Chauvel Charles: Settlement Systems Futures and Emissions Units Bill — In Committee 
Chauvel Charles: Settlement Systems Futures and Emissions Units Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:658;Page:7658] 
CHARLES CHAUVEL (Labour) 
: 
 The Settlement Systems Futures and Emissions Units Bill is a very good bill and Labour does support it. It might be useful to briefly remind the House of the legislative history of the proposal. The bill in its original form was introduced by my friend and colleague Lianne Dalziel on 2 September 2008. On 23 September 2008 it was read a first time and referred to the Commerce Committee. Some time later on 18 June 2009 we see that the bill was reported back to the House and we finally get to debate it now. 
I will touch on some of the main features of the bill for those listening to the debate. The legislation is intended to signal that trades in securities and other products can be cleared and settled through systems that meet the expectations of both international and domestic participants. The bill provides for settlement systems to operate in New Zealand with the option of applying for designation and being regulated to relevant international standards. In return for that a designated settlement system receives additional legal protections to support the integrity of the system in the case of a participant’s default or insolvency. As we have just heard from the Minister the legislation will also amend the Securities Markets Act. Clearly if it is done properly that will reduce compliance costs. We will be able to align the regulation of exchanges that seek to operate in both the securities and the futures markets. Also if we enact that a person approved by the operator of an authorised future exchange is an authorised futures dealer then we ought to get that level of efficiency as well. One would assume that the New Zealand Exchange would expect to benefit from those amendments through a reduction in its compliance costs. 
The legislation also clarifies the regulatory treatment of emissions units to support the development of the all-important market that we want to see arise for these emissions units. The bill will give effect to that policy through a number of technical amendments to existing legislation. Settlement systems do contribute to a well-functioning capital market—there is no doubt about that. Capital market development will also be enhanced by this legislation and hopefully it will also contribute to building our infrastructure. 
I reiterate some of the concerns that were pointed out to the Committee of the whole House by my colleague David Cunliffe. The first concern is that this legislation has been allowed to languish on the Order Paper for some time. As I said earlier it was reported back from the Commerce Committee on 18 June. Since that time we have seen an excessive amount of urgency used in this House on matters that surely any objective reader of the Order Paper would agree simply do not merit the use of urgency. There has been a shambolic management of the House by those responsible. Why this legislation has had to wait until now is really beyond members on this side of the Chamber. We could have got to it much earlier than we have. We should have debated it soon after its report back in June. There was ample time for the Commerce Committee to do a good job as I think the report back indicates. 
The legislation was thoroughly considered by the Commerce Committee. There are sensible amendments being put forward and I pay tribute again to the able chairpersonship of my friend and colleague Lianne Dalziel in that regard. Quite why some of the measures that we have been considering in urgency in the House have been allowed to proceed while this has had to wait its turn beggars belief. 
The second concern that has to be stated is that although this legislation has no direct bearing on the operation of the Government’s emissions trading scheme it will facilitate the creation of a system that will allow for the trading of units generally. It is incumbent on any speaker trying to give an honest context to this legislation to point out the fact that while it has been languishing on the Order Paper we have also had climate change policy in general languishing in this country. As Mr Cunliffe said we currently have a process where emissions trading legislation is simply being rammed through the Finance and Expenditure Committee with no regard for the public’s right to give proper submissions no regard for the right of this Parliament to hear properly from officials and no regard on the part of the Minister for the obligations that exist under the Official Information Act for the release of Cabinet and other materials. Members and the public are not able to make a proper assessment of whether the fiscal cost of the emissions trading scheme amendments are those that we should agree to. In fact as Mr Cunliffe said the evidence that the committee has heard to date on that question is of fiscal recklessness and a complete lack of transparency. But more of that anon when we come to what will no doubt be the debate of the emissions trading scheme mark whatever it is under urgency in this House next month. 
The other concern is that we have had yet another select committee the special committee on the emissions trading scheme considering questions arising out of the scheme. That has meandered on from February through to June or July with no particular urgency. The Government finally forced it to a conclusion and put that committee out of its misery. That was probably a very good thing but it again points to a real waste of the time of members in this House. That process occurred we had this rushed Finance and Expenditure Committee process and now finally we are dealing with the Settlement Systems Futures and Emissions Units Bill. I note that it was introduced under urgency yesterday. Thank goodness we are at least not taking the Committee stage also under urgency! It is good legislation it does deserve proper consideration and I do hope that the Committee will give it that under this process.