Statutes Amendment Bill

I rise to take a brief call on the Statutes Amendment Bill. I want to draw people’s attention to the submission put forward by Chapman Tripp, which opposed the amendments to clauses 32 and 33 of the Statutes Amendment Bill. The reason for the opposition is that Chapman Tripp felt that the proposed amendments to the Companies Act were unnecessary and would result in onerous additional compliance costs for amalgamating companies, in terms of both time and money. Perhaps the Minister in the chair, the Hon Clayton Cosgrove, might like to take a call and give us his views on the concerns Chapman Tripp raised about the proposals to change the Companies Act. The Chapman Tripp submission goes on to state that in the Act’s current form a company that is amalgamating with another company must give secured credit or a copy of an amalgamation proposal—

The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich): Clauses 3 and 4 only, please.

OK, clauses 3 and 4 only. Right, I shall go to clauses 3 and 4 only—I am not quite sure where we are up to on this bill. [Interruption] The Animal Products Act! Well, do we know a lot about the Animal Products Act! What is happening with the Animal Products Act? There are huge changes there: “Section 167(1)(ja) is amended by omitting “section 59A” and substituting “section 60”.” That is a hugely significant change to the legislation.

💬 Steve Chadwick: What is it?

Well, that is a good question from the member. Perhaps she might like to take a call and answer that very question. Perhaps the Minister might like to answer the question and enlighten the House and the New Zealand public about what those particular clauses actually mean. We have some briefing papers from the officials about all these different clauses. I am sure the Minister has those to hand and can give us a very enlightened précis of the changes to those particular clauses.

There are, of course, a number of Acts that are being changed by this legislation, and the Animal Products Act is just one of the Acts that is being amended in the Statutes Amendment Bill.

With regard to the Statutes Amendment Bill, one could give either an 8-hour speech or a 3-minute speech.

💬 Hon Harry Duynhoven: Three minutes.

I have opted, indeed—as my friend Harry Duynhoven said—for the 3-minute speech. In the second reading I addressed some of the provisions that dealt particularly with the question of the appointment of environment commissioners and with various other minor amendments—for example, Part 18, which concerns the Family Courts Act.

The purpose of the Statutes Amendment Bill—as is well known—is to introduce provisions of a very minor nature that tidy up legislation in order to bring various pieces of legislation into line with other legislation, and so it is here. This legislation need not detain the Committee at all. It is all fairly sensible stuff. The National Party has no problem with the various parts of the bill, with the exception of the particular parts that are referred to in the report from the Government Administration Committee. National supports the legislation.

Part 1 agreed to.

Parts 2 to 4 agreed to.

Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.

Parts 5 to 35 agreed to.

Part 36 objected to and struck out of the bill.

Parts 37 to 38 agreed to.

Part 39 objected to and struck out of the bill.

Parts 40 to 50 agreed to.

Schedules 1 to 10 agreed to.

Clause 1 agreed to.

Clause 2 agreed to.