Carter David: Veterinarians Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Carter David: Veterinarians Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:628;Page:951] 
Hon DAVID CARTER (National) 
: 
 I want to ask the Minister for her comments on three sections and I want to start with clause 86 “Service of documents”. I raise this because I just wonder whether the Primary Production Committee although it worked diligently on this has actually missed something here. Clause 86(1) states: “Any document notification or summons required or authorised by or under this Act may be served—(a) by delivering it personally to the person; or (b) by posting it to the person at that person’s usual place of residence.” I have no concern with clause 86(1) but clause 86(2) I think actually raises something that the Primary Production Committee may have missed and I think the Minister should concentrate on this. Clause 86(2)(a) states that if a summons is served personally on a person then that person must receive it “at least 48 hours before the attendance of the witness is required”. 
The point I want to raise with the new Minister in the chair the Hon Annette King is that—[ 
Interruption 
] Well maybe this Minister will actually know something about it. The point I want to raise is that there seems to be an incredibly short time frame between the time someone is served a notice to appear and the time that that person must appear—at least 48 hours. I genuinely worry whether the Primary Production Committee has missed something because I know that if the summons were served on a person like Dame Ann Hercus she would have no trouble being there in 48 hours because her diary is free now. But if the document were served on my vet Dave Matheson of Teddington RD1 Lyttelton who runs the most efficient vet clinic in Christchurch the Shirley Vet Centre then Dave would have huge difficulties clearing his diary because he is one of the most competent vets in Christchurch—probably the most competent vet in Christchurch. He would have a very busy schedule if people brought Sally the dog or Bianca the cockatoo to him. Under this legislation if summonsed he would be required to be at the hearing in 48 hours. 
I seriously say to the Minister—and the Minister might like to check with the officials—that maybe I am misinterpreting this or maybe it is something we have missed at select committee which would not be surprising because the Primary Production Committee has had a huge job sorting the mess out after the Government delivered the bill in such a cruddy state in the first place. Again I pay tribute to the assistance the committee received from the Veterinary Council in doing that. 
The second point I raise with the Minister in the chair Annette King is the inclusion of new clause 79AA “Protection for members of Council and others”: “Neither the Council nor any committee member committee member employee or agent of the Council is liable for anything done or omitted to be done in good faith …”. I was worried about the inclusion of that clause at the time we examined it in the Primary Production Committee. But after hearing the contributions from members of this Committee on the previous part where we talked about putting people like “Swainy and the boys” Dianne Yates Jill Pettis and the likes on to the council as the ministerial lay appointments—because they are people who will have lots of time after the next month or two—then I think we probably do need to realise that some of the decision making will be pretty marginal at best. 
Let us take somebody like Russell Fairbrother. He has been a disaster as a member of Parliament so he will probably be no better as an appointee to the Veterinary Council. We need to make sure that the whole of the council—some of them will be good people—does not become exposed to some of the marginal decisions that people like “Swainy and the boys” may make. 
The final point I make before “Swainy” walks out relates to the fees referred to in clause 87. Clause 87 states that the council may prescribe fees. That is satisfactory; I agree that that is a necessary role of the council but because the council will be stacked initially with Labour Party lackeys—