Weekly Select Committee Business
The Select Committee Office press release for 15 October follows.
SELECT COMMITTEE BUSINESS
8 October 1999 to 15 October 1999
Committee meetings
There were no committee
meetings this week, and no further select
committee
meetings are scheduled.
Reports presented (17)
Education
and Science
Inquiry into the Blueprint for
Change
Inquiry into the Gene Technology Information
Trust
Finance and Expenditure
Inquiry into the
powers and operations of the Inland Revenue
Department
(I. 3i)
Justice and Law Reform
1996/1745 Petition
of D de Jong and 113 others
1996/1962 Petition of Jane
Sarah Kennedy and 11 158 others
1996/2061 Petition of
Gladys Evelyn Phillips and 4797 others
Interim report
on the Degrees of Murder Bill (I. 8b)
Primary
Production
Inquiry into the Cost Benefit Analysis of
the Merger of the
Ministries of Agriculture and Forestry
1996/959 Petition of Donald Percy Coles for Property
Rights in New
Zealand Incorporated
Regulations
Review
Activities of the Regulations Review
Committee during 1999 (I. 16x)
Complaints Relating to
the Accident Insurance (Review Costs and
Appeals)
Regulations 1999 (I. 16w)
Social Services Committee
Inquiry into the Review of the Community Employment
Group
1993/335 Petition of Lynette Neill and
others
1993/322 Petition of Kathryn Mary Staples and
others
Petition 1991/2971 of Michael Ernest Jeavons
and others
Petition 1996/093 of Stephen Plester and
others
Inquiry into sub-standard rural housing in East
Cape and Northland
(I. 11d).
Bills referred to
select committees
No bills were referred to select
committees.
Committee notes
(for further
information on an item, please contact the committee
staff
noted in brackets)
Education and Science
(Graham Hill, Tim Cooper)
The committee has presented a
report on the Blueprint for Change, which
sets out the
Government*s new policy for Research, Science and
Technology.
While the committee agrees that *New Zealand
must be at the forefront of
technological innovation in
building a knowledge economy* * which the
Blueprint
policy is intended to deliver * the report expresses
concern
that the Blueprint does not address the issue of
funding. It questions
how the Blueprint will help to
plug the *brain drain* of talented, young
New Zealand
scientists moving overseas. It also criticises the
language
of the document, which the committee believes is
*generally
incomprehensible and meaningless*.
The
committee has also presented a report on its Inquiry into
the Gene
Technology Information Trust, which was set up
mainly by Crown Research
Institutes with the stated aim
of providing authoritative gene technology
information to
enable New Zealanders to make informed choices about
the
use of such technology. The committee expressed
unease at various aspects
of the trust*s operations,
which *appear to cast doubt on the trust*s
impartial role
as a dispenser of authoritative information*.
Finance
and Expenditure (Nick Aldous, Ainslie Rayner, Louise
Sparrer)
The committee has presented the report on its
Inquiry into the powers and
operations of the Inland
Revenue Department. The report contains
27
recommendations to the Government. Copies are
available from Bennetts
Government
Bookshops.
Primary Production (Bob Bunch)
The
committee reported back on the Petition of Donald Percy
Coles for
Property Rights in New Zealand Inc. and on its
Inquiry into the cost
benefit analysis of the merger of
the Ministries of Agriculture and
Forestry.
Petition of
Donald Percy Coles for Property Rights in New Zealand Inc.
This petition requests that Parliament repeal section 8
of the Forests
Amendment Act 1993. By majority the
committee had no recommendations to
make about the
petition as such, but did report on and
make
recommendations about an issue that arose during the
hearing of evidence
on the petition.
The committee
undertook a survey to establish the cost of
preparing
sustainable forestry management (SFM) plans and
permits, and the impact of
this cost on the economic
viability of timber harvesters.
The results of the survey
showed that the average cost of preparing an SFM
plan had
trebled each year in the period from 1995 to 1997, and that
just
over 40 percent of respondents indicated that costs
had a *high* or *very
high* impact on their
profitability.
The committee noted that the data need to
be handled with some caution,
but that the survey
suggests widespread concern at the rising cost
of
preparing SFM plans and permits. The report notes the
response to the
survey by the Ministry of Agriculture,
which attributes some of the high
costs to
misunderstandings about the ministry*s requirements for
SFM
applications.
The committee recommended to the
Government that the ministry do more to
assist those
applying for SFM permits or plans to reduce their
costs,
including providing services and better informing
applicants of the
services it provides. It also
recommended that the ministry be adequately
funded and
resourced to enable it to be pro-active in its advice
and
assistance to applicants.
In a minority report, the
ACT Party supported the contention that some
landowners
had suffered significant losses as a result of the
Forest
Amendment Act 1993 and that the Crown should be
liable for compensation.
Inquiry into the cost benefit
analysis of the merger of the Ministries of
Agriculture
and Forestry
The report on the Inquiry into the cost
benefit analysis of the merger of
the Ministries of
Agriculture and Forestry was also presented.
