Horan Brendan: International Finance Agreements Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Horan Brendan: International Finance Agreements Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 19 February 2013. Volume:687;Page:7959. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
BRENDAN HORAN (Independent) 
: 
 I rise to speak to the International Finance Agreements Amendment Bill and to Supplementary Order Paper 175 standing in my name. As the bill has been written by the Government the commencement date is entirely open. The bill would come into force on a date set by an Order in Council. That sounds good enough but the bill lacks the default specified commencement date that is now the usual drafting practice. That means that the bill when enacted could wait 10 years or 20 years or even longer before coming into force. Will it still be relevant then? 
It is not a hypothetical problem. The Parliamentary Counsel Office annually publishes a list of Acts not yet in force that do not have a specified default commencement date. On the latest list there are 38 such Acts that in whole or in part are not in force. The oldest is the Summary Proceedings Amendment Act 1976. So Parliament passed a law 37 years ago and part of that law is still in limbo. Is that acceptable? 
This International Finance Agreements Amendment Bill should not be another of those blank cheque bills. When Parliament passes legislation the resulting Acts should be brought into force within a reasonable and definite period of time. The Order in Council process allows the Government of the day some flexibility to ensure that the implementation can be conducted to deliver a good public policy process but surely that flexibility must be backstopped by a default specified commencement date. 
I am aware that there are issues around treaty-making powers of Government the desire to avoid a vote in Parliament and recent developments since 1996 to provide some opportunities for scrutiny by our Parliament’s select committees. The principal Act is unusual in that it enshrines in New Zealand legislation the nuts and bolts structure of an overseas body—in this case the International Monetary Fund—but that is an argument for another day. Today I am focusing on the issue at hand and that is if Parliament passes a law—considering the time it takes for Parliament to pass that law and the work and energy that have gone into it by many groups and parliamentarians—then surely the Government is obliged to reasonably bring it into force. 
It is not necessarily an academic debate. Amongst the 38 Acts not brought into force are two domestic violence Acts and two Acts regarding Family Courts. This is a real issue because too many children in New Zealand are children who do not choose to be victims of neglect. These children do not choose to be absent of a loving home. These children do not choose to be victims of violence. This Government continues to leave the legislative solution in limbo not being brought into force. Ministers are not allocating public funding and are not taking policy decisions. 
I draw the House’s attention to the Ministry of Justice’s Care of Children Amendment Act 2008. If we look at the departmental comment around sections 5 to 8 10 to 13 and 18 to 21 it reads as such: “Relates to agreements between parents and guardians duty of lawyers and courts with regard to reconciliation and conciliation disputes between guardians that lead to mediation or counselling the mediation and counselling process and appeals to the High Court and Court of Appeal. Will come into force on a date to be appointed by an Order in Council. Needs operational policy development and additional funding to bring it into force.” If we go to the Family Courts Amendment Act 2008 the departmental comment on it is: “Relates to the appointment and powers of Senior Family Court Registrars and amendments to s 8 inserting ‘mediator’ after ‘counsellor’. Will come into force on a date to be appointed by an Order in Council. Needs operational policy development and additional funding to bring it into force.” One more that I draw the House’s attention to is the Family Proceedings Amendment Act 2008 which “Relates to the counselling and mediation process and rules under the Act”—and at the end there—“Needs operational policy development and additional funding to bring it into force.” 
The National Government is taking advantage of this blank cheque written by previous Parliaments in the form of an open-ended commencement date. I take into account the comments from the Hon David Parker. However we cannot have open-ended start dates for any Act. Therefore I commend this amendment to the House.