NEWS ON POLICY
AND POLITICS |
|
||||
A MATTER OF OPINION Freshwater management too important to be left to politicians? IN POLITICS Extra sitting days on the cards more... IN OTHER NEWS Pan Pharmaceuticals Decision to Have Major Repercussions more... Financial Advisers Bill Interim Report more... TransTasman Superannuation more... Renewable Energy Generation National Policy Statement more... Hydropower Scheme on the Wairau approved more... Warehouse Case Continues more... PROGRESS OF LEGISLATION Bills Introduced/Awaiting First Reading more...
Bills Referred to Select Committee
Bills Reported Back / Awaiting Second Reading more... Bills Delayed more... Bills Passed Second Reading / Awaiting Third Reading more... Supplementary Order Papers more... Bills Passed Third Reading more... Acts Assented more... Regulations more... IN COMMITTEE more... IN THE WINGS more... IN CONSULTATION more...
LEGISLATION IN THE WINGS more...
|
|||||
| A MATTER OF OPINION | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Freshwater management too important to be left to politicians?Adversaries over the management and allocation of fresh water are finding common cause in their criticism of the draft National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management released by the Government last month. Although intended to put the icing on five years' policy activity, the Statement fails to address fundamental questions about how existing and prospective use applications are to be reconciled. Preserving the current devolved model of regional decision making the Statement is silent about allocation methodologies and does nothing to address the widespread criticism reserved for the 'first in first served' approach to resource allocation. The intention of the draft statement may well be to expedite a more rational basis for management in over-allocated catchments, but, as at least one regional representative has noted, the Statement may erode the substantial investment of time and money made on local solutions to date. Much of problem with the draft statement lies in its failure to confront the difficult political question of water ownership and the use of economic instruments to shift the basis of allocation from first in first served to highest best value use. Anxious to dodge the controversy that will attend customary rights and any intervention in existing use rights, the Government seems to have opted for more of the same, but with additional parameters around local decision making. Disenchantment with the draft statement and the Sustainable Water Programme of Action has now reached a point where, at a recent meeting of counterparties on water use, the comment was made that freshwater management was too important an issue to be left to politicians. It was a comment that resonated, prompting even longstanding opponents to agree that the determination of the high level principles for water management might be better left to the interest groups to hammer out, rather than the dwellers of Wellington's inner beltway. The idea that Government should be made the servant of the process rather than its master has struck a chord with members of the Government's leadership group on water. Constrained to react to half-formed policy delivered up by officials, the leadership group has been frustrated by the sterility of the development process and its failure to grapple with the national interest. A straw poll of environmental, pastoral, energy generation and urban water interests reflect a similar judgement. There is also a clear consensus on two things: 1) that the draft policy statement has missed the mark and 2) that a different - and apolitical - approach is needed for setting the parameters of freshwater management. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| IN OTHER NEWS | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Extra sitting days on the cardsThe Beehive rumour mill suggests that an additional day will be added to the Parliamentary calendar to deal with the raft of legislation that the Government has indicated it wishes to have introduced before the House rises for the year. Logical targets are the days 16 - 19 September. Given the requirement for 43 days from when Parliament is adjourned until the general election, an election date may now be as late as November, not 18 October as popularly thought. No clear outcome for ETS legislationAs at August 19, Government still did not have the numbers to advance its flagship ETS legislation. Parliamentary scuttlebutt suggests that despite significant inducement New Zealand First continues to be coy about its support. However, the expectation is that promises to the elderly over electricity prices notwithstanding, New Zealand First will come on board. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| IN OTHER NEWS | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pan Pharmaceuticals decision to have major repercussions In 2003 the Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration ordered the recall of 1600 products manufactured by Pan Pharmaceuticals and cancelled its licence to operate. Similar action followed in New Zealand and in short order Pan, a $300 million plus company, collapsed. Last week the case was settled when the Australian Government agreed to judgment being entered in Selim's favour and to pay him AUD $55 million - the amount he had sought in settlement hearings. This followed weeks of damaging evidence from Commonwealth officials that ultimately forced the Government to swallow a bitter pill of its own. The reported exchange between Federal Court Justice Emmett and Government barrister David Brogan captured it all. If Mr Selim succeeds, his damages are going to be huge, aren't they?" "Yes, your Honour." "And the reputations of several senior Commonwealth officers are going to be completely destroyed?" "Yes." The story will not end there with the way now open for investors and affected pharmacists and workers to launch legal action of their own. The repercussion will also be felt here in New Zealand and a call has already been made by one complementary medicines group for the resignation of then Health Minister Hon Annette King. It is a headache that King and the Labour-led Government do not need, particularly only weeks away from a general election. Financial Advisers Bill Interim ReportThe Finance and Expenditure Select Committee has released a second interim report on the Financial Advisers Bill. The interim report recommends four substantive changes to the Bill, in response to which the Committee seeks submissions from those who have already submitted on the Bill. Firstly, the Committee suggests narrowing the Bill's application to "financial products", as opposed to "financial advice" or the "implications of a financial decision". In turn, "financial products" needs to be defined. The Committee suggests financial products include credit, debt, equity, risk products and real property investments. Secondly, the Committee suggests creating two tiers of financial adviser. Category 1 consists of those advising on complex securities and savings planning. The Securities Commission would register each individual category 1 adviser. Category 2 consists of those advising on credit, general insurance and simple securities (such as bank term deposits). Category 2 advisers would not require registration but would have to comply with the Bill's disclosure requirements. Thirdly, the Committee suggests that finance institutions are certified. Certification would ensure that institutions' employees and agents offered appropriate advice. Institutions themselves would be certified by the Securities Commission rather than individual employees and agents. Finally, the Committee recommends the establishment of a Commissioner of Financial Advisers. The new Commissioner would be part of the Securities Commission and be responsible for all functions of the Securities Commission under the Bill (except for investigations and punishments which the Securities Commission itself would retain). Trans-Tasman superannuationNew developments in the Australian and New Zealand Closer Economic Relations agreement will result in New Zealanders being able to repatriate money currently locked in Australian retirement funds. Trade Minister Phil Goff, Agriculture Minister Jim Anderton and Commerce Minister Lianne Dalziel met with their Australian counterparts in Melbourne recently and discussed progressing retirement savings portability between the two countries. In Australia, employers must contribute 9 per cent of wages into a locked-in retirement savings account under the Australian Superannuation Guarantee ("ASG"). Currently, New Zealanders who have worked in Australia and accumulated compulsory pension contributions under the ASG are unable to repatriate their savings to New Zealand before reaching the Australian age of retirement. Kiwsaver has now been judged mutually compatible with the ASG, allowing savers to transfer their accounts between countries. “Superannuation Minister Nick Sherry estimates that of the $13 billion in ‘lost accounts’ under the ASG, a considerable amount of this money will belong to New Zealanders who have returned home,” Phil Goff said. A Memorandum of Understanding to formalise portability arrangements will be signed in October 2008. Legislation in 2009 will bring the proposed portability regime into effect. The Ministerial meeting also marked progress in other areas including agreements to enable resolution of trans-Tasman civil disputes more effectively and at lower cost; the facilitation of opportunities for businesses to raise capital on both sides of the Tasman at lower cost; and the re-negotiation of the Australia-New Zealand Double Taxation Agreement. Renewable Energy Generation National Policy StatementThe Minister for the Environment, Hon Trevor Mallard, has announced a board of inquiry to review the Cabinet-approved National Policy Statement for Renewable Energy ("NPS"). The board will consist of Dr Royden Summerville QC (chairman, barrister), Geraldine Baumann (legal advisor), Dr Ralph Chapman (academic at Victoria University of Wellington) and Wiri Gardiner (company director). The thrust of the NPS is now well-known, namely 90 percent renewable electricity generation by 2050. Under Part 5 of the Resource Management Act 1991 the Minister for the Environment must elect to appoint a board of inquiry to consider a NPS, or instead notify the proposed NPS and receive submissions himself under a fast track procedure. Having been appointed, the board of inquiry must publicly notify the NPS, receive submissions, conduct hearings and report back to the Minister based on the submissions and hearings. The Minister then recommends the NPS to the Governor-General in Council where it is approved as a regulation. The Minister need not