Tolley Anne; Dean JacquiPart 3 Canterbury Earthquakes Insurance Tribunal CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): That brings us to Part 3 which is debate on clauses 53 to 67 and parts of Schedule 2 and Schedule 3. Hon JACQUI DEAN (National—Waitaki): Madam Chair thank you. I would like to speak to clauses 59 and 60 and then track back a little into clause 55. Clause 59 in Part 3 relates to the chairperson's responsibilities in the tribunal. It's interesting because in reading clauses 58 and 59 and moving on to clause 60 it really makes clause 55 a little more comprehensible even though I'm not sure that we would agree with the decisions therein. So clause 58: The chairperson must assign 1 member"—and it could be the chairperson themselves—"to act—(1) as the tribunal for each claim:" and that happens "as the tribunal [is] to perform the functions required to be performed under section 64(4)" of the Act and it will be that relating to access to tribunal records. That's pretty straightforward but it does give a clue to why there is clause 55 which precedes it—but I'll go over that—which is around the appointments of the members of the tribunal. I had started to speak to Stuart Smith's Supplementary Order Paper 229 which has been ruled out so I probably won't refer to that too much except to say that under the bill as amended in clause 55(1AA)(2) "The Minister must recommend for appointment—(a) only people who in the Minister's opinion are suitable to be appointed as members taking into account their knowledge skills and experience;" and of course then we can agree with this next part that "(b) at least 1 person who has the experience required to be the chairperson under subsection (4)." So the question is why should only one of the appointees to the tribunal have a practising certificate as laid out in clause 55(1AA)(4): "The chairperson must have held a New Zealand practising certificate as a barrister or as a barrister and solicitor for at least 7 years." The question still remains I believe why isn't every member of the tribunal which has significant powers required to have a practising certificate of seven years as a barrister and or as a barrister and solicitor? Dr Duncan Webb: Because there's other experts. Hon JACQUI DEAN: The member across the Chamber does say "Because there are other experts." Yes there are but there just does seem to be a little looseness and also really I think it discounts or discards the fact that barristers and solicitors also can have other areas of expertise that they can bring to bear into this tribunal work. Then perhaps a less contentious clause is clause 60 "Delegation by chairperson" who may delegate any functions. Of course the function in this instance is this function to delegate to a member whom the chairperson is satisfied has the necessary capability skills and experience to perform that function which puts an awful lot of responsibility and weight on the chairperson. So it brings me back again to my colleague's Supplementary Order Paper 229 which would require each of the members of the tribunal to have a legal qualification because while a number of people—yes—can have expertise it's that legal expertise which I would have thought would be a critical part for members who serve on the Canterbury Earthquakes Insurance Tribunal. CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): I am just trying to sort out Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) 229 in the name of Stuart Smith that I said in Part 2 had been negatived but it actually refers to clause 55 in Part 3 and I can't—I'm just seeking some advice on how it's been negatived. So the member might like to take a call because he is at this stage entitled to speak to his SOP until it's ruled out of Part 3."