Cosgrove Clayton: Third Readings —Text is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCosgrove Clayton: Third Readings —[Sitting date: 10 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15394. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Labour): Like my colleague Carol Beaumont has said we will be supporting this legislation arising from the Consumer Law Reform Bill. Consumer protection legislation is generally supported in a non-partisan way in this House. I know Mr Lotu-Iiga is nodding his head. He represents an area where like many parts of New Zealand there are particular vulnerabilities for consumers when dealing with others. I can recall as I said in a speech last week that when in my capacity as Associate Minister of Justice we reformed the whole of the real estate industry because like many industries 90 percent of those people are exceptionally good folks but in terms of consumer protection there was a percentage of those in that industry who preyed on the vulnerable. That is the case and this legislation deals with a whole series of sectors in a generic way in a number of pieces of legislation. It is important that consumers are protected.I did raise and note during the Committee stage that with consumer protection legislation it does not matter how many laws you actually pass there are certain folks in our communities who need an upgrade of financial literacy and an educative process that not only promotes the legislation but advises the most vulnerable folks in our community of what their rights are and of course of what their obligations are—but specifically their rights. I recall that we did not get an answer from the Minister—I think it was Mr Finlayson who was in the chair at the time who also happens to be the Attorney-General—during the Committee stage as to what process promotion and education programmes would be put in place once this legislation is put through. To date I think the record now would be that we have not got an answer.So I say to the Government that it simply would not be good enough to pass this legislation bang it up on a variety of websites and ask those good folks at the Citizens Advice Bureaux and budget advice services and other agencies to do the work for the Government. The Government through its agencies needs to go out and promote this legislation educate the masses as to what protections are contained within this legislation and how they are implemented and advise what rights people have and how they can use this legislation to protect their position because as I say there is no point in passing it if we do not promote it and educate and advise people of their rights.I make a couple of observations. The last speaker Jonathan Young talked about the legislation and its impact on unfair contracts. I recall in looking at the legislation in the Committee stage—and the previous speakers were going way back to some years ago when Lianne Dalziel was speaking on this—that there is the issue that has not been dealt with in this legislation in respect of unconscionable conduct. In the commentary to the legislation as per the Committee stage it was noted that although the Australians had implemented unconscionable conduct laws it was felt that in this legislation it would be omitted until such time as I understand it that a body of case law built up around the said unconscionable conduct and its definition. I note in the commentary on the then legislation that unconscionable conduct “applies where courts consider it unfair or inequitable (or ‘against good conscience’) to allow a party to enforce its contractual rights against another party who is detrimentally affected by an oppressive bargain.”—an oppressive bargain—“The Minister of Consumer Affairs invited the Commerce Committee and those making submissions on the bill to consider whether protections regarding unconscionable conduct should be added …” and it was felt as I say that it be omitted until a body of precedent was drawn up in Australia.But it also talked about oppressive contracts—about whether a contract was oppressive and therefore could be inflicted on another. I did ask the Minister in thechair in the Committee stage and it is worth repeating for the record—you may have been in the Chair Mr Deputy Speaker at the time—whether unconscionable conduct would include for instance the conduct of say one Hon John Archibald Banks. I know—before I am pulled up by you Mr Deputy Speaker or others—that we cannot talk about the detail of the grave grave and graphic difficulties that the Hon John Archibald Banks is in because he is before the courts but we do know the facts. It is interesting as to whether that is an oppressive contract where you have a “willing buyer willing seller” situation perhaps or whether a situation where money is offered to another and accepted—brown paper bags aside but not talking about any specific case—would be considered unconscionable conduct.Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga: Come on.Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE: Sam Lotu-Iiga is a lawyer and so is far more qualified than my good self to commentate on this. I know that he is scratching away in the law books on the laptop as we speak looking up case precedent in the Commonwealth courts—or if he is not he should be—and I wonder whether he could advise us whether that example of conduct which we cannot talk about would be considered unconscionable and therefore where a contractual relationship exists and money is changing hands whether that could be considered oppressive. I would argue that in relation to the Hon John Archibald Banks we will know whether it is oppressive once the learned court has rendered a verdict.He may well be able to write a dissertation or Mr Goldsmith you know through striped sunshine might be able to add to volume one of Mr Banks’ autobiography with volume two. I am told that the Lord “Sir” Jeffrey Archer—the Lord “Sir” Jeffrey Archer—penned many a volume of literary works from within Her Majesty’s prisons over a number of years so we could be in line for another series of literary works from the Hon John Archibald Banks one who has been convicted of two crimes prior to the one that we talk about now. So that member may indeed want to consult this legislation in terms of consumer protection. Indeed Mr Dotcom might wish to consult this legislation to determine whether he has any consumer protection or rights that could be aided and abetted by this learned legislation.But to get back to the more substantive part given that we have traversed that little episode I note and other speakers have noted—and again I talked in the last piece of legislation earlier today with regard to taxation—this Government’s priorities. We note that this legislation was initiated after a review in 2009. In June 2010 there was a discussion document. These are all good processes. The bill was introduced into Parliament in 2011. Its first reading was in 2012 in February. It was reported back in October—blah blah blah—and here we are. These are all appropriate processes for a piece of legislation to go through. The message though that I have for this Government is that it has taken it an inordinate amount of time to get this legislation to the third readings which we are on today—an inordinate amount of time. Minister Foss and I believe Minister Bridges before him that well-known—Dr David Clark: Clamper.Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE: Clamper did you say Mr Clark? Yes Minister Bridges’ claim to fame was wheel clamping when he was an Associate Minister of Transport. With those two Ministers there is a pattern. Getting legislation through takes an inordinate amount of time with Minister Foss and the question is simply this: what is more important than providing people with rights and protections as they go about their daily business engaging in transactions? These people are often the most vulnerable. Many of us in the House have been around a bit—for some over there longer than for others. We have had a bit of life experience. We know what smells bad and what doesnot in terms of basic transactions. Other people do not have that benefit. Other people do not have—Hon Member: Give us an example.Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE: I was not including Mr Banks in that life experience I say to my colleague. But other people do not have that benefit. They are vulnerable and they need assistance and they rely on this Parliament to give assistance. So it has taken a number of years to get relatively straightforward legislation through and you have got to ask yourself: is it asset sales or is it consumer legislation? Is it deals with RioTinto—which could itself be called unconscionable because the taxpayer of course got nothing for the 30 million bucks? But that aside what is more important and where are the Government’s priorities?The Government is great of course at laying down the law for others but when it comes to consumer protection and critical pieces of legislation it can just toddle on wheedle its way down the path and take its time going through the process in Parliament. I submit that this is very important legislation. We will be supporting this legislation and there are probably other ideas that will flow from this. I hope that Ministers Foss and Bridges and others will lift their game and ensure that when there is the next round of consumer protection legislation it will be expedited and not dragged kicking and screaming through the parliamentary process.