Roy Heather: Disputes Tribunals Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Roy Heather: Disputes Tribunals Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:653;Page:2265] 
Hon HEATHER ROY (Deputy Leader—ACT) 
: 
 I rise to speak to this first reading of the Disputes Tribunals Amendment Bill on behalf of the ACT Party. It is pleasing to see that this very sensible bill has good cross-party support in the House. The ACT Party endorses the comments of just about every speaker to date. The disputes tribunal operates as a cheap and effective means of redress for disputes such as consumer-to-business disputes business-to-business disputes or person-to-person disputes such as neighbouring fence issues and the like. 
Under the Disputes Tribunals Act referees are able to consider the merits of a case in reaching a decision. That is one of the advantages of using the disputes tribunal—the referees are not obliged to follow the letter of the law if doing so would for instance result in a perverse judgment outcome. 
As we have heard from other speakers disputes heard by the disputes tribunal are currently limited to the amount of $7500 but disputes up to the level of $12000 may be heard if both parties consent. This piece of legislation allows for the lifting of the level of claims to $15000 or to $20000 with the agreement of both parties. That is a very sensible and pleasing move that as I said the ACT Party is pleased to support. 
 The move is part of the Government’s small-business relief package and the ACT Party fully supports that as we have made very clear. It is aimed at improving the business environment by reducing the impact of taxes on firms’ cash flows by improving firms’ access to credit and reducing business compliance costs. 
The decision to increase the financial limit is also good news for consumers and it is important that we consider their rights. Community law centres and groups such as Consumer New Zealand and the Principal Disputes Referee have suggested for some time that the current limit is inadequate and should be raised. The limit is currently resulting in consumers and small businesses missing out on access to redress as many claims are valued higher than the limit and many consumers and small businesses are not in a position to take those claims to the District Court as they would have to do if the disputes tribunal did not exist. The Small Business Advisory Group and the Arbitrators and Mediators Institute have also advocated for a much higher limit. So it is good to see good general support for this move. In fact I would have been supportive of raising the level even higher so that many other cases would not have to go through the court process and through the legal system. 
The principal referee of the disputes tribunal Dr Peter Spiller has had quite a lot to say about this. He said he has directly communicated to the Ministry of Consumer Affairs that he strongly supports a large increase in the limit and I think he has raised some very good points. Dr Spiller considers that the value of the limit has been undermined by inflation and rising court costs and that these have not been taken into consideration as the limits have stayed put. 
 There is a growing gap between the upper limit and the point at which it is financially feasible to take cases to the District Court. Dr Spiller has also advised that increasingly claimants are actually having to abandon part of their claims to bring them within the jurisdiction of the disputes tribunal as they cannot afford to take their claims elsewhere. 
Before the bill goes to the select committee and is considered by the members of that committee there is one other issue that I would like to raise here and I have written a letter to the Minister of Justice in this vein. Publication of decisions of interest from the disputes tribunal currently is not allowed. I would like the select committee to at least consider that point. The representatives of community law centres have expressed a view that there should be publication of these decisions. They note that the majority of consumer disputes with traders are taken to the disputes tribunal rather than being resolved by other means—for example through the courts. Currently the proceedings are private and as a result it is difficult for the community law centres and other groups to show to those who use their services examples of how cases have been successfully resolved and how cases might best be approached. These representatives have said they do not necessarily need the publication of all decisions; instead they suggest that the Principal Disputes Referee could perhaps be given the ability to describe cases that are of interest and have their basis in consumer legislation. I think that is a very valid point. This would generally affect cases involving the Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Act the Credit (Repossession) Act the Consumer Guarantees Act and the Fair Trading Act. 
Consumer problems are the most common type of legal problem faced by New Zealanders and the disputes tribunal is the primary forum for hearing consumer grievances. So I think that it is a valid point to raise at this time. I would like the select committee to consider this and I have also written to the Minister of Justice in this vein. 
Hon Steve Chadwick 
: He’ll listen. 
Hon Simon Power 
: I always listen. I’m a listening Minister. 
Hon HEATHER ROY 
: I have asked the Minister of Justice to consider making a direction under section 57 of the Disputes Tribunals Act and he is very is reasonable. I am sure he is taking that into consideration. I have asked him to consider making a direction under section 57 asking the Principal Disputes Referee to periodically publish reports of cases that he considers would provide useful information to consumers traders and the general public. 
As I have already made very plain the ACT Party supports the Disputes Tribunals Amendment Bill. We strongly support raising the disputes tribunal monetary limit to a higher sum. In fact we would have been happy to look at a higher level— 
Hon Simon Power 
: All in good time. 
Hon HEATHER ROY 
: Well we look forward to that. We strongly support raising the disputes tribunal monetary limit to a higher sum as it will help satisfy those issues and will allow greater access for consumers to a cheap and expert disputes resolution forum.