Burns Brendon: Trans-Tasman Proceedings Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Burns Brendon: Trans-Tasman Proceedings Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:666;Page:13428] 
BRENDON BURNS (Labour—Christchurch Central) 
: 
 I am very pleased to take a call on the Trans-Tasman Proceedings Bill and to note that this is a continuation and an enhancement of the process of the closer economic relationship with Australia which I have to acknowledge began under a National Government in the late 1970s and early 1980s under the Hon Hugh Templeton. It got support from the Labour leader Bill Rowling at that time and took off and it was a very appropriate and timely move for this country. It acknowledges the strength and depth of our relationship with Australia and this bill continues to acknowledge that which is important. 
I think it is also important that we have some complementarities where possible in the judicial systems of Australia and New Zealand and this bill endeavours to implement some of those. It is important to have those complementarities because the capacity of New Zealanders to travel to Australia and of Australians to come to New Zealand is ever-increasing. Obviously our court systems have to acknowledge the fact that people are not always domiciled in one country; they can live in one country and cross to the other and court proceedings can take place in one country or the other. This bill effectively allows some sort of acknowledgment that there are issues that need to be resolved in courts across the two countries. 
But there are still some gaps that I will allude to and I have a constituent who is facing one at the moment. My constituent has had to return to Australia to face proceedings in Australia’s equivalent of our Family Court in relation to a custody case. It is a very distressing and harrowing case because this poor young woman has been forced to go back to Australia by the father of her child under circumstances that suggested that the father wanted to have ongoing contact with the child. She has now been back in Australia for some 9 months but the father has not made any contact. In fact I understand that he is on the run from the police in two states of Australia. I acknowledge the intervention last week of the Minister of Justice Simon Power who has asked his officials to investigate and who has also asked the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade to provide whatever assistance it can to this poor young constituent of mine. She is faced with the ongoing demands and delays of a court system of which she has no knowledge no power and in her view no real authority to try to expedite proceedings. 
This bill does not extend to those issues; it is more related to the business community and those sorts of relationships but that case is a signal of the need for real complementarities between the justice systems of our two countries. We are a very movable nation and our affairs are often interwoven with Australian affairs. Our business and family relationships are increasingly taking us back and forward across the Tasman and this bill is an attempt to expedite those issues. 
The bill of course began under Helen Clark’s leadership. It has come through Parliament—it has been through the select committee process—and it will reduce some of the complexities and costs that are in place in trans-Tasman litigation and provide better remedies. It is therefore a very sensible measure. Through facilitating the effective resolution of trans-Tasman disputes this bill will foster those ever-increasing economic relationships with Australia and New Zealand. That is important. It will simplify proceedings within our courts and the enforcement of judgments. That is very sensible. We have had a significant increase in the movement of people assets and services across the Tasman; obviously they will be subject to disputes from time to time. Therefore it is important that we have this arrangement which is perhaps internationally one of the best arrangements between any two sovereign States with separate legal systems. We still retain our entire independence in respect of our judicial system but obviously we want to try to ensure that there are as few impediments as possible to the process of justice whether people are on this side of the Tasman or the other. 
The Trans-Tasman Working Group on Court Proceedings and Regulatory Enforcement has worked through these issues. The group was set up by Helen Clark and John Howard back in 2003. It has brought forward the proposals that are now enmeshed in this bill. It is appropriate that we now see this bill passed and move towards that closer integration of the New Zealand and Australian civil justice systems so that we can continue to develop and foster the closer economic relationship that began even before the time of the Hon Maurice Williamson in this House. Thank you. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 160 in the name of the Hon Simon Power be agreed to. 
Amendments agreed to. 
Parts 1 and 2 schedules 1 and 2 and clauses 1 and 2 as amended agreed to. 
Bill reported with amendment. 
Report adopted.