Home
Search
Site map
FAQ
NZ legislation
Client file
Careers
About the PCO
PAL Project
Links
Archive
Contact us

About this site
Access keys

Archive

Annual Report for the year ended 30 June 2003

Chief Parliamentary Counsel's Overview

Introduction
Role of the PCO
Drafting Bills on the Government’s legislation programme
The drafting of delegated legislation
The impact of the Public Access to Legislation (PAL) Project
Resourcing issues
Concluding comments

Strategic Result Areas

SRA 1—Best practice legislative drafting services
SRA 2—Ready access to New Zealand legislation
SRA 3—Professional services and relationships
SRA 4—Process and system management
SRA 5—Capability management

Financial Statements

Introduction to the Financial Statements
Statement of Responsibility
Statement of Financial Performance
Statement of Movements in Taxpayers' Funds
Statement of Financial Position
Statement of Cash Flows
Reconciliation of Net Surplus to Net Cash Flow from Operating Activities
Statement of Commitments
Statement of Contingent Liabilities
Statement of Unappropriated Expenditure
Statement of Departmental Expenditure and Appropriations
Notes to the Financial Statements
Statement of Accounting Policies
Statement of Objectives and Service Performance
Report of the Auditor-General

Appendices

Legislative framework
Mission statement
Vision statement
Organisational chart
PCO staff
Gender equity
How to contact us

CHIEF PARLIAMENTARY COUNSEL'S OVERVIEW

For the year ended 30 June 2003

Introduction

George Tanner, Chief Parliamentary Counsel. This is the report for the Parliamentary Counsel Office (PCO) for the 2002/03 year. The report is in 3 sections. The first section contains a brief description of the work of the PCO. It also addresses the significant issues for the Office in the year under review. The second section reports on the performance of the PCO against the Strategic Result Areas identified in the PCO’s Business Plan for the year. The third section contains the audited financial statements and auditor’s report for the 2002/03 year.

Role of the PCO

The Statement of Intent for the PCO for the 2003/04 year describes the outcome of the Office as contributing to parliamentary democracy under the rule of law by supporting Parliament and the Executive in their law-making roles and contributing to the Government’s objectives by—

The PCO is a statutory office of Parliament. It carries out 2 principal statutory functions. These functions are reflected in the PCO’s output classes: Law Drafting Services and Access to Legislation. Under the output class Law Drafting Services, the PCO drafts Government Bills for introduction into Parliament and drafts amendments to Bills during their passage through Parliament. The PCO drafts some Members’ Bills at the direction of the Attorney-General in cases where there is a high probability that the Bill will receive sufficient support in Parliament to become law. The PCO also provides legislative drafting advice to the promoters of Private Bills and Local Bills.

The PCO drafts the Statutory Regulations made by the Governor-General by Order in Council. It also drafts other executive legislation made by Ministers of the Crown and others under powers delegated by statute.

Under the output class Access to Legislation, the PCO publishes in printed form official versions of Acts of Parliament, Statutory Regulations, and reprints of Acts of Parliament and some Statutory Regulations. The PCO also publishes and supplies printed copies of Bills and Supplementary Order Papers (SOPs) to the House. The PCO makes this material available for public sale and on subscription. It also provides, through an arrangement with a commercial publisher, access to up-to-date unofficial versions of legislation free via the Internet.

The legislative framework for the PCO is described in more detail in the Appendices to this report.

The PCO has a mission statement and a vision statement. The PCO produced an annual Business Plan for the year under review. It also produced a Departmental Forecast Report for the 2002/03 year. The operations of the PCO are reported against the Business Plan and the Departmental Forecast Report. For the 2003/04 year and subsequent years, the PCO is required to have a Statement of Intent. The Statement of Intent amalgamates into a single document the Business Plan and the former Departmental Forecast Report. The Business Plan component covers a 3-year horizon. Subsequent reports will evaluate the work of the PCO against this single planning document. The mission and vision statements are set out in the Appendices to this report.

Matters of particular significance in the year under review were as follows:

Drafting Bills on the Government’s legislation programme

At the end of each calendar year, the Government seeks submissions from Ministers and their departments to include Bills in the legislation programme for the next year. Those submissions, or “bids”, are then allocated a priority on the Government’s legislation programme by Cabinet in accordance with 5 categories. Those categories are—

  1. Bills that must be passed as a matter of law
  2. Bills that must be passed
  3. Bills to be passed if possible
  4. Bills to proceed to a select committee
  5. Bills for which instructions are to be provided to the Parliamentary Counsel Office.

The legislation programme determines the priority accorded by the PCO to the drafting of Government Bills. It also assists departments in allocating resources to the development of the policy to which Bills will ultimately give effect. Bills in Category 1 are those that must be passed to ensure continuity of supply (such as the Annual Appropriation and Imprest Supply Bills and the Bill that prescribes the annual rates of income tax) and those confirming or validating important delegated legislation that would otherwise lapse. Bills in Category 2 are those that the Government requires to be drafted and passed for legal or other reasons that reflect the importance the Government attaches to the implementation of particular policies. Bills are included in Category 3 also as a measure of their significance. Bills in the remaining categories have lesser significance and will be drafted subject to the drafting of Bills with higher priorities.

