Wall LouisaLOUISA WALL (Labour—Manurewa): Tēnā koe Mr Chair. Thank you very much for the opportunity to contribute to the Committee stage debate on the Land Transfer Bill. It is quite timely for me because I am going to pick up on where my colleague Meka Whaitiri left off. In doing so I would just firstly like to acknowledge the Law Commission's 2010 report A New Land Transfer Act which is 342 pages long. It completed this review of the Land Transfer Act 1952 and the two subsequent amendment Acts the Land Transfer Amendment Act 1963 and the Land Transfer (Computer Registers and Electronic Lodgement) Amendment Act 2002. Contained within that particular Law Commission report was recommendation 21 which in fact was that there should be an in-depth review into the registration of Māori land. So what my colleague Meka Whaitiri has brought up is actually germane and pertinent to Part 1. I am very interested in the comment by the Minister in the chair Chris Finlayson about a document that I have just got. It is Land Information New Zealand's addendum to its main departmental report on the Land Transfer Bill. Actually the Government did respond to the Law Commission recommendation and in fact it asked for Te Pūni Kōkiri Land Information New Zealand and the Ministry of Justice to investigate the issues and report back to Ministers on what if any aspects of Māori land registration should be subject to the review. The recommendation of that process however was that a review of the relationship between the two Acts was not deemed to be needed or appropriate. So I am really interested to know whether the Minister agrees with that or how they came to that conclusion because I think it is important that we address such issues. I have been trying to find an alternative to the Torrens system actually because it seems we have got one type of registration process. In fact it was created in 1858 by Sir Robert Richard Torrens who was the third Premier of South Australia. The reason the system was created in South Australia was that in the context of the early 1800s that state was a booming land speculation environment and so at that time it granted lands. Apparently there were 40000 lands that were granted and over a period of time 75 percent of those lands were lost so no one actually knew who owned them. So I can understand why this system was created but it seems it has not evolved and there do not seem to be any alternatives. I have googled and Strata seems to be a system that is used but that is about multiple ownership of single dwellings. But I just wonder whether there is anywhere else in the world—or whether the Minister in the chair knows of any other systems—because the whole intention of this legislation as was highlighted in the Law Commission's report is that we want the legislation to be clear effective and fair. I just want to commend the Law Commission for its work because I think creating a bill like this which seems to have general support of the House—it is an incredibly technical bill which is what we have been briefed on in making contributions to the debate in the Committee tonight. But just from my perspective I am really interested to know whether there are any other registration systems because basically the purpose of this bill is to simplify land transactions and to certify the ownership of an absolute title to property. That is all that this bill is wanting to do but just from my curious perspective I am wondering whether there are other systems that are used in other jurisdictions. But I am also very very interested in the Minister's agreement or otherwise about the relationship between Te Ture Whenua Māori Act and the registration of Māori land and this Land Transfer Bill as my colleague Meka Whaitiri has highlighted. Kia ora.