Fenton Darien: Births Deaths Marriages and Relationships Registration Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Fenton Darien: Births Deaths Marriages and Relationships Registration Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:647;Page:16581] 
DARIEN FENTON (Labour) 
: 
 It is a real pleasure to take a call in the third reading of the Births Deaths Marriages and Relationships Registration Amendment Bill. I will start by addressing some of the process issues that have been raised by our Government Administration Committee chairperson Shane Ardern because I totally disagree with what he says. 
Hon Rick Barker 
: That’s why he’s not on the front bench. 
DARIEN FENTON 
: That is true. I note from National’s report that its members said they were not satisfied with the amendments that the Minister proposed. Well if they were saying that in their report they must have known what the amendments were. In fact I can confirm that they did. 
I always thought that the process of select committees was that people came along and made submissions and that members listened to them discussed those things and then came up with alternative ideas to meet their concerns. That is indeed what happened. I can also confirm that the Minister wrote to the select committee and that the National members were there; they read the letter. We discussed with the officials the various proposals for amendments but National members decided to oppose them for some reason I still cannot understand. They have not explained their dissatisfaction with the amendments that were proposed and they still have not explained their reasons for opposing them. I can think only that it is a political decision. 
I also need to confirm to the House that I as the deputy chair did approach the National Party about these amendments in just the same way as the Minister and I talked to the Greens United Future and New Zealand First. So National members did have a chance to say what they thought about the amendments. The officials did a very very good job in putting those amendments forward and it seemed to all of us who were reasonable that those amendments were very very good workable solutions. As I said in my second reading speech the process was a good one. I thought it was carried out in the way that a select committee is supposed to work and I thought also that was how MMP works—where there are concerns members work together to find a solution. 
The reality is that those National members missed the boat. We cannot be very surprised about that because we have learnt in the House this week—and we know that National has had a bad week—that those members do not talk to each other. They do not even talk to each other. So there is a little group of people in a little room making decisions. 
Hon Rick Barker 
: They don’t talk about principles and they don’t talk about policy. 
DARIEN FENTON 
: Yes. Then they get told what the decisions are—or they do not get told as the case may be. So I— 
Hon Rick Barker 
: The employment spokesperson is not told about his employment policy. 
DARIEN FENTON 
: That is right. I do want to clear that up because some very outrageous criticisms have been made by members opposite and particularly by one of the wonderful brains of the National Party Sandra Goudie and by the member on his way out—on his last hurrah—Brian Connell. He made some outrageous suggestions and some amazing comments. I was actually quite stunned by some of the fairly bizarre things that Mr Connell had to say and I discussed that last time. 
To go back to the purpose of this bill I tell members that it is to strike a balance between protecting personal information from those who wish to abuse it and maintaining freedom of information and the right of public access. 
Debate interrupted.