Prasad Rajen: Joint Family Homes Repeal Bill — First Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Prasad Rajen: Joint Family Homes Repeal Bill — First Reading 
[Sitting date: 25 July 2012. Volume:682;Page:3927. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Dr RAJEN PRASAD (Labour) 
: 
 Kia ora e te whanau. Kia ora Mr Speaker. Firstly I congratulate sincerely the member Simon O’Connor on his Joint Family Homes Repeal Bill being picked out of the ballot. I also have a bill in there—for a couple of years now—and it takes a while to get the luck that that member has had so congratulations. 
The background to this bill is very simple. Some time before 2001 the then Minister asked the Law Commission to have a look at this area at whether enough changes had occurred and whether we needed the Joint Family Homes Act 1964. The Law Commission went away and did a detailed piece of work. Clearly people who have spoken today have read that report. After that examination the commission concluded that there were only two serious bits remaining that needed to be talked about: protection from creditors—and other members have talked about that—and savings in legal costs in developing joint family homes. The Law Commission then had a look at both of those and concluded that there was nothing there that required the Act to stay on the statute book. In 2001 its report said that the Act should go and alongside that the provision in the Family Protection Act that also is repealed by this particular bill also needed to go. 
So this bill is quite simple and clearly we support it but not the arguments that the members opposite have presented for this particular bill. In a sense this is Simon O’Connor’s Military Manoeuvres Act Repeal Bill. This bill is identical to that one. Somebody in the National Party has decided: “Look those backbenchers need to get their act into gear. We have got to give them something to do so we will dream up bills that really will not make one iota of difference to contemporary issues facing New Zealand.” 
Tim Macindoe 
: The Law Commission reported it— 
Dr RAJEN PRASAD 
: Not one iota Mr Macindoe—not one. So this bill was put in the ballot. I do think the members speaking on this bill today are far more fortunate; they are in a much better place than when they were asked to defend the Military Manoeuvres Act Repeal Bill. At least Simon O’Connor has presented an argument. I remember that on the third reading of the Military Manoeuvres Act Repeal Bill members opposite gathered in large number. That bill seemed to have been designed only to pick the spirits up of the member who had proposed that particular bill. At least there is something serious about this Joint Family Homes Repeal Bill in the sense that the member Simon O’Connor can present an argument and he has presented it as well. 
But look at the argument he has presented. This bill is the Government’s attempt to actually have a clean legislative slate so to speak—to clear out legislation. This bill is its attempt. By golly if this is it then I am sorry but there is not much left in the tank. And there are so many other more important things to do. I wish the members would think about that. Of course the private—[ 
Interruption 
] Ordinarily Mr Macindoe an omnibus bill would be brought in to strip to clean out these things and would put them all together. That is what ought to have happened but it did not. 
But look at the difference between what these members opposite are now presenting using the member’s bill process to do it and what this side of the House is doing. Here we are today discussing this bill which will not make an iota of difference to anybody’s life today. 
Hon Members 
: Aw! 
Dr RAJEN PRASAD 
: It will not—not to anybody’s life today. But on the other side of the House here we have just had passed—the Government was defeated—a bill about full recognition of holidays. That was what somebody from this side of the House had thought through. It will make a difference to the lives of people. Again maybe later on this evening we will be discussing the Parental Leave and Employment Protection (Six Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill. Here also a member has thought it through. But no the members opposite would sooner discuss the equivalent of the Military Manoeuvres Act Repeal Bill—bills that do not make any difference at all bills that do not address contemporary issues bills that just keep backbenchers busy. Mr Macindoe has not had one picked out of the ballot. I wonder what it would be. Maybe some kind of thing about—I do not know—houses? I do not know. It might be a housing one Mr Macindoe. There might be something about housing that the member might want to talk about. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: We used to have a good MP in Hamilton West. 
Dr RAJEN PRASAD 
: That is right and he did a lot of good work. So I ask Mr Macindoe to put forward something serious that makes a difference. But we will be supporting this bill going to the Justice and Electoral Committee and let us listen to the arguments. Thank you.