Lawyers and Conveyancers (Employed Lawyers Providing Free Legal Services) Amendment Bill

I move, That the Lawyers and Conveyancers (Employed Lawyers Providing Free Legal Services) Amendment Bill be now read a first time. I nominate the Justice Committee to consider the bill.

I intend to take only five minutes in my introductory remarks on this bill because this is a very simple and straightforward piece of legislation, which, I hope, will at least meet with the approval of the House to be sent to a select committee for further consideration. It’s a simple bill, but I believe it will have an impact in terms of improving access to justice, and that is the aim of the bill.

It’s a simple bill. It has one provision. It amends the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, which was legislation passed by Parliament back in 2006 after much debate, and what it does is allow a lawyer who’s an employee to provide free legal work where the services are provided with the agreement of their employer and in accordance with the practice rules made by the New Zealand Law Society.

Now, a lot of people will be unaware that currently, under the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act, an employed lawyer is technically deemed guilty of misconduct if the lawyer does legal work outside their employment or for a community law centre, so this seeks to improve access to justice by allowing that to happen. What it will mean is more lawyers can do more pro bono work outside their employment and expand outreach to the justice system and greatly increase accessibility without the fear that their actions will be regarded as misconduct.

A lot of people are unaware of this provision currently. In reality, it is a law that is not actually really ever enforced, because it’s very common for lawyers who are employed by a Public Service department, for example, or employed as in-house counsel at companies around New Zealand to do pro bono work for the local tramping club, for the local croquet club, for the tennis society—I keep naming sporting bodies, but there’ll be others out there as well. Macramé, Women’s Refuge, indoor cricket as well—

💬 Christopher Luxon: Twenty20 cricket.

—Twenty20 cricket—thank you, Mr Luxon. So it’s very common for lawyers to do that sort of work. It’s often low-level grunt work, but, of course, it saves community groups quite a lot of time and money. But that is technically misconduct, and what this bill aims to do is make sure that that is not misconduct so that they can do that. So it’s a law that is not commonly enforced, and I note that the United Kingdom has recently amended their own solicitors’ client duty rules in order to allow this.

The first reason to advance it is that it brings the law into line with what actually happens in practice, and then the second is to improve access to legal advice and legal assistance. There will be people out there who are now able to access legal advice that they wouldn’t otherwise have been able to access.

Then, the third reason is that ultimately, it will improve access to justice, particularly litigation. People are allowed to work for community law centres currently without breaching the provision, but, of course, community law centres are not really equipped for litigation, and often that’s the expensive, difficult form of legal work. Community law centres do a wonderful job—they do a fantastic job—but they’re not really cut out for expensive and high-profile litigation. So it will improve access for people who seek to litigate.

So it’s a simple bill. I hope that it will meet with the approval of the House. I know the Justice Committee is extremely busy at the moment, having just kicked off the inquiry into the last general election, and there’s lots of other things going on there. But I’ve sat on that committee and I know it’s a very hard-working committee, and I hope that they’ll be able to, in their busy work programme, have some time to consider it. I put this forward, and I hope it meets with the approval of the House.

The question is that the motion be agreed to.

Debate interrupted.