The PCO drafts all Bills in Category 1 and as many Category 2 and 3 Bills for which it receives instructions. The drafting of Bills in Categories 4 and 5 is dependent on the PCO receiving instructions from departments and on the time and resources available.

The legislation programme changes constantly during the year. Bills are added to the programme to deal with new political or legal issues that arise. The proportion of new Bills added to a legislation programme can be significant: in 1997 it was 50%, and in 1999 it was 30%. The Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Bill is a particular example that illustrates the point. The Bill was drafted, introduced, and enacted in 2002 in response to a crisis in the residential home building industry. It is not unusual for work on a particular Bill to be suspended in order to draft a Bill that is given a high priority by the Government. The PCO, like the legislative drafting offices in other countries, has to be sufficiently well resourced to be able to draft not just the Bills on the legislation programme at the beginning of the year, but also those Bills that get added to the programme with high priorities. The resourcing of the PCO is discussed later in this report.

The drafting of delegated legislation

Previous reports have tended to say little about delegated legislation. Most of the focus has been on the drafting of Bills. The PCO estimates that about 60% of its drafting resources is committed to the drafting of primary legislation, that is, Bills that become Acts of Parliament, and that about 40% of its resources is applied to the drafting of delegated legislation, principally Statutory Regulations.

Unlike the legislation programme for Bills, there is no equivalent programme for Statutory Regulations. The PCO is, however, able to anticipate to some extent the requirements that will be placed on it to draft Statutory Regulations through liaison with departments and with the knowledge it has of requirements and patterns in previous years.

Delegated legislation, or executive legislation as it is sometimes called, is an important part of most legislative regimes. Few statutes do not provide for the making of Statutory Regulations or some other form of delegated legislation. Statutory Regulations are the principal form of delegated legislation. They are, in most cases, made by the Governor-General by Order in Council following consideration by Cabinet. Some instruments are Statutory Regulations even though they are not described as such and are made by another person or body. Examples include certain notices given by Ministers of the Crown, exemptions under the Securities Act 1978 granted by the Securities Commission and exemptions under the Takeovers Act 1993 granted by the Takeovers Panel, Orders in Council that bring Acts of Parliament into force, and rules of court. The PCO drafts all Statutory Regulations that are published in the annual Statutory Regulations series. It expects to draft between 300 and 400 Statutory Regulations in a calendar year. As the Table of comparative figures for printed legislation indicates, that number has been exceeded in recent years. This number of Statutory Regulations does not represent an attempt by the Government to use delegated legislation to provide legislative solutions to issues that it is unable to have dealt with by statute law but rather, the number reflects the increasing complexity of modern society where the range of matters for which legislation in some form is required is constantly increasing.

Acts of Parliament deal with matters of higher policy, including significant changes to existing policy, and matters that materially impact on individual rights and liberties. Statutory Regulations typically deal with the detailed implementation of the policy contained in statutes. That is not always the case. Some statutes contain very wide regulation-making powers.

In general, Statutory Regulations tend to be uncontroversial and do not attract the high level of public attention that many Bills do. Nevertheless, delegated legislation can have a more direct impact on the citizen than the statute under which it is made. It is often difficult for the framers and drafters of legislation to draw the boundary between primary and delegated legislation. Statutory Regulations are not subject to parliamentary and public scrutiny before they are made in the same way that Bills are. They are essentially the work of the executive branch of government.

Statutory Regulations are, however, subject to scrutiny by the Regulations Review Committee of Parliament. The committee reviews all Statutory Regulations and considers complaints about them from the public. The Committee may draw the attention of the House to Statutory Regulations that are considered to breach any of the grounds stated in Standing Order 382. Statutory Regulations are also subject to disallowance under the Regulations (Disallowance) Act 1989. These are powerful safeguards. The courts provide another important safeguard on the exercise of delegated law-making power. Delegated legislation may be struck down by the courts on a number of grounds.

As with primary legislation, delegated legislation is based on sound legal principles, consistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights, effective, and accessible. For these reasons, Statutory Regulations are drafted by the PCO with the same degree of professional skill and care required for primary legislation.

The commencement of a new Act of Parliament may require the drafting of several different sets of Statutory Regulations.

The drafting of Statutory Regulations may take place over a number of years. The Family Courts Rules 2002 took 5 years to draft, and involved up to 5 drafters.

Delegated legislation deals with as wide a range of subjects as primary legislation does. Some is comparatively minor, such as prescribing fees and forms. Other delegated legislation deals with important matters, such as rules governing foreign investment, immigration, securities trading, and measures to give effect to resolutions of the United Nations Security Council under the United Nations Act 1946 that require the imposition of sanctions and related measures.

