Huo RaymondRAYMOND HUO (Labour): I rise to take a call to support this bill. I should congratulate the Hon Christopher Finlayson. The former Attorney-General couldn't convince his colleagues over the last 10 years but he could manage to convince his luck to get his member's bill drawn from the ballot and here we are. I'd like also to thank him for referring his bill to the Justice Committee. How many bills do we have now?Virginia Andersen: Fourteen.RAYMOND HUO: Fourteen.Marja Lubeck: Lucky you!RAYMOND HUO: Lucky us. Probably we will get another one from Minister Nanaia Mahuta as well. So there's 15 probably 16. I'd like to thank the Hon Christopher Finlayson for his contributions to the Justice Committee. We have established a subcommittee specifically for the Trusts Bill and for each session we spent a significant amount of time good quality time discussing legal issues—for instance trying to find the legal definition of negligence gross negligence and recklessness although some members mentioned that we may use the facial expression or the tone of the speeches of the Hon Nick Smith to help gauge for us the level of legal definition between negligence gross negligence and recklessness! That's a light-hearted joke. Hopefully Dr Smith won't take it to heart.Why I mentioned Dr Smith's name is because whenever we tried to do a Google search and type in contempt of court" his name popped up because as a member he was fined $5000 for making a critical comment on a Family Court case. Whether that sort of a gesture would amount to a kind of contempt of court—if so how to strike a balance between the protection of the integrity of our justice system and the freedom of speech and what we should do to adapt to the internet age because the current contempt law was developed before the rise of the internet and e-commerce or e-economy. New technologies such as e-commerce e-technology or the development of social media have certainly changed our lives and have certainly transformed business and Government and also individuals' behaviour.So this bill seeks to address the three most important issues. One is the contempt of court because at the moment our law is kind of a mixture of statutory law and case law—i.e. the court-made law or the decisions of the courts. Secondly where and how to strike a balance between contempt of court and freedom of expression. And thirdly as I said how to adapt to the current digital economy e-commerce or the internet age.This bill based largely on the recommendations of the Law Commission seeks to address the three most important issues in such a manner. Firstly this bill will ensure the law of contempt is accessible to those it affects. Currently the law is not accessible because as I said it's kind of a mixture—even some commentators have used the words hodgepodge—of common law and statutory law. Secondly the bill will ensure the law is clear and easily understandable. The law is not currently clear to New Zealanders because courts are still developing the boundary of the law especially the line between contempt and freedom of expression. Thirdly the bill will make the law of contempt workable. In several significant aspects the law is not working as it should. The law for contempt was developed prior to the internet age and the enactment of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 so the law of contempt has not kept pace with the digital age.So I commend the member for having the luck of having the member's bill drawn from the ballot and I very much look forward to the submissions and progress of this very important bill. Thank you."