Guy Nathan: Statutes Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
Guy Nathan: Statutes Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
[Volume:671;Page:17981] 
Hon NATHAN GUY (Associate Minister of Justice) 
: 
 I move  
That the Statutes Amendment Bill (No 2) be now read a first time. 
 At the appropriate time I intend to move that the Statutes Amendment Bill (No 2) be referred to the Government Administration Committee and that the committee present its final report on the bill on or before 1 July 2011. 
As the House will be aware the Statutes Amendment Bill is an annual legislative vehicle that makes minor technical and non-controversial amendments to a number of Acts. It allows amendments to be made that would not usually receive sufficient priority to be progressed. This is achieved with the support of all parties in Parliament. 
The bill as introduced amends 20 Acts administered by eight different Government agencies. Many of the amendments are designed to correct drafting errors and incorrect references. I will give members a few examples. The amendment to the Sugar Loaf Islands Marine Protected Area Act 1991 replaces the misspelled “Saddlebank Island” with “Saddleback Island”. The amendment of the definition of “lawyer” in section 5(1) of the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009 replaces an incorrect cross-reference to the now-repealed Law Practitioners Act 1982. 
Others make unobjectionable refinements to machinery provisions including an amendment to the New Zealand Railways Corporation Act 1981 to allow up to nine directors to be appointed by the Minister as comprising the New Zealand Railways Corporation. Under the current wording only seven directors can be appointed. The corporation needs additional directors to manage the increased workload associated with the 10-year turn-round plan which involves the corporation investing $4.6 billion in its assets. 
There are a number of amendments to the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002. For example one amendment redefines a state of emergency as lasting 168 hours which is obviously 7 days times 24 hours a day unless it is stated to expire earlier is terminated earlier or indeed is extended. The September earthquake in Canterbury highlighted that when acting under pressure the current wording of the Act is difficult to understand and apply for some members in the civil defence emergency management sector. This amendment will help people more clearly calculate the duration of a state of emergency. 
I want to mention two amendments that I expect the committee will wish to have a closer look at. The amendments to the Wills Act make it clear that the Act does not change the law about the formalities for making a will set out in its predecessor. The Wills Act 2007 modernised and updated the law relating to wills which was previously contained in the Wills Act 1837 (UK). The intention was to carry over the law about the formalities for making a will into the new Act with updated language. Following the passage of the 2007 Act concerns were raised by legal practitioners academics and the judiciary that the 2007 Act had unintentionally changed the formal requirements for executing a will. If that were the case the 2007 Act might have unintentionally invalidated some wills that were valid when they were made. I have received correspondence from beneficiaries who have been adversely affected. This amendment was originally included in the Statutes Amendment Bill for 2009 but was removed at the Committee of the whole House stage because of an objection to it. Opposition to the amendment as it appeared in the Statutes Amendment Bill 2009 arose from public commentary that was not available to the Government Administration Committee during its deliberations on the bill. I am satisfied that the objection to the amendment was based on a concern that the matters raised be given proper select committee scrutiny which will be afforded by the inclusion of the amendment in this bill. 
The amendments to the Charities Act 2005 include a proposed change to the definition of “charitable purpose” to clarify the circumstances in which amateur sports purposes are indeed charitable. This amendment is meant to address uncertainty amongst sports groups funders and the legal community about the charitable status of amateur sports and the consequent confusion about funding eligibility. I look forward to hearing the committee’s views on this matter. 
In conclusion the examples of amendments I have mentioned demonstrate the value of the Statutes Amendment Bill as a vehicle for advancing technical yet important amendments. I look forward to the passage of this bill and to working constructively with parties across the House on bills that we put together in the near future. I commend this bill to the House.