Members Bill in the name of Sue Moroney (Labour) drawn from the ballot on July 23. The purpose of this bill is to extend paid parental leave to 26 weeks. This bill adds provisions around work contact hours, where working parents are entitled to the flexibility of returning to work for a certain amount of time during the parental leave period without losing their entitlement to paid parental leave. Received first reading on September 16 opposed just by National and ACT and sent to the Government Administration Committee for consideration. A report back is due by March 16. Its continued progress is reliant on the Maori Party and Peter Dunne still supporting the bill. The Government has indicated it will use its veto powers if it does survive to third reading. Some of the of the extensions of coverage proposed in this bill have been incorporated into the Government’s Employment Standards Legislation Bill. Report back deadline pushed back to April 28, 2016. The evenly divided Government Administration Committee failed to agree on whether the Bill should be passed when it did report back on April 28. However, the committee said if the House decided to progress the bill, it recommended a number of changes. These included changing the implementation date to April 2017. It also removed the provision for work contact hours as the Govt has already made these changes. As introduced, the bill would extend the period of paid parental leave from 16 to 26 weeks. However, since its introduction paid parental leave has increased to 18 weeks. On May 25, the bill received its second reading by 61 to 60 with National and ACT opposed. Finance Minister Bill English restated his intention to use his financial veto to stop the bill passing into law. MPs completed the committee stage on June 8 with the Govt slowing progress as part of a general tactic to negate Member’s bills. As expected Finance Minister Bill English vetoed the bill due to its fiscal impact. Third reading debate held on June 29, but the veto prevented a vote being taken and the Bill will not be enacted.Parental Leave and Employment Protection (Six Months’ Paid Leave and Work Contact Hours) Amendment Bill

Introduced under Urgency on Nov 8 and completed its first and second reading on the same day. The Bill  increases paid parental leave to 22 weeks from 1 July 2018, with a further increase to 26 weeks from 1 July 2020. Only ACT voted against the Bill. Labour, NZ First, Greens voted against a National amendment allowing parents to share the entitlement and use it at the same time. They said the amendment was flawed and needed further work, but was an issue worth considering in a future Govt bill. The Govt parties supported another National amendment allowing the proportional increase of  ‘keep in touch’ work provisions. Committee stage completed on Nov 15. Completed its third reading on Nov 30. Parental Leave and Employment Protection Amendment Bill

Introduced on May 28. A revision Bill to update the Partnership Act 1908. Only intended to modernise and remove inconsistencies with no policy changes. First reading on June 11 with no debate due to its status as a review Bill and referred to the Justice Committee. Reported back on Aug 30 with no amendments and MPs satisfied it made no change to law. Second reading and thirding reading on Oct 15 by leave and with all parties in agreement. Partnership Law Bill

Introduced on April 5. A member’s Bill in the name of  Parmjeet Parmar.  It  seeks to provide intellectual property protection rights to advancements that are novel, useful and non-obvious that may or may not qualify as an invention for the standard patent. First reading interrupted on May 16. Parmar indicated the second tier model proposed did not follow the Australian system due to faults with it and in this case alignment was not necessary. Iain Lees-Galloway indicated Labour would oppose the Bill. He said many other countries were abandoning similar systems because they caused problems and tried to solve non-existent issues. First reading again interrupted on July 25 with Government parties indicating they would vote it down and they did so on August 8.  Patents (Advancement Patents) Amendment Bill

Introduced on Nov 3 the bill establishes a single trans-Tasman patent attorney regime. The intent is also to increase competition and modernise the patent attorney occupational framework with single qualification requirements and professional standards. It will enables a single patent application and examination process to be implemented between IP Australia and the Intellectual Property Office of New Zealand. It also changes the grounds on which a person can oppose the grant of a patent. Awaiting first reading. Completed its first reading on Feb 9, 2016 with the support of all parties. Sent to the Commerce Committee for consideration with submissions closing on March 24. Reported back on July 17 with the bill gutted by the select committee. Commerce Minister Paul Goldsmith and his officials came in for stinging criticism from a committee dominated by National MPs. Its main purpose is to implement a single trans-Tasman registration regime for patent attorney remains intact. However its plan to set up a single patent process between NZ and Aust has been dumped. The committee it would have inflicted costs for little benefit and was unlikely to be used. The committee said there was a lack of consultation and officials’ work was “inadequate”. Labour MPs were even more stinging saying the lack of due process was a debacle which has forced the Govt to justify a complete reversal of its original position. Completed its second reading on October 13 with NZ First and Maori Party opposed. Committee stage completed on November 2 with no major changes from the select committee amendments and third reading completed on November 15 with the Maori Party and NZ First still opposed.   Patents (Trans-Tasman Patent Attorneys and Other Matters) Amendment Bill