The
ministries were merged in 1998 following a strategic review
which
indicated that the merger would have significant
benefits. In its 1997/98
financial review of the
Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, the
committee
identified significant issues affecting the operations of
the
ministry arising from the merger. It subsequently
decided to examine the
cost benefit analysis (CBA)
attached to the review*s report and asked the
Controller
and Auditor-General to comment on it.
The Controller and
Auditor-General found that the CBA was
generally
computationally accurate but lacked the
comprehensiveness * in the
determination of costs and
benefits * expected in a CBA. The Controller
and
Auditor-General also noted a number of aspects that were
not
satisfactorily addressed in the CBA, and stated that
merger opportunities
and risks could have been subjected
to a greater degree of both fiscal and
qualitative impact
analysis.
The committee*s report also notes evidence
received from witnesses from
the State Services
Commission and The Treasury, who did not agree with
a
number of points made by the Controller and
Auditor-General.
The committee recommended to the
Government that any future cost benefit
analyses
undertaken as part of the merging or restructuring of
government
agencies contain a statement of the purposes
and extent of the CBA, and
that peer reviews of processes
and methodology take place whenever a CBA
is
undertaken.
Regulations Review (Shelley Banks, Fiona
McLean)
The committee presented two reports to the House.
The first summarises
the Activities of the Committee
during 1999 (I. 16X). The report formally
records
matters that have not been separately reported to the House,
such
as the committee*s consideration of draft
regulations referred by a
Minister of the Crown and its
examination of regulation-making powers in
bills before
other committees.
On Monday, 11 October 1999 the
committee presented its report on
Complaints relating to
the Accident Insurance (Review Costs and
Appeals)
Regulations 1999
(I. 16W). The committee
upheld the complaints of the New Zealand Law
Society and
Philip Schmidt, and the complaint of Michael Gibson in part.
The committee concludes that the regulations are likely
to limit the
ability of applicants to receive
entitlements under the Act; and limit an
applicant*s
ability to access his or her right of review and appeal.
In
the committee*s view, the regulation is not in
accordance with the general
objects and intentions of the
Accident Insurance Act 1998 (and is
therefore contrary to
Standing Order 197 (2)(a)) and trespasses unduly
on
personal rights and liberties (contrary to Standing
Order 197 (2)(b)).
The committee draws the regulation to
the special attention of the House
and recommends that
the Government:
* Review the amounts prescribed in
Schedule 1 of the regulation that
relate to the costs and
expenses on review of the applicant's or another
person's
representation.
*Consult widely about what amounts would
reflect the actual costs of
applying for a review of an
insurer's decision. Such consultation should
include the
New Zealand Law Society, the Legal Services Board
and
Community Law Centres.
Following the review
and consultation process, promulgate new
regulations that
relate to the costs and expenses on review of
the
applicant*s or another person*s representation,
currently prescribed in
Schedule 1 of the
regulation.
The view of National Party members and Rana
Waitai is separately recorded
in the report.
Social
Services (Marie Alexander, Sue Goodwin)
The committee has
reported on its Inquiry into the Review of the
Community
Employment Group. The Community Employment
Group (CEG) was administered
by the Department of Labour
until it became part of Work and Income New
Zealand in
October 1998. Earlier this year the committee became
aware
that a review of the Community Employment Group was
being undertaken by
WINZ. The committee was aware that
there was concern in the community
that insufficient time
had been allowed for the wide range of
organisations with
links to the CEG to be fully involved in the
consultation
process. Given the committee*s knowledge of the work of
the
CEG it decided to inquire into the review by
WINZ.
The committee also reported on its Inquiry into
sub-standard rural housing
in East Cape and Northland.
The committee initiated its inquiry in August
1998
because of its concern about the difficult housing
situations faced
by a number of people in the East Cape
and Northland areas. The committee
visited Northland to
observe the situation first hand and talked to groups
and
organisations. The committee has made a number of
recommendations in
its report. These include
recommending that the Government consider ways
of
improving the uptake of mortgages under the Low Deposit
Rural Lending
Scheme administered by the Housing
Corporation, and recommending that the
Government work
with non-profit organisations that are seeking to assist
M
ori in building houses by assisting the organisations
financially to
increase the number of houses they can
build.
Transport and Environment (David Bagnall, Karen
Smyth)
The Forests Amendment Bill has been the primary
focus for the committee in
recent weeks. However, the
committee has not reported on the bill, and it
will still
be before a select committee when the new Parliament
resumes.
Carrying over of business before select committees
The resolution of the House to carry business
forward to the new
Parliament has been reproduced in the
Notice Paper of Monday, 11 October
1999, and in the
Parliamentary Bulletin and the Journal. All bills
before
select committees that are to be carried over have
now had their
report-back dates extended to 30 June 2000.
This includes those older
bills that did not previously
have report-back dates.
Closing dates for submissions on bills
Submissions are being received on the following bill
with the closing date
shown:
Government
Administration
Parliamentary Service (1 November
1999)
General
You can find further information about
select committees on our web site
at
www.clerk.parliament.govt.nz. If you require additional
information or
have any feedback on the contents, please
contact:
David Bagnall
Parliamentary Officer
(Select Committees)
at
david.bagnall@parliament.govt.nz
Compiled in the Select
Committee Office, Office of the Clerk, 15
October
1999