te Heuheu Georgina: Lawyers and Conveyancers Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third Reading 
te Heuheu Georgina: Lawyers and Conveyancers Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third Reading 
[Volume:648;Page:17639] 
Hon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU (National) 
: 
 I rise to take a short call on the Lawyers and Conveyancers Amendment Bill (No 2). The commentary on the bill is obviously quite clear: “At present unions and employer organisations employ lawyers to provide legal services to their members.”—and they have done so for some time. The commentary continues: “The Act provides explicitly that lawyers employed by unions and employer organisations will be guilty of misconduct if they provide such services.” Obviously the purpose of the bill is to allow lawyers employed by unions and employer organisations to continue to provide legal services to their members. But as my colleague Chester Borrows just related it is very important that this is not to be a licence for lawyers to give legal advice on all manner of things like drink-driving and so on and so forth. So the provision that allows that advice to be given is limited to matters that are related to the business of the employer or member organisation that any individual is in. 
The explanatory note of the Minister’s Supplementary Order Paper of Tuesday 29 July as I say clarifies “that a lawyer employed by an employer organisation or by a union may not provide legal services to a member of the organisation or the union if those services are not relevant to the person’s membership of the organisation or union.” That is very clear and it is very important. It is important that we recognise the areas where lawyers can provide advice but also that we are very explicit about the limits to the advice that is given. It continues: “A new subsection (1B) is inserted into section 9 of the principal Act to specify cases of legal services that are relevant to a person’s membership of an employer organisation or a union. These are legal services that” firstly “relate to the member’s rights obligations or liabilities in his or her capacity as a member or as an employer or employee”; secondly to “any matter concerning or arising out of an employment relationship as defined in the Employment Relations Act 2000. That term covers a number of relationships that are relevant in the context of employment law such as relationships between a union and an employer between unions bargaining for the same collective agreement or between employers bargaining for the same collective agreement”; and thirdly to “any claim or action under an enactment specified in section 236 of the Employment Relations Act 2000. That section allows employers and employees to be represented by any person of their choice in claims and actions brought under a number of enactments listed in the section. The right to wider representation applies if the other party is the party’s employer or employee or if the action is taken in the Employment Relations Authority or the Employment Court.” It goes on to list those enactments which include the Employment Relations Act; the Equal Pay Act; the Holidays Act; the Human Rights Act; the Police Act; the Injury Prevention Rehabilitation and Compensation Act; the Minimum Wage Act; the State Sector Act; and the Wages Protection Act. 
Fourthly the new subsection also specifies cases of legal services relating to “compliance with any enactment or other requirement governing the performance of duties of the member in the conduct of the member's normal business or profession” and fifthly relating to “any question or matter concerning the member’s professional liability entitlement under a contract of insurance or compliance with professional standards.” 
I understand that this legislation comes into force tomorrow—1 August. It is rather ironic that at 4 o’clock 2 hours before the House rises we are now doing the third reading that will enable that to happen. I have not sat on the Justice and Electoral Committee so I am not entirely certain as to why it happens that at the last minute— 
Lindsay Tisch 
: Poor organisation. 
Hon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU 
: Well I was coming to that. I am not certain why at the last minute—just the day before the bill is to become law—we are now doing the third reading. My colleague Lindsay Tisch has obviously answered my question. That was the answer I was going to give anyway. I suppose it was a rhetorical question. 
Lindsay Tisch 
: Say it again. 
Hon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU 
: Well basically the reason is poor organisation by this Government—the Labour-led Government. It is typical of the way it has done things—or not done things—during the 9 years of its long tenure on the Treasury benches. It is no wonder that those 9 long years look to be coming to an end. Obviously it is because of things like this. This has been described as a technical bill but in essence it is a hugely important matter. As I say only a Government that does not know what it is doing would have us doing the third reading on the afternoon before the legislation is to become law. Thank you Madam Assistant Speaker. 
Bill read a third time.