The drafting of the rules of procedure for New Zealand’s courts is undertaken by the PCO. The High Court Rules were enacted as a schedule of the Judicature Act 1908. They were drafted by a former Chief Parliamentary Counsel, Walter Iles, CMG, QC. Under section 51C of the Judicature Act 1908, amendments to the High Court Rules are made by the Governor-General by Order in Council with the concurrence of the Chief Justice and 2 other members of the Rules Committee, of whom at least 1 is a High Court Judge. The rules that govern the civil and criminal procedure of the Court of Appeal are made in the same manner as for the High Court Rules and there is a similar procedure for the rules that apply in the District Courts.

The Rules Committee is chaired by a High Court Judge, and includes among its members the Chief Justice, High Court and District Court Judges, the Solicitor-General, senior legal practitioners, and a representative of the Department for Courts. The Chief Parliamentary Counsel is not a member of the Rules Committee, but attends its regular meetings along with other counsel. Rule changes deal with all aspects of the practice and procedure of the Court of Appeal, the High Court, and the District Courts.

In the year under review, new rules were made for the High Court and District Courts relating to the payment of disbursements in court proceedings, the representation of incapacitated persons, and the discontinuance of proceedings. At the same time, substantial work has been done on revising the rules applying in the High Court relating to the discovery of documents, interlocutory proceedings, and appeals to the High Court from District Courts and tribunals, and incorporating much of the current case management practice direction into the rules.

The drafting of these rules may be regarded by some as specialised and possibly arcane. It is, however, important work in assisting in improving access to justice and the efficient operation of the courts. The PCO drafts the rules for other courts, including the Family Courts Rules 2002, the Employment Court Regulations 2000, and the Maori Land Court Rules 1994.

The Table of significant legislation drafted lists some of the significant Statutory Regulations drafted by the PCO in the period under review.

The impact of the Public Access to Legislation (PAL) Project

The Public Access to Legislation (PAL) Project aims to integrate systems and processes for the drafting of legislation as well as the publication of legislation in both printed and electronic form. An important outcome of the project is for the Crown to own and maintain an electronic database of legislation that is made publicly available free via the Internet.

Stage 1 of the project involved initial scoping, identification of user requirements and functional specifications, and product selection. Stage 1 was completed in December 2001. Work on Stage 2 of the project commenced in April 2002. The PCO entered into a contract with Unisys New Zealand for the implementation of both stages of the project.

The PAL Project has again placed significant demands on the PCO during the course of the year. These demands were exacerbated when the new PAL systems were not able to be commissioned on the planned go-live date of 17 February 2003. The work undertaken on the project, and the consequences of the delays in the project, are described in more detail in the section of this report dealing with Strategic Result Area 2 (Ready Access to New Zealand Legislation).

While the early part of the project principally involved the PAL Project team, the later stages of the project have impacted on the whole office. This is particularly true of the effort required to gear up for the planned go-live date. A number of drafting and support staff were involved in testing work in the second half of 2002 and early 2003, and all drafting and support staff were trained in the new systems in December 2002 and January 2003.

The contribution required from staff has been particularly challenging because of the need to balance the demands of the PAL Project with the need to maintain business as usual. It was originally planned to take advantage of the anticipated slowdown in legislative output during the 2002 election period. Detailed planning for Stage 2, therefore, proceeded on the assumption that the general election would be held towards the end of the last Parliament, in October/November 2002, thus making resources available over that period for user acceptance testing of the new systems, the training of drafters and support staff, and the migration of work in progress (including Bills before the House) into the new systems.

The holding of an early general election on 27 July 2002 meant that the implementation of the Government's post-election legislation programme in the latter half of 2002 made heavy demands on PCO drafters and support staff, and Office of the Clerk staff, particularly in the lead-up to Christmas.

Pressures were also placed on drafting resources as a result of the secondment of a PCO drafter to work full-time on the development of user acceptance testing scripts and to manage user acceptance testing. The recruitment of 2 members of the Information Services Team to head the Prepublication Unit and the Reprints Unit placed additional demands on support services. The need to respond to queries and comments arising out of the availability of the interim website of legislation, and increased interest in the legislative process and the work of the PCO, has added to those demands.

The consequences of the delay in the completion of the PAL Project have also been significant and given rise to much additional work. This work has included-

While it may be said that these are matters that can inevitably be expected to arise when a major or complex information technology (IT) project encounters difficulties, it is nevertheless the case that they have increased the workload of key staff who are already carrying significant project and other responsibilities. An additional consequence of the project delay is that these staff members will have to spend a longer period away from their normal work as drafters, information systems specialists, or other respective roles.

Efficient access to legislation is an important component of the basic infrastructure of a modern society. Significant improvements in the provision of timely public access to up-to-date legislation in both printed and electronic form cannot be achieved without harnessing modern technology in the drafting, publishing, and reprinting processes. In doing so, New Zealand is moving in the same direction as a number of other countries.

Resourcing issues

Recruiting and retaining well-qualified lawyers with an interest in, and aptitude for, legislative drafting has been identified as a critical issue for the PCO in successive annual reports, Budget Estimates documents, and in answers to select committee estimates and financial review examination questions. It is difficult