Little Andrew: Legislation Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Little Andrew: Legislation Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 15 November 2012. Volume:685;Page:6755. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
ANDREW LITTLE (Labour) 
: 
 It is a pleasure to take yet another call on the Legislation Bill which as my colleague Charles Chauvel has pointed out is a very important piece of legislation. It is curious given what the bill does in relation to the status of legislation—completed and concluded legislation—the publication of it and the role of the Parliamentary Counsel Office that it should be given such a bland unappealing and really uninformative name as the Legislation Bill. Really I think that if we are serious and want to meet the spirit of this legislation itself then we will find a more creative name something that in fact does it justice—no pun intended. 
I will relay a recent experience I had. I found myself yesterday in the company not only of a QC and one or two other lawyers but actually of a High Court judge in an interesting exercise which I will not go into. 
Hon Damien O’Connor 
: Where was that? 
ANDREW LITTLE 
: It was at the Auckland High Court. I do not want to go into too many other details except to say that there was a very satisfactory outcome for all concerned. It was a very satisfying—satisfying and satisfactory—outcome for all concerned particularly that party that I think had the biggest legal bill to pay. But anyway the point is this: while we were there engaging in a very mutually satisfying and satisfactory conversation with all concerned— 
Hon Simon Bridges 
: Was this in the courtroom? 
ANDREW LITTLE 
: This was before we held hands and exchanged beatific smiles with each other. The High Court judge a most respectable and honorary fellow came to the room equipped with large printed and hard-bound editions of legislation and a highly respectable legal text. I sat there in that room observing this highly respectable and honourable High Court judge thinking: “If only His Honour the Justice had the benefit of the Legislation Bill currently going through Parliament.” 
Hon Annette King 
: Did you think that? 
ANDREW LITTLE 
: I did think that. In fact were it not for other issues that were occupying those of us who were there I might have raised the issue because His Honour the judge would have been most assisted by an electronic publication of the legislation he was consulting at the time which from memory I think was something like the Defamation Act 1992 although I could have that wrong. It was a large bound volume of legislation. I thought to myself “Isn’t it a pity that at this very point it is not a requirement that an official version of the legislation is published electronically?” because had that been the case then His Honour the judge may well have been able to turn up with a nifty little iPad or even a laptop or some other hand-held device on which he could have brought his legal texts along with him and it would have saved him having to wander through the vast cavernous regions of the Auckland High Court to come to our little room to play his very important role. So that is what I think is very good about this legislation and why—