Borrows Chester: Lawyers and Conveyancers Bill — In Committee 
Borrows Chester: Lawyers and Conveyancers Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:629;Page:1541] 
CHESTER BORROWS (National—Whanganui) 
: 
 It is my privilege to rise in support of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Bill. I find it quite ironic that I would speak in favour of the legislation which will broaden the scope of legal practice and the practice of law in New Zealand. 
When I went from being a policeman to a lawyer I was told by my former colleagues that I had gone over to the dark side and my new colleagues convinced me that I had come into the light. I guess it is obvious that I am more of an ex-cop than an ex-lawyer but I am pleased to note and to speak in support of Part 6 because it imposes a bit of regulation monitoring and accountability on the profession and allows others to be involved in conveyancing and some other legal matters. 
As a detective in the 1980s and 1990s the most attractive prospect was of turning the key on an errant lawyer. One can look around at some of the lawyers in the Chamber and see where I was coming from. Of course I do not refer to the paragons of virtue on this side of the Chamber; all the others to whom I am referring are not so easily visible here this evening. 
It was the crash in 1987 that proved too much of a temptation for a lot of lawyers—far too many lawyers—in this country and a lot of people suffered as a result of it. Under clause 96(1) the New Zealand Law Society may from time to time investigate the accounts of lawyers firms of lawyers or incorporated law firms and it can look into and investigate any other aspects of practice as well. 
I recall investigating the activities of a lawyer whom I eventually managed to arrest for the theft of over half a million dollars. The person who brought him down was a little old lady with an exercise book that she kept all her accounts in. When she and dad were farming and did not have much to come and go on all the accounts were kept in a little exercise book. Every little penny and then every little cent was accounted for and when they sold the farm and had over a million bucks to their name she still kept her little exercise book. She had written in there everything that was supposed to be invested and a copy of every letter she had sent to her lawyer was pasted in the back. The book became a mine of evidence and it was eventually what brought the guy down. 
When there were no share certificates and no replies to her letters she went to the New Zealand Law Society and that forced the investigation. An unusual point was though that the investigating accountant from the Law Society had no idea of the extent of the criminal liability. He did not have it together in his head that because money had been stolen and applied to some other purpose that did not directly affect him—in other words to pay staff wages or office rent or applied to the mortgage of a mate—it was theft. We have a bit of a problem here because if the lookers do not understand entirely what is going on then how do they know what they are looking at? They do not know what they do not know. 
 That problem is compounded by the attrition over time of fraud squads within the police. Around the country those squads have been taken away whereas when those investigations took off and people worked hand in hand with detectives fraud squad officers and forensic accountants as part of the police they were able to add to the mix. But it is increasingly common for there not to be any fraud squads around the country or in various cities. It is not long ago when I was in practice that I rang the Wellington police station and asked to be put through to its fraud squad. I was given the local duty squad because there was no fraud squad. I think we have something to fear from that as it applies to this part: it is all very well to have legislation but if we are looking at people who are dealing with the assets of vulnerable people and if the legislation is not backed up with some institutional or forensic knowledge then those vulnerable people can be placed even further at risk. Those investigating need to have the support of the police and other agencies to be able to follow through and to be able to keep safe the assets of those vulnerable people that I mentioned earlier. 
Something that three other speakers have mentioned earlier is the removal of the title of Queen’s Counsel. That seems to me to be a move that sets us up for the execution of the will of this Government to move towards republicanism. I think there is another flaw in the plan as well which is that lay people are aware of there being senior counsel.