Ardern Shane: Statutes Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading 
Ardern Shane: Statutes Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading 
[Volume:645;Page:14791] 
SHANE ARDERN (National—Taranaki-King Country) 
: 
 The Statutes Amendment Bill (No 2) was referred to the Government Administration Committee as the Minister said on 20 September 2007. The closing date for submissions was 9 November. By that date we had received two submissions. 
The Statutes Amendment bills probably need a bit of explanation in the Chamber because I do not think too many people in public or in Parliament really understand the purpose of these bills. They are designed to provide a legislative vehicle for minor technical and non-controversial amendments—generally typing errors or other such minor amendments—to legislation or Acts of Parliament. They are known as omnibus bills. Unanimous cross-party support must be obtained prior to the bill being included in debate and going to a select committee. 
The select committee received an interesting submission from a Mr Graeme Edgeler who is a lawyer in Wellington. He raised the issue of the bill potentially crossing the line of being non-controversial and of potentially introducing a statute amendment that would have an effect on people. He did not disagree with the change; he disagreed with the fact that it should happen in a Statutes Amendment Bill. 
My colleague Mr Finlayson may later describe the issue around the Historic Places Trust that was raised by this gentleman. 
Christopher Finlayson 
: No I won’t! 
SHANE ARDERN 
: He may not but we will wait and see. We received advice from the Ministry of Justice the Ministry of Defence the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry and various other Government advisers. On balance the committee decided that the issue was not outside the normal gambit of a Statutes Amendment Bill and therefore supported the bill coming back to the House. 
But it raised an interesting point which is that the executive needs to be reminded at times of just exactly what these Statutes Amendment bills are for. They are an interesting and useful tool for Government. Government needs that tool and all Governments regardless of their political persuasion need this vehicle. If the executive were ever to start venturing out into more controversial amendments then these bills would get vetoed and potentially a vehicle would be lost whereby it could otherwise normally carry out such work. 
I know that the Assistant Speaker has a keen interest in the Standing Orders and the Standing Order concerned in regard to Statutes Amendment bills is 263(1)(e). I thought I would just point that out to Mr Assistant Speaker in case he needs it later in the debate. 
The Statutes Amendment Bill we are debating here tonight the Statutes Amendment Bill (No 2) received the support of the select committee. This particular bill includes amendments that involve the Ministry of Justice the Ministry of Defence the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry the Ministry for Culture and Heritage the Ministry of Fisheries the Ministry of Economic Development the Department of Conservation Land Information New Zealand the Biosecurity Act—which is one I myself am particularly interested in being the spokesman for that particular subject—the Cadastral Survey Act the Fisheries Act and the Veterinarians Act. 
Fourteen various statutes and 50 clauses in total were involved so we have to pay close scrutiny to make sure that amendments are just minor and not any more substantial than was designed. The select committee as the Minister very kindly spelt out did its work in that regard. 
From time to time in the Government Administration Committee we have sought support on various issues from the Regulations Review Committee but in this case we received the standard response from the committee which was that the bill was fine. With those comments I say that the National Party supports the bill and I recommend it to the House.