Hudson Brett: Statutes Amendment Bill (No 4) — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHudson Brett: Statutes Amendment Bill (No 4) — In Committee[Sitting date: 19 March 2015. Volume:704;Page:2470. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]BRETT HUDSON (National): I appreciate that this is the first time that Chairman Borrows has presided over this debate on the Statutes Amendment Bill (No 4) but other presiding officers have heard a number of times people saying the same thing about it. So I resolved that I would not repeat that this is an omnibus bill that makes minor technical changes that have unanimous support across the House. Mr Chair one could tire very quickly of every member saying such a thing.But I did want to take a call to speak on the changes to the Births Deaths Marriages and Relationships Registration Act 1995 because I think the current provisions there have the potential to be quite troubling in their effects. In fact it is clause 15 of the Statutes Amendment Bill (No 4) that replaces within that principal Act section 21A(2) which is around the proof of identity. There is actually quite a great deal to it. I will not read out the full detail but what it does amount to is that someone seeking to change their name must now under the new provisions actually provide satisfactory evidence that they themselves are the person who is seeking the name change or the legal guardian or authority to make that change.It is very troubling that the way the law stands today could potentially allow a person to change the name of someone else or in fact to change their name to someone else’s because that proof of identity is not required to the extent that this change will require. Hypothetically just as an illustration to help show the magnitude of this troubling provision a person a Ms Willow-Jean Prime could choose to change her name to Mark Osborne and she would not have to prove that she is actually Mark Osborne and has a right to that name. You might wonder why someone would do that. Well if Ms Prime changed her name to Mark Osborne at least she would have her party’s support in the by-election. So you can understand why she might try to do that very thing. Fortunately this very sound pragmatic action we are taking in the Statutes Amendment Bill (No. 4) will prevent such things ever occurring in the future. It is most important because quite frankly the only way she would get any support in this by-election is if she were to do that.I would also like though to comment on another Act that is amended in this Statutes Amendment Bill (No 4) and that is the Local Government Act 1974. Clause 43 of this bill amends schedule 10 of that Act by replacing “Ministry of Transport” with “New Zealand Transport Agency”. Although one could imagine that local body employees could indulge in friendly intercourse with employees of the Ministry of Transport such is likely to be more fruitful and productive if they held it with the employees of the responsible agency. In this case in respect of consulting on temporary road closures it is in fact the New Zealand Transport Agency they should be talking to not the Ministry of Transport. So yet again it is another simple technical change that helps to make sure that our law actually operates as intended.Finally I would also like to comment on the National Animal Identification and Tracing Act 2012. Clause 63 of the bill inserts into that principal Act new subsection10(3A) after subsection 10(3). That new subsection reads: “When contracting out compliance and enforcement functions under subsection 3(b) the NAIT organisation remains responsible and accountable for the performance of those functions.” That is an extremely good measure and extremely sound. What it allows of course is for National Animal Identification and Tracing (NAIT) to contract out certain functions to people who might be in a better place to discharge them. They may have more competency more resources or more practical skill in the matter but most important NAIT remains accountable for what that subsidiary may do. It remains responsible for the obligations under that Act.Those are just a small number of examples of the very good work that this omnibus bill does and I look forward to it progressing to the end of this debate and hopefully into a successful third reading. Thank you.Parts 1 to 33 and clauses 1 and 2 agreed to.The Committee divided the bill into the Animal Welfare Amendment Bill (No 2) the Antarctica (Environmental Protection) Amendment Bill the Biosecurity Amendment Bill the Births Deaths Marriages and Relationships Registration Amendment Bill the Commodity Levies Amendment Bill the Copyright Amendment Bill the Forests Amendment Bill the Friendly Societies and Credit Unions Amendment Bill the Governor-General Amendment Bill the Heavy Engineering Research Levy Amendment Bill the Judicial Conduct Commissioner and Judicial Conduct Panel Amendment Bill the Land Transport Amendment Bill the Land Transport Management Amendment Act 2008 Amendment Bill the Local Electoral Amendment Bill the Local Government Act 1974 Amendment Bill the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill the Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Amendment Bill the Marine Mammals Protection Amendment Bill the Misuse of Drugs Amendment Act 1978 Amendment Bill the National Animal Identification and Tracing Amendment Bill the National Parks Amendment Bill the Ngāti Manuhiri Claims Settlement Amendment Bill the Official Information Amendment Bill the Ombudsmen Amendment Bill the Pork Industry Board Amendment Bill the Reserves Amendment Bill the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Amendment Bill the Sentencing Amendment Bill the Summary Proceedings Amendment Bill the Tariff Amendment Bill the Tokelau (Territorial Sea and Exclusive Economic Zone) Amendment Bill the Trade in Endangered Species Amendment Bill and the Wildlife Amendment Bill pursuant to Supplementary Order Paper55.Bill reported without amendment.Report adopted.