Pillay Lynne: Limitation Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Pillay Lynne: Limitation Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:666;Page:13572] 
LYNNE PILLAY (Labour) 
: 
 It is an absolute pleasure to come down to the Chamber again and speak on the Limitation Bill. I was in my office catching up on a bit of work and I thought: “No—enough. I have to get back to this bill.” 
I heard with interest the comments in terms of the waiting period in the bill and I acknowledge the very good contribution of David Parker. That was something on which the Labour members showed a lot of leadership and I am only sorry that all our very valid arguments were not brought into effect. What I do know is that this bill is long overdue. As I said earlier in terms of the Government we have seen a lot of things we are not happy with come before the Justice and Electoral Committee but especially before this House. But on this occasion this has been a common-sense bill if I can use that term. It has clearer more comprehensive law on general civil limitation defences. The bill is not all about defendants being disadvantaged by stale claims. It is also about having some clarity in terms of the whole system. 
I acknowledge the work of the Law Commission. I note that under the previous Labour Government more Law Commission reports were implemented than were implemented under any other previous Government. Although I acknowledge Chester Borrows who is a very good chair of the Justice and Electoral Committee I also take this opportunity to acknowledge the former chair who was me. During my time as chair of the Justice and Electoral Committee there were many bills that came before— 
Hone Harawira 
: You were just wonderful. 
LYNNE PILLAY 
: I thank the member very much. Kia ora. If we really want to remember that committee the member will remember when we went to look at victims’ rights in Victoria. It was a very constructive meeting. Unfortunately the National members wanted to take advantage of the adjournment and go on international holidays but those of us in Labour and indeed in the Maori Party went on that select committee trip. The member was very helpful in the time that he was there but he then felt a need a very— 
Hone Harawira 
: To sneak off. 
LYNNE PILLAY 
: I would not put it that way. He felt a need to go and investigate some concerns. 
Hone Harawira 
: For a walkabout. 
LYNNE PILLAY 
: He went walkabout in Australia but that is past history. What I will say is that that member put in the time and effort to accompany us on that trip. I can see Minister Finlayson looking and thinking “Oh I wish I had been there.”! I know that it is something the Minister has always regretted just a teensy bit. The trip was crucial in terms of Labour enacting some very very good legislation on victims’ rights which the National Government has been a little tardy on building on. We hope that in the future it will do so. 
I come back to the Limitation Bill because I know that all of us on the committee found it particularly interesting. Even though it is an update it seemed quite technical and some quite substantive issues came out that needed quite a bit of consideration and discussion. My good friend David Parker has talked about sexual abuse claims and why the limitation period should not apply to them because of the very nature of longevity of when those claims may come into effect. It would be really remiss of me not to acknowledge that and at the same time acknowledge what a dreadful dreadful job the Minister for ACC has done in terms of providing support for survivors of sexual abuse in New Zealand. I know that it is not appropriate to digress and very few members have tonight but that is one of the things that would have to be a real blot. Where do we draw the line? Where do we stop counting all the terrible things that this Government has done? But that has to be up there with the worst. 
I mentioned before—just in passing of course—the assault on workers in New Zealand. I also want to mention the Sentencing Council because I know the Minister would be very upset if I did not mention it. I know that other members have also mentioned it tonight. If the Minister could somehow enrapture the Sentencing Council into this bill he may wish to take a call. If we are talking about access to justice—[ 
Interruption 
] Ah I see the Minister is jumping to his feet. Thank you very much.