take account of the board in inquiries' report. Once approved a NPS sits at the top of the Resource Management Act hierarchy. For example, all regional policy statements, regional plans and district plans must give effect to a NPS. The Minister for the Environment expects the board of inquiry to begin its work next month. More information on the NPS is available on the Ministry for the Environment's website at http://www.mfe.govt.nz. Hydropower scheme on the Wairau approvedThe Marlborough District Council has granted Trustpower the resource consents required to build its proposed 72MW hydro scheme in the Wairau Valley in Marlborough. The proposed $275 million scheme will take water from the Wairau River and pass it though six power stations, including the existing Branch River hydro scheme, before returning the water to the river some 50km downstream. The full resource consents follow interim consents issued in June 2007 after six months of hearings by a panel of independent commissioners, and a subsequent hearing to determine a wide range of conditions designed to ensure there is minimal adverse impact upon the environment. TrustPower Chief Executive Keith Tempest said “The proposed scheme will provide direct benefits to upper South Island communities and indirect benefits to the rest of New Zealand through the freeing up of electricity currently imported into that region for more efficient use elsewhere. At the same time it will assist New Zealand to meets its targets of increased sustainable generation using local natural resources, with minimal impact on the environment.” Warehouse case continuesAs we speculated in the last Watching Brief, Woolworths has announced it will appeal the Court of Appeal's decision in Commerce Commission v Foodstuffs and Woolworths to the Supreme Court. Foodstuffs is considering its options and has until the end of the month to decide. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PROGRESS OF LEGISLATION |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bills Introduced/Awaiting First ReadingFranklin District Council (Contribution to Funding of Museums) Amendment Bill This Bill seeks to exclude any part of the district of the Franklin District Council that is not within the boundaries of the Auckland Regional Council from calculations of levies payable to the Auckland War Memorial Museum and the Museum of Transport and Technology. Health and Safety in Employment Amendment Bill (No 2) This Bill amends the Health and Safety in Employment Act 1992 to provide clarity regarding collaboration in multi-business workplaces; to ensure consistency with the Evidence Act 2006 in relation to the privilege against self-incrimination; and to provide a funding mechanism through the Health and Safety in Employment levy for the enforcement of the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act 1996 in respect of hazardous substances in places of work. Legal Services Amendment Bill This Bill amends the Legal Services Act 2000 to ensure that victims of crime attending a parole board hearing or coronial inquest are not subject to financial eligibility testing, and that any grants made do not have repayment conditions attached. It also enables the Legal Services Agency to write off legal aid debt where individual circumstances may result in it being inequitable for the Legal Services Agency to seek recovery of a legal aid debt. This decision will be able to be made at any time during the legal proceedings. The Bill also introduces a regulation-making power to enable the Governor-General, subject to specific conditions, by Order in Council to exempt particular classes of persons and proceedings from financial eligibility tests and repayment conditions. Regulations may only be made if the Minister is satisfied that the exemption is in the public interest, facilitates access to justice, or is just and equitable in the circumstances. The exercise of this power will also be subject to parliamentary scrutiny through the Regulations Review Committee. Sale & Supply of Liquor & Liquor Enforcement Bill This Bill amends the Sale of Liquor Act 1989, the Summary Offences Act 1981, and the Land Transport Act 1998 to implement recommendations arising from recent reviews of the sale and supply of liquor to minors, and sale of liquor and liquor enforcement issues. Significant changes include:
The introduction of this Bill was complemented by a Government announcement that the Law Commission will undertake a comprehensive two and a half year review of the sale of liquor laws. Judicature (High Court Rules) Amendment Bill This Bill amends the Judicature Act 1908 principally to repeal and substitute Schedule 2 (the High Court Rules). The content of the new Rules closely follows the content of the existing Rules. The principal focus of the revision is to enhance the accessibility of the rules to all court users. Significant developments under the new Rules include:
Bills Referred To Select CommitteeThe Aquaculture Legislation Amendment Bill was read for the first time and referred to the Primary Production Committee. Submissions close 20 August 2008. The Committee is due to report back on 8 September 2008. The Taxation (International Taxation, Life Insurance, and Remedial Matters) Bill was read for the first time and referred to the Finance and Expenditure Committee. Submissions are not called. The Committee is due to report back on 6 October 2008.
