Hipkins Chris: Hamilton City Council (Parana Park) Land Vesting Bill — In Committee 
Hipkins Chris: Hamilton City Council (Parana Park) Land Vesting Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:670;Page:17087] 
CHRIS HIPKINS (Labour—Rimutaka) 
: 
 I am happy to take this call on the commencement clause of the Hamilton City Council (Parana Park) Land Vesting Bill. It is in fact my first call on the bill. I wanted to take a call on the commencement clause which is a very specific clause because I think commencement clauses in legislation are vastly underrated and are not debated enough. Members fail to understand the significance of a commencement clause and the complexity of the issues behind a commencement clause. Although they may seem simple on the surface there is actually a huge amount of complexity involved. I will talk members through some of that complexity. 
This commencement clause clause 2 states: “This Act comes into force on the date after the date on which it receives the Royal assent.” That may seem very simple in writing; it is nice and clear in black and white. But what does “the day after … it receives the Royal assent” actually mean? In New Zealand it means effectively the day after it is signed by the Governor-General. The Governor-General in New Zealand has some reserve powers; the Governor-General could refuse to sign this bill. This bill could be passed by Parliament and the Governor-General could say he does not like it and is not going to sign it. The New Zealand Governor-General has that ability on behalf of the Queen as it is at the moment to refuse to assent to legislation. 
Tim Macindoe 
: You’re making a mockery of Parliament Chris. 
CHRIS HIPKINS 
: Tim Macindoe says that I am making a mockery of Parliament by talking about the constitutional significance of the Governor-General signing legislation. I do not think that that is making a mockery of Parliament at all. 
Coming back to the issue of whether the Governor-General signs legislation it is not the House that recommends to the Governor-General whether legislation should be signed; it is normally the Prime Minister or often the Attorney-General or it could be any other Minister. Usually a Minister of the Crown makes that recommendation to the Governor-General. 
Tim Macindoe 
: How does this relate to the bill? 
CHRIS HIPKINS 
: It has everything to do with this bill because it will determine when this bill actually becomes law. Parliament could pass this bill and the Prime Minister could recommend to the Governor-General that it be signed into law. When that happens the Prime Minister may do so very swiftly as Prime Ministers normally do or he may not. The Prime Minister may not report it very swiftly to the Governor-General for signature and the Governor-General as I have said is under no obligation to sign it. There is a constitutional convention that Governors-General will sign all the legislation presented to them on behalf of the Parliament by the Prime Minister but they do not need to and they have a reserve power to refuse to do so. 
In fact there have been instances in the past when the Governor-General has been petitioned not to sign legislation. I think there was some legislation in the 1970s regarding the SIS. The Governor-General at the time Keith Holyoake a former National Prime Minister had the opportunity should he have chosen to not sign that legislation. It would not have become the law. He decided not to go with the people who petitioned him but to go with the then Prime Minister Sir Robert Muldoon. He signed that legislation and it became law. I think that that was the constitutionally proper thing for him to do—to sign the legislation so that it became law. Parliament ultimately has that supremacy in New Zealand. The laws of the land are made by this Parliament and it is incumbent on our unelected head of State to sign those laws on behalf of the people who are elected. 
There is a remaining technicality in here which is that this bill does not give a specific date on which it should come into force. That is quite welcome. As a member of the Regulations Review Committee I am aware of issues around allowing any flexibility around the dates for example. This bill is very specific: the Governor-General signs it and it becomes the law. It does not contain what is called a “Henry VIII” clause which gives the Government of the day the choice to introduce this law whenever it feels like it. It does not say that this bill will come into force on the day that a Minister determines or the day that the Hamilton City Council determines. It is very clear: it comes into force on the day after the Governor-General signs it. The democratic process is actually being respected by the commencement clause as it is worded providing the Governor-General does his part and does not decide to utilise his reserve powers and refuse to sign the legislation which under our current constitutional arrangements he could do. 
As I said the commencement clause in legislation is I think vastly underrated. It is a very important part of the parliamentary process and one that from time to time we probably should spend a little time talking about so that those who pass the laws actually understand them and those who follow the proceedings of Parliament at home—and there are many of them—understand what we are doing.