A member’s bill in the name of Rachel Boyack introduced on Sept 23. The bill requires reporting govt agencies to ensure relevant documents use plain language and appoint plain language officers who are responsible for ensuring the agency’s compliance with the Bill. Completed first reading on Feb 16 and referred to the governance and administration committee with National and Act opposed. Reported back on Aug 12 with National filing a minority report saying the bill was a waste of time and the creation of a new bureaucracy. Second reading on Aug 30 with National and Act opposed, committee stage completed Sept 21. Third reading on Oct 19 with National and Act opposed.  Plain Language Bill

Introduced on May 11. The Bill replaces the Plant Variety Rights Act 1987, reforming the regime and implementing the Crown’s obligations under the Treaty of Waitangi in relation to the plant variety rights regime and obligations under the CPTPP. First reading completed on May 19 with the Greens opposed and sent to the Economic Development, Science and Innovation Committee. Reported back on Nov 19 with a large number of changes. Second reading completed on May 10 with the Greens and Te Paati Māori opposed. Committee stage completed on Nov 9 and third reading on Nov 15 with Labour 64 and National in favour.

Plant Variety Rights Bill

Introduced on December 7, the purpose of the Bill is to enable housing development on 11.69 hectares of land on the Point England Recreation Reserve in Tāmaki in east Auckland. Completed its first reading on December 13 with no opposition and sent to the Local Government and Environment Committee with a shortened report back of April 28. Labour announced it would oppose the Bill, which is part of a treaty settlement, due to the loss of public park space. Reported back on April 13 with Labour filing a minority report opposing the Bill. Completed second reading on May 23. Labour and NZ First opposed and the Greens abstained. Committee stage completed on June 21 with no change in parties positions. Third reading completed on June 27 with Labour and NZ First continuing to oppose and the Greens continuing to abstain. Point England Development Enabling Bill

Allows the Police to charge fees and recover costs for some of it services. Cabinet has agreed this will only apply to vetting services. Given its first reading on November 4 2014 and sent to the Law and Order Committee for consideration by 105 to 16 with the Green and Maori Party opposed. Labour MPs also expressed misgivings saying the changes were originally intended to help meet the costs of policing profit making events such as concerts and sporting matches. They feared the vetting service charges would hit cash-strapped organisations hardest. Submissions closed on Feb 5 2015 with a report due by May 4 2015. Fierce opposition led to the report back deadline being pushed back to June 29 with the Govt indicating it was considering exemptions to the charging regime. Reported back from select committee on June 29 2015 with a number of amendments including tightening of  rules about what could be charged for and how waivers would be issued. Labour, Greens and NZ First all made minority reports strongly opposing the bill. They argued police charges could easily spread and become more expensive. After a year’s delay the Govt took the Bill to second reading on Sept 15 after agreeing with Peter Dunne to exempt charities from the vetting fees. Labour, Greens and NZ First remained opposed due to fears the current plans would be expensive for schools and the charging regime would widen in the future. Committee stage completed on October 12 with a number of amendments to reflect support parties concerns, but maintaining the thrust of the Bill. Third reading completed on November 1 with Labour, Greens and NZ First opposed. Policing (Cost Recovery) Amendment Bill

Introduced on March 20, 2018. The bill repeals and replaces the Privacy Act 1993, as recommended by the Law Commission’s 2011 review of the Act. It overhauls and updates many provisions of the Act. Completed first reading on April 11 and referred to the Justice Committee. All parties in support. The report back  has been extended from Nov 22 to March 13, 2019. Reported back on March 13 with a large number of changes including on organisations and businesses requirement to disclose privacy breaches. The committee rejected submissions calling for a ‘right to be forgotten’. Second reading completed on Aug 7, 2019  with all parties in support. Committee stage completed June 3. Third reading completed on June 24 with all parties in support. Privacy Bill