te Heuheu Georgina: Arbitration Amendment Bill — In Committee 
te Heuheu Georgina: Arbitration Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:639;Page:9784] 
Hon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU (National) 
: 
 Following on from my colleague Christopher Finlayson I echo the sentiments he has expressed. They certainly are true enough and have been evident in the discussion that has proceeded this evening. Those sentiments are that this is good legislation. I suppose given the record of this Government under which it has taken sometimes up to 7 years to introduce and pass legislation this has a somewhat shorter time span. The Law Commission’s report on which the legislation is based is from 2003 so 4 years on we have finally got it into place here. Again to echo my colleague let us not tarry—because it is good legislation—and let us see the third reading up on the Order Paper quite quickly. I am sure the Minister in charge of the bill the Hon Clayton Cosgrove being the eager enthusiastic—I was going to say “young” but I am not quite sure—youngish Minister that he is wishing to impress like all of the rest of his colleagues will make sure that this comes through reasonably quickly— 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: Guaranteed! 
Hon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU 
: —particularly since there is support across the Chamber for it. The purpose of it is to make improvements and to give further credence to the underlying themes of the Arbitration Act. I have mentioned those earlier but I want to add again that anything that encourages this kind of private dispute resolution between private individuals so as to free up our clogged up court system is very good as well. That is an additional benefit here and it is very good. 
The New Zealand Law Commission identified issues with the exceptions found in section 14 of the Act regarding confidentiality in the context of arbitral proceedings and earlier we discussed some of the provisions that deal with those matters. Those are also worthy and as I say all designed to encourage parties to participate where it is appropriate in this type of arbitration. 
I want one more time before I conclude to go through the confidentiality description again. The provisions here are in a completely opposite direction to the underlying cornerstone of our justice system which is that proceedings and disputes between parties be heard in open court and in public so that justice is seen to be done. This is a process set up in appropriate cases to deal with matters that are private and should stay private for a whole variety of reasons including sensitivity of information where big corporates and businesses are concerned. That is why I guess section 4 and the interpretation in Part 1 set out very clearly what confidential information includes: the whole range of paperwork the range of evidence and submissions that come before the arbitral tribunal. It is a very comprehensive set of provisions that we are provided with here and I would say they are designed to make the whole arbitral process in this context work better. 
This bill was intended originally to come into force last year as Chris Finlayson said but it will now come into force this year. The Minister has given a guarantee that that will happen. I think that is good and I am very pleased to see that there is agreement across the Chamber on worthwhile legislation.