McClay Todd: Electronic Transactions (Contract Formation) Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMcClay Todd: Electronic Transactions (Contract Formation) Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 09 April 2014. Volume:697;Page:17099. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon TODD McCLAY (Minister of Revenue):I was worried for a moment there that I would not have an opportunity to speak on the title of this bill the Electronic Transactions (Contract Formation) Amendment Bill. Before I do I want to congratulate the mover of the bill Paul Goldsmith on an excellent piece of work. Members opposite have been a bit flippant about this legislation and the importance of it but I can honestly say when looking at the title anybody sitting at home at the moment watching their television who has entered into an electronic transaction and who is concerned about whether the contract has been formed or not will now be reliably informed that Mr Goldsmith has their best interests at heart. I congratulate him on that.Others in this debate so far have spoken about bills that have come before the House from members and the titles of those bills. Some of the members of the Opposition have not seen the relevance of that as far as this debate is concerned. Well I would argue that it is relevant because if you get the title of a bill wrong it can give the wrong impression as to exactly what it is the member is trying to achieve. There have been many examples of this—of very well-meaning bills that have fallen on the steps of this Parliament because they have not gained the votes or support that they needed because members often from the Opposition have not understood the importance of them the import or what they are trying to achieve because the title has not been done correctly.In the case of Mr Goldsmith who—we have heard from him firsthand—so narrowly avoided becoming a lawyer and instead decided to look backwards in history so that he could learn from the mistakes of others and could therefore come forward with a bill with a title that is about the future not about the past he has put great depth and detail into this. So the bill is the Electronic Transactions (Contract Formation) Amendment Bill 2012.The member responsible for the bill spoke eloquently at the beginning of the debate but he has not answered the questions that have been posed. The question I have—in fact I have many questions for him but in this case the first question is: when he decided to name this the Electronic Transactions (Contract Formation) Amendment Bill why “contract formation”? It could just be the “Electronic Transactions Amendment Bill 2012” and that would be enough. But there would be people out there who have unknowingly and unwittingly entered into contracts as a result of an electronic transaction not knowing they have done so and therefore there would be obligations imposed upon them one assumes. Is that the reason he has decided to include “contract formation” in the title? There will be people who have wanted to enter into contracts I am sure and were not sure that they were able to do so when they entered into that electronic transaction.This is quite a weighty piece of legislation. Although on the surface of it that may not be clear it will touch many New Zealanders’ lives. For those who have had issues in the past around contracts and contract law and for those who maybe did not narrowly avoid the obstacles that would have been placed in the way of Mr Goldsmith—those who continued on to study law—they know how detailed how complex and how very very difficult contract law can be anywhere in the world particularly in New Zealand. So I am very interested to hear from him about exactly why he decided this should be the title.I would say it is so very important because this is my sixth year I have been in Parliament now and I do remember many many opportunities and many occasions when the Opposition has kept us here talking late into the night about whether or not the title of a bill should be changed. Actually it was enjoyable and it is one of the great things about this Parliament. When the Government has an important piece of business to do we do not mind sitting aside and letting others who do not want there to be any question—whether or not they are intelligent—and who are happy to stand up on the other side the Opposition members and decide to get rid of any doubt at all by going on and on about things that they think the Government has not got right.In this instance I guarantee that any moment now a member from the Opposition will decide that actually Mr Goldsmith has not done his job properly he has not thought this bill through properly and it is going to do things other than those suggested in the title and they will come forward with a swathe of Supplementary Order Papers during the Committee stage to make changes. That is why we have to decide whether or not it is right and whether Mr Goldsmith has got this right. For my part I think from my reading of the bill—and I spent quite a bit of time looking over it before deciding to make an intervention—he has it about balanced. [Bell rung] Mr Chair?The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy): I call the Hon Todd McClay.Hon TODD McCLAY: I was going to conclude but one other thought came to mind so I will continue for a moment and I thank you for giving me the opportunity for this. So in reading this bill and spending quite some time looking at it part by part—Kris Faafoi: How sad are you?Hon TODD McCLAY: Well the member has asked how sad I am. I have got to tell you looking at what has happened in the polls I am not as sad as the members opposite. I have got to tell you that if my party was at 29 percent in the polls I would not have that grin on my face. I would be focusing on this legislation. The reason there are differences in the way the different parties in this Chamber are polling at the moment is that some members on this side of the Chamber come here to make a difference to New Zealanders. Paul Goldsmith with this bill is one of those members. He is one of those people who want to make a difference in the lives of New Zealanders. He has worked so very hard in the last 3 years that he has been in this Parliament. This piece of legislation is merely one part of the hard work that he has done over the last 3 years that he has been here.This title will send a very clear message to New Zealanders about what he is deciding to do on their behalf so that they can be more comfortable in their commercial lives in their private lives when they are engaged with the internet when they are working with their banks and when they are looking at their electronic transactions of very many different types the contractual obligations they have and exactly how those contracts are formed. So this will be called the Electronic Transactions (Contract Formation) Amendment Act 2012. I think this is an excellent piece of legislation. I think Mr Goldsmith has done a very important piece of work here. I very much look forward to taking many many many more calls when we get into some of the substance of this because it will be so very important that we have clear understanding.One of the challenges you have is that in the case that members opposite do not fully understand the intricate detail of the bill that Mr Goldsmith has brought before the Committee it may be that we need to consider a change to the title. That is why this Parliament has decided that any member may take the floor to talk about the title of the bill so we can make sure that we get it right. In the case of what Mr Goldsmith has done here if it was not correct one day in the future when his great-great-grandchildren—because he is a great family man from Epsom—look at the sterling work he did here they may see only the title. They would not fully appreciate the many many hours of detailed study and work he put into formulating this idea into the research to draw up the bill and then into going to all parts of this Parliament to lobby them to get their support so that he could put it into law. They may think actually with a title that was not well-thought-up that this was a trivial piece of legislation.But indeed as I have said earlier I think he has the balance about right at least in my simplistic understanding of this legislation. Those in the future who may look at only the title and not take the time to read the great detail of this bill should it become an Act will see that it is a piece of work with great gravity and that he is a man with gravitas. So can I again thank him for bringing this to the Committee and congratulate him on so very narrowly avoiding the direction he could have fallen in moving towards a career in law. Had he become a lawyer I am sure there would have been many many more words in this bill but I am not sure so much would have been added to it. So if he could address my question about exactly why he decided that this was the title that this bill should have I would be eternally grateful.Scott Simpson: What is the title?Hon TODD McCLAY: The title of this legislation will be the “Electronic Transactions (Contract Formation) Amendment Act 2012”. Thank you.