Rutherford Tom; Pugh MaureenTOM RUTHERFORD (National—Bay of Plenty): Thank you very much Madam Speaker. It has been a really interesting debate to listen to over the last hour or so listening to a variety of contributions from each side of the House on why they're supporting this bill and the different provisions that they've seen in the bill that they think are really good being updated in 2024 by this House. So it's been engaging to listen to—particularly the contributions from some of my colleagues have been fantastic.Before I sort of go through a process of picking apart the different aspects of the bill that are looking to be updated by the House I actually did a little bit of a deep dive to actually want to know a little bit more about the man of Allan McLean and who he actually is. A number of my colleagues have talked about him already but there's some things here that I pulled out. One I would note says Allan McLean was a somewhat eccentric figure. He frequently wore a plum-coloured suit bow-tie and white socks". Now I wonder if that would be pressing the rules of Parliament if he were to wear that here today in 2024.He also travelled around the district in a white wagonette referred to locally as the "Yankee Express". However he was also known for his generosity to the poor and had a large bunkroom for swaggers built on his property. What a really generous man in his own individual right. Then I looked into the history of McLean's mansion which we've discussed a little bit this evening already. This magnificent residence containing 23000 square feet and generally referred to as "McLean's Mansion" was completed in 1902. Allan with the aid of his very capable housekeeper Mrs Emily Phillips and staff then went into residence. And I thought actually I'm keen to know a little bit more about the residence and then tying that back into the bill around how that residence still remains with us today.I read that he commissioned his solicitors to prepare what was a very long and clearly expressed will. This document after making generous provisions for his relatives his housekeeper and his staff provided for the establishment of the McLean Institute. Upon Allan's death on 12 November 1907 90 years before I was born the trustees announced his magnificent benefaction. His reason for building such a fantastic residence now became apparent to all. It had obviously been his intention to provide and endow this beautiful property to be used as his will expressed—and I quote—as a "home for women of refinement or education in reduced or straitened circumstances". The institute was incorporated by an Act of Parliament the McLean Institute Act 1909. And that brings me to the bill. That's the journey we've taken to where we are today. The McLean Institute (Trust Variation) Bill is a private bill being led by the MP for Christchurch Central the Hon Dr Duncan Webb. The first private bill I'm actually aware of that we've had in the 54th Parliament. So it's been an interesting journey for those of us that are new seeing the processes behind a private bill versus the other bills we have coming before the House. I read through the report from the Social Services and Community Committee and one of them well they talked about some of the amendments which were all recommended unanimously just like this bill is tonight.I want to talk about the five amendments from the select committee. The first was future changes to the trust involvement of the High Court under the Charitable Trusts Act. Now the Charitable Trusts Act consolidates aspects of New Zealand's legislation and the common law relating to charitable trusts. The select committee noted that the board followed the process—the board being the board of the McLean Institute—under Part 3 of the Charitable Trusts Act in 2021 seeking to vary the terms of the trust as reflected in the Schedule of this bill. The court declined to make the requested changes because they were inconsistent with the McLean Institute Act 1909 1930 and 1934. The court ruled that the changes sought could only be made by an Act of Parliament. That brings us to where we are today why we are in fact debating this bill here in Parliament.The second amendment the select committee talked about was proposed amendments related to the Charitable Trusts Act and clause 6 of this bill as introduced refers to the Charitable Trusts Act and its functions in relation to the McLean Institute. It sets out that the Act would apply to the trust and the board as if the powers and constitution of the trust were set out in a deed and not in statute. The intent of this clause is to allow the court to approve the changes to the trust in accordance with Part 3 despite the trust and deed being set out in legislation. Then the committee went on to say they recommended amending clause 6 and adding 10A to the preamble to clarify this intent. The committee also recommended the deletion of clause 24.2 which would be unnecessary given their proposed amendment to clause 6.Then the third amendment the select committee looked into and has recommended was amending the trust's charitable purpose. Now the bill as it was introduced would set new charitable purposes for the McLean Institute's trust and the select committee heard from the board's representatives that it feels it is no longer able to fulfil the charitable purposes laid out in the original deed of the trust as societal changes have meant the criteria are no longer relevant. Now the select committee having heard from the board's representatives were satisfied that the changes to the trust's charitable purposes are consistent with the wishes of the late Allan McLean and that's got to be the priority here. Mr McLean bequeathed this money and it needs to ensure that it is being utilised as was his intentions and his wishes. So now the Schedule of the bill outlines a new deed of trust which would vary the charitable purposes so that the trust may be better administered and can continue to support disadvantaged women.The fourth amendment from the select committee was around the incorporation of the trust board and the select committee noted that the board was established through the will of Allan McLean and incorporated as a body corporate under the McLean Institute Act 1909. However the bill as introduced incorrectly states that the board was incorporated under the Charitable Trusts Act. Therefore the select committee recommended several amendments to the bill to ensure that it accurately reflects the trust's status and does not unintentionally change it. There are four recommendations in this part and they are: affirming that the board continues to be incorporated under the McLean Institute Act 1909 despite that Act being repealed—[Bell rung] there goes the bell—rather than the Charitable Trusts Act by amending clause 4 and adding clause 4A which clearly states this. The next point was removing requirements in clause 5 for the trust deed to be lodged with the Registrar of Incorporated Societies. This would only be needed if the board was incorporated under the Charitable Trusts Act. The third was removing the requirement in clause 6 of the Schedule for the board to remain an incorporated body and as amendments to clause 4 and the proposed new clause 4A already states that the board remains incorporated despite the repeal of the McLean Institute Act 1909. The final was changing any instances of the term "registered charitable trust" to "registered charity" to indicate that the trust is a registered charity under the Charities Act not a registered charitable trust under the Charitable Trusts Act.Now the fifth and final recommendation from the select committee was removal of a trustee on the basis of unsound mind. The terms of the trust as originally written contains language that in 2024 is outdated. Therefore the select committee recommended that there was some confusion of the term "of an unsound mind" and suggested that it be updated so that the language used aligns with the provisions set out in the Trusts Act 2019 which instead of being of an unsound mind referred to the "loss of capacity to perform the functions of a trustee".I have traversed the journey of the McLean Institute (Trust Variation) Bill and I recommend it to the House.Motion agreed to.Bill read a second time.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh): I declare the House in committee for consideration of the Child Protection (Child Sex Offender Government Agency Registration) (Overseas Travel Reporting) Amendment Bill."