member is a genius. 
LINDSAY TISCH 
: Well it is a great committee we have. The Regulations Review Committee not only has Dr Worth as its chair but has on it my esteemed colleague here Eric Roy who is the authority on fishing. He will be able to tell us what the fisheries legislation means. One of the provisions we are asked to confirm and validate this afternoon specifically talks about fishing. I know that my colleague Eric Roy will be able to do that as an expert in that area. Subordinate legislation needs to be confirmed and in some cases validated to avail the effect of what are commonly called sunset clauses where regulations and orders in subordinate legislation will be deemed to be revoked and will expire on a certain date. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: Struth! 
LINDSAY TISCH 
: That is important to realise and that is why we are here today. It is an annual event. I say to the Minister that I have spoken on this before—it is an annual event. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: I remember that speech. 
LINDSAY TISCH 
: Oh it is not the same speech as last time because we are dealing with different clauses this time. These clauses will expire on a date and it is important that they are confirmed and validated by an Act before this Parliament. That is the reason we are here this afternoon. The regulations and orders that we will be validating are in Part 2 of the bill. I will go through those in a minute. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: Slowly. 
LINDSAY TISCH 
: Well there are nine clauses here in Part 2 where the regulations and orders are specified in the bill and to avoid revocation we must today confirm and in some cases validate those. As I said this is a technical bill so it does not have the panache or the excitement of many but it is certainly an important bill. 
I draw the attention of members to the contents page of the bill. This bill has in it the title and commencement—I do not think we in National will be commenting on those. Part 1 of the bill talks about the “General and technical provisions” and includes the purpose clause. Part 2 contains the confirmations and validations that are so important. There is the Animal Products Act 1999 the Commodity Levies Act 1990 the Customs and Excise Act 1996 and the Fisheries Act 1996 which I am sure my colleague Eric Roy will want to make comment on. Our spokesman on fishing Phil Heatley who is standing up will probably want to make a valuable contribution on this also. There is the Gambling Act 2003 which I will be speaking on. There is the New Zealand Superannuation and Retirement Income Act 2001 and the Social Security Act 1964. There is the Road User Charges Act 1977 the Tariff Act 1988 and the War Pensions Act 1954 which my colleague Dr Worth spoke about. 
I draw the attention of members first to clause 11 of this bill which relates to the Gambling Act 2003. The regulations were made under section 319 of the Gambling Act 2003. That section provides that if regulations requiring gambling operators to pay a levy are made on or before 30 June in any year the regulations would expire on 30 June of the following year unless they are specifically confirmed by an Act of Parliament passed during the year. That is the reason we are here today—so that a levy can be struck. Since 1996 successive Governments have considered it appropriate that the major gambling operators should contribute to the cost of addressing the harm caused by their products. Section 317 of the Act states that the Government may allocate responsibility for developing and delivering an integrated problem gambling strategy to a department. This responsibility was allocated to the Ministry of Health which took over the role of the Problem Gambling Committee of New Zealand from 1 July 2004. 
Section 319 of the Act also provides that regulations may be made requiring gambling operators to pay a levy to recover the cost of developing managing and delivering an integrated problem-gambling strategy. This strategy will be funded from an appropriation to the ministry and the Crown will recoup this funding from the levy. The levy which is calculated using a formula supplied in the Act provides a mechanism for apportioning the cost of the strategy between the main gambling subsectors—that is non-casino gaming machines casinos the New Zealand Racing Board and the New Zealand Lotteries Commission. 
This formula is always subject to debate. I spent much time working on it back in 2003 because it is a formula that I think does not have fairness and equity. I will not talk about that today because of course that is a policy decision. We are not talking about policy today; we are talking about the confirmation and validation of a levy so it can carry on. So I will not talk about the process which is a policy decision of the Government—I will not get into that debate. 
This levy that I have talked about the problem-gambling levy is fixed for a term of 3 years. Three years has been established as the maximum period for which the levy can be made to coincide with the conclusion of the 3-year funding round. It may be that during that period of time there are overs and unders—that the levy that has been collected has not met the budget that has been required—so there is a provision in section 318 of the Gambling Act that provides that when the next levy is going to be made under the formula those unders and overs can then be apportioned out. That is how that process will work. 
In my remaining minutes I want to talk about the indexing of the war pensions and associated allowances. This is done annually and it takes into account the percentage increase in the consumer price index over the previous calendar year. It is important for those who receive war pensions that this provision is there. Otherwise if it were to lapse it would be a huge problem and it would contravene Government policy—here I am actually talking about Government policy—and there may be the need if payments have been made for the department to ask for money back. We do not want that to happen. These people who are eligible for war pensions need to have certainty and security. One of the provisions that we are talking about here—clause 15 in the bill—validates and confirms an order in the War Pensions Act 1954. It is important that we are able to roll that over and to confirm and to validate the War Pensions (Rates of Pensions Lump Sum Payments and Allowances) Order 2007. 
If the increase in the rates of war pensions lump-sum payments and allowances are not confirmed the department that is responsible for this will be asking for money back and trying to retrieve those overpayments—and that goes back to 1 April 2007. Our committee spent much time on this. It is an important committee. We have scrutinised and analysed these clauses. National is happy to support this bill before the House.