Smith Nick: Weathertight Homes Resolution Services (Remedies) Amendment Bill — Recommittal In Committee 
Smith Nick: Weathertight Homes Resolution Services (Remedies) Amendment Bill — Recommittal In Committee 
[Volume:641;Page:10972] 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson) 
: 
 I want to remind the Committee again of the legislative mess that we are experiencing tonight. We are debating the Weathertight Homes Resolution Services (Remedies) Amendment Bill. This is a bill to amend a fix-up of a mistake that was made in the 2006 legislation regarding weathertight homes. The 2006 legislation was amended to fix up the mess that was made in 2002. So what we had was a botch-up in 2002 that was plugged through under urgency and overrode the normal parliamentary process. That problem was attempted to be fixed by the Minister in the chair the Hon Clayton Cosgrove in 2006 passed under an urgent process and done in a rush. We then discovered that that legislation also had mistakes so that we now have this bill to fix the botch-up arising from the botch-up. 
If members think that that is bad enough we now have had during this Committee stage a further botch-up. In the Building Act—which was originally passed in 2004 and for which another set of amendments was passed in 2006 to try to fix up the Act—the Government has found another mistake so has wanted to correct it. To correct the mistake the Government has said that we have to suspend the rules of the House to introduce Supplementary Order Paper 133 which includes an amendment to clause 3 and in that respect we are going to add the amendments on to this bill to fix the botch-up. 
The simple argument of members on this side of the Chamber is that the Government got it wrong the first time it got it wrong the second time and it got it wrong the third time but on each of those occasions the Government has said: “Trust us. We’ll fix it. We will do it in a hurry.” Opposition members are simply saying that we do not believe Government Ministers anymore. 
Christopher Finlayson 
: But we never believe them. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: Well some members were generous of spirit I tell Mr Finlayson and wanted to think that Clayton Cosgrove was the new-found hope of the Labour Government—that he was the new generation of leadership and that surely he could not get it so wrong. We thought that surely he could not botch it up that badly. 
Darren Hughes 
: Tell us about leadership. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: Obviously Darren Hughes wants to talk about anything but the bill—the bill that is such an extraordinary botch-up. Members on this side of the Chamber are saying: that given that the Government has got it wrong so often why should we abuse parliamentary process and ram this through? I bet that not one member of this Committee has sat down and gone through every one of those 32 lines of law and checked that they line up with the amendments to the amendments of the original Act. I bet they have not. So what sort of Wild West legislation are we passing in ramming these amendments through under a process by which we have suspended the Standing Orders of the House to enable this Minister to ride roughshod over proper parliamentary process? 
I also want to point out that the Minister gave a speech just a month ago and said that everything was on track and that we could do this by 30 November. I ask him what has changed in the last month to cause him to ride roughshod over proper parliamentary process and ram this bill through in less than 24 hours. What has changed? The Minister gave a speech a month ago and said that this was all under control; there was no problem. Why a month later is he saying that the legislation is in trouble? Is he telling us that councils are not going to make the deadline? If he wants to have established the threshold that Sir Geoffrey Palmer has set for riding over the Standing Orders it is that there must be exceptional and extreme circumstances. What are those exceptional and extreme circumstances? Could the Minister please explain. What is the extreme circumstance that justifies as Sir Geoffrey Palmer says this extraordinary process when we have only a single House—when we are one of the few democracies in the world that has only a single House of Parliament? What is the circumstance that enables the Minister to drop on Parliament today 36 changes in the law and have them passed by tonight—changes that are completely outside the scope of the bill? 
Darren Hughes 
: The member should have debated this during the motion. We are now on to the substance of the bill. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: Well I want to know the substance of the bill. I want to know what is the substance that justifies the extreme circumstance of surrendering the Standing Orders. Unless the Government justifies that members on this side of the Chamber will continue to vote against this clause.