Dowie SarahSARAH DOWIE (National—Invercargill): I rise in support of the Arbitration Amendment Bill in this first reading brought to the House by Mr Paul Foster-Bell. I want to start by congratulating the member. While this is a technical bill it is a well-thought-out bill and one that will certainly strengthen our systems and procedures around arbitration. I also want to congratulate him given that he is going to leave our ranks come election 2017. He has already had one member's bill pulled from the ballot debated in this House and passed and now he has a second. I thank him for that and I thank him for the thought around this bill.I am a fan of arbitration. I think that alternative dispute resolution has a real place in our legal system. I think that mediation and arbitration are valuable tools in the legal tool box. While arbitration is still very formal in nature it does significantly reduce cost it is effective—definitely time effective—and it certainly reduces the pressure on our court system if people who have commercial disputes or disputes regarding trust deeds decide to opt into them. I pick up on the point of Mr Foster-Bell that not only is it an effective way forward to resolving disputes but certainly given our reputation internationally as one of the least corrupt places in the world that we do abide by the rule of law. It is a good thing for our reputation to have strengthened arbitration laws to have them consistent with international law and to have them available when there are parties in a dispute that are international so that they can choose New Zealand as a place to arbitrate their disputes. That $1 million that was provided as revenue to arbitration is certainly significant and one that we should be capitalising on.Again I say that this is a nuanced bill but it is certainly one that will strengthen arbitration in New Zealand moving forward. I do like the idea that this plans to change the confidentiality rules. Obviously arbitration in itself—the negotiations are confidential. We do that so that parties go to dispute resolution and feel safe in the room so that they can get to the nub of the issue and discuss their issues robustly and so that they can come to the table in a bona fide way. I actually disagree with the member opposite Mr Parker in that I think that if you are going to dispute resolution to negotiate an outcome in good faith then you should not be allowed to use that confidentiality as a weapon in the future should you appeal some procedural matter. I think that the confidentiality that is set out in this bill—the presumption of it—strengthens the tool of arbitration and gives it extra weight as a method forward to resolve disputes. So we will look into that issue as a committee moving forward but certainly I think that it is a very good change that Mr Foster-Bell has mooted and one that will strengthen the tool box around arbitration. Obviously the court under this bill would reserve the right to waive that confidentiality if it was in the public interest to release certain details of a case. So I think that covers Mr Parker's concerns. But again I say that we as a committee will look into that issue moving forward. Certainly the last thing that the bill does is strengthen the enforceability of arbitration awards which is particularly good given that in the past there have been appeals on procedural issues that are meaningless. It is only fair that awards should be enforceable and again that adds strength to the objective of arbitration moving forward.So I think this is a good bill. I commend the member for bringing it to the House. Again I think that arbitration has a valid place in our justice system and should be supported.