Bills Reported Back / Awaiting Second ReadingAuckland Regional Amenities Funding Bill Bills DelayedThe following Bills have been delayed:
Bills Passed Second Reading / Awaiting Third ReadingEmployment Relations (Breaks and Infant Feeding) Amendment Bill Supplementary Order PapersSOP 222 Policing Bill This SOP postpones the commencement of the Policing Bill until 1 October 2008 and makes some minor drafting amendments. It is made clear that that all offences against the Bill are triable summarily. Bills Passed Third ReadingParliamentary Service Amendment Bill Acts AssentedLawyers and Conveyancers Amendment Act 2008 RegulationsFinancial Reporting Act (Australian Scholarships Group Friendly Society Limited) Exemption Notice 2008 In CommitteeThe Finance and Expenditure Select Committee released a second interim report on the Financial Advisers Bill. Submitters on the Bill are invited to comment on the changes to the Bill contained in the interim report. The Government Administration Select Committee continued hearing submissions on the Copyright (Artists' Resale Right) Amendment Bill. The Health Select Committee heard submissions on a petition from Ann Galloway and 33,011 others, presented by Sue Kedgley MP. The submission seeks a higher budget allocation for aged care workers. The Justice and Electoral Select Committee reported back on the Organised Crime (Penalties and Sentencing) Bill and recommended its passage with amendments. The Law and Order Select Committee examined the Agreement between the Government of Australia and the Government of New Zealand on trans-Tasman Court Proceedings and Regulatory Enforcement. The treaty aims to make it harder for New Zealand citizens to ignore Australian court proceedings and vice-versa. The Law and Order Select Committee has reported back on the Corrections Amendment Bill (No 2) and recommended its passage with amendments. The Committee also reported back on the Serious Fraud Office (Abolition and Transitional Provisions) Bill and recommended, by majority, its passage with amendments. The National Party issued a minority view. The Local Government and Environment Select Committee received a briefing from the Ministry for the Environment on the clean up of New Zealand's most contaminated site at Mapua in Tasman Bay. The Local Government and Environment Select Committee reported back on the Auckland Regional Amenities Funding Bill and, by majority, recommended its passage with amendments. The National Party issued a minority view. The Committee reported back on the Christchurch City Council (Lancaster Park) Land Vesting Bill and recommended its passage with amendments, subject to Office of Treaty Settlements approval. Finally, the Committee reported back on the Dog Control Amendment Bill (No 2) and recommended its passage with amendments. The Primary Production Select Committee heard submissions on the Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 2). The Bill would amend the Fisheries Act 1996 by clarifying the total allowable catch (TAC) which the Minister of Fisheries can set. The Privileges Committee on the night of 18 August heard a question of privilege relating to Rt Hon Winston Peters' disclosures of interest.. At the time of writing the Committee had not released its findings. The Social Services Select Committee reported back on the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families Amendment Bill (No 6) and recommended, by majority, its passage with amendments. The Committee also received a briefing from the Ministry of Social Development on South Auckland issues. The Transport and Industrial Relations Select Committee reported back on the Public Transport Management Bill and, by majority, recommended its passage with amendments. The National Party issued a minority view. In The WingsAustralia - New Zealand Double Taxation Agreement and Trans-Tasman Civil Disputes Judicature Amendment Bill (High Court Rules) Settlement Systems Futures and Emissions Units Bill Superannuation Portability
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
IN CONSULTATION |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
What's New
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LinksThis
publication is intended only to provide a summary of the subject
covered. It does not purport to be comprehensive or to provide legal
advice. No person should act in reliance on any statement contained
in this publication without first obtaining specific professional
advice. If you require any advice or further information on the
subject matter of this newsletter, please contact the partner/solicitor
in the firm who normally advises you, or alternatively contact:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
© Russell McVeagh 2005. All rights reserved.