Mallard Trevor: Judicial Matters Bill — In Committee 
Mallard Trevor: Judicial Matters Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:660;Page:9347] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 I want to speak on this part of the Judicial Matters Bill not to make an enormous substantive contribution but to ask the Attorney-General whether he thinks this is the sort of legislation that should be passed under urgency or whether this is the sort of legislation that should be carefully considered. There is a degree of agreement certainly around this part of it and one that has developed over a period of time; we think that is good. 
The question I have is whether the Minister as Attorney-General thinks it is good lawmaking practice to ram this sort of legislation through the House under urgency. The House is sitting under urgency and there is chaos. There was a point of order yesterday that took about one and a half question times—just for one point of order. The House has not been well organised. The Attorney-General as the chief legal officer of Parliament has responsibility along with the Leader of the House for process. The process under which this legislation is being addressed is shambolic and I want to know what responsibility he is taking for that. 
I want to know whether the Attorney-General has advised the Leader of the House that in taking this approach to this bill which it is fair to say is constitutional in its approach it is one that should properly be dealt with under urgency or using the words of Steven Joyce at the Cabinet table “whether the optics are good about this or not.” “Are the optics of this good?” I ask the Attorney-General or is the bill something that could probably have easily been dealt with in a much shorter period? We would not therefore be having speeches like this or I am sure like some that will follow other than under urgency. 
As I have indicated as far as this part of the bill is concerned Labour will be supporting it. Whether we will be supporting it to the closure is a discussion that we are currently having. It is good that we have a careful look at it. But is it necessary to waste Parliament’s time by taking a bill of this type? I do not want to say that it is not important and that there will not be some things later where there will be some more— 
Charles Chauvel 
: It’s important. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: Well the bill is very important but it is not urgent. It is also a bill that could have been dealt with on its merits rather than by having a big debate about the process—if the process had been organised properly. 
The essence of the point that I want to make to the Attorney-General is that he needs to take some responsibility. He was the one who was parading around town saying he wanted to be a QC or thinking he would be a QC before he became a member of Parliament. He was someone who was so upset on procedural matters that he might be turned down by a previous Attorney-General for that sort of thing; “prissy” I think was the word that was used around the place as to his approach. So I ask what has happened to those principles. What has happened to the Christopher Finlayson who wanted to be a QC and to the proper approach to lawmaking that he used to promote? He might have changed his mind on the substance of this bill and I congratulate him on catching up with people who were well-briefed back in those times. I think it is good that he admits now that he was wrong then. But does he think that this is the sort of process that should happen? Is he associating himself with Gerry Brownlee’s chaotic handling of this House over the last week? It has been absolutely chaotic; an opportunity was turned down to have things done in an organised and proper manner. He will get much much less through Parliament than he would have had he accepted that opportunity. Longer time was spent on one point of order than on an entire question time and now we have the chief legal officer of Parliament ramming constitutional legislation through this House under urgency in a manner that is just inappropriate.