Hipkins Chris: Student Loan Scheme Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Hipkins Chris: Student Loan Scheme Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:678;Page:1443] 
CHRIS HIPKINS (Labour—Rimutaka) 
: 
 To respond to Holly Walker’s comment I do not think the Minister in the chair the Minister for Courts is going to respond. He is tied up with a glossy magazine over there; I am not entirely sure what is in it. I also want to talk about the commencement clause which means new clause 30D is coming into effect retrospectively. It will come into force on 1 January. What is new clause 30D? We have to turn to new clause 30D to find that it amends schedule 5 of the principal Act— 
Simon Bridges 
: “Shedule” not “skedule”. 
CHRIS HIPKINS 
: “Shedule” “skedule” “schmedule”—whatever. It amends it by repealing clause 2 of that schedule. What is clause 2 of that schedule that this is going to be imposing retrospectively? It says that no interest is to be charged by the loan manager and then the commencement clause is repealing it retrospectively. National is the party that promised us it was not going to reintroduce interest in any form on student loans yet it is repealing retrospectively in the commencement clause of this bill a clause in the schedule of the principal Act that says no interest shall be charged by the loan manager.  
We should rename this bill. It should be the “Another Broken Promise by the National Party Bill”. Not only is National going to break the promise but it is going to do it retrospectively. Under the commencement clause of this bill it imposes that retrospectively. The clause in schedule 5 of the principal Act that says that no interest shall be charged by the loan manager is gone—gone under this Government—and it is doing it retrospectively. It is imposing it from 1 January this year. That would make it a new record for a broken promise by the National Government. Less than 2 months effectively after an election it is doing away with an election promise. Even though it is now 4 or 5 months after the election National is going to break its promise retrospectively by repealing this clause in schedule 5 that says that no interest shall be charged by the loan manager. National is repealing it retrospectively.  
This has now actually become one of the major clauses. This commencement clause which imposes this change retrospectively is now one of the major clauses in this bill because it is a broken promise by the National Government. It is trying to sneak it through retrospectively in this commencement clause under clause 2(1A) which says “Section 30D is deemed to have come into force on 1 January 2012.” The clause that says no interest is to be charged by the loan manager is being repealed retrospectively. It is being repealed retrospectively.  
For a starter that is just bad law. It is simply bad law for the Government to be forcing through the Parliament any provisions that apply retrospectively. But this is a provision that breaks a fundamental promise of National’s of not having interest on student loans albeit in what is potentially quite a minor way. I have not had a chance to review the entirety of the Act in terms of how that fits into it but it is pretty clear. I will read out the clause: “The loan manager must not charge interest in relation to any loan advance made by the loan manager in accordance with this schedule.” That is pretty fundamental. It says that the loan manager cannot charge interest and the Government is repealing it retrospectively. It is doing away with that element of the interest-free student loan scheme retrospectively. Going back to the beginning of the year that commencement clause will take effect.  
That is a broken promise by this National Government. It is no wonder its members did not want to debate this part of the bill. It is no wonder nobody in the National Government is willing to leap up and take a call. It is no wonder the Minister is not willing to take a call and say why it is that this needs to apply retrospectively. Regardless of whether it breaks the promise—and I think it is outrageous that National is breaking that promise—any clause in a bill that applies retrospectively needs to be explained and needs to be justified. That is what the Committee stage of the House is all about. It is where we go through bills brought before the House clause by clause and we are now on to the commencement clause. The Minister in the chair needs to stand up and explain why this clause needs to apply retrospectively—this clause that effectively removes the restriction on the loan manager from charging interest on any loan advance made by the loan manager in accordance with that schedule—that “shedule”—of the Act. 
David Bennett 
: Schedule. 
CHRIS HIPKINS 
: That schedule of the Act. I will help old “Cue Ball” over there. He is getting a bit uptight about the pronunciation of the word.