Hutchison Paul: Sullivan Birth Registration Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHutchison Paul: Sullivan Birth Registration Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 09 April 2014. Volume:697;Page:17090. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Dr PAUL HUTCHISON (National—Hunua):It is a great pleasure to have the opportunity to support the Sullivan Birth Registration Bill at its third reading and might I too acknowledge Rowen and Doreen up there in the gallery. I too feel almost as though I have been on a little bit of a journey in that although I am not on the Government Administration Committee it has been a great privilege to be part of this process here in Parliament. It is quite historic and is indeed unique to the circumstances. There is no doubt that this is a situation driven by a young woman’s determination to honour her mum. As I understand it in her own words she said: “I want my mum’s name on my birth certificate to honour her”. This bill is indeed about human rights and very deep-rooted human instincts that all of us should be able to realise.In previous readings of this bill I have pointed out some of the huge transitions that we in New Zealand and around the world have witnessed in the changes in birth technologies changes in the law and of course changes in our attitudes to areas that previously were really extraordinarily taboo and in many respects put things under the carpet which led only to confusion and dishonesty and often to deep-seated resentment. May I too acknowledge Louisa Wall for the double whammy it was indeed. It was her earlier bill which was landmarked here in the Parliament that led I understand to Rowen approaching her and congratulations on that in that respect. When I first spoke on this bill I did speak about a variety of examples of young people who had searched the world more or less despite huge hurdles because of this deep-seated instinct to be able to find their parents and know their parents whether they were alive or not or whether they were in a different country or not.It has been fascinating to me as a former obstetrician and gynaecologist to see what has happened in New Zealand over the years. I was at the National Women’s Hospital’s celebration of 50 years just last month. I spoke and I heard of the extraordinary work in New Zealand that occurred. Professor Bonham who was the head of the hospital at the time used to literally mix together donor sperm so they could not be detected because of the legal ramifications. That is how far we have changed. The opposite is that we surely want to seek transparency and openness because that is the way people will unravel the huge distortions that occur when information is repressed. I want to acknowledge a young social worker called Joi Ellis who was at National Women’s Hospital through the time when the debates on informed consent were raging. She was the one who came up and said: “Look it’s absolutely inappropriate to have the prevailing situation continue. We must have transparency and honesty.” It set the legal profession academics and sociologists in New Zealand working hard to see whether we could follow that sort of pathway. I would like to acknowledge Professor Ken Daniels sociologist from Canterbury University who has represented New Zealand in the academic literature in this field and is widely regarded as an international expert and innovator in terms of ensuring that openness prevails and of course Freddie Graham and “Mont” Liggins who led the in vitro fertilisation team.But finally I come back to the bill. This indeed is I hope very much one of celebration. It is fantastic to see you Doreen and Rowen here tonight in the Parliament. It is wonderful that Louisa has been the person who has brought this bill through to reality. I certainly think this is a wonderful bill and I commend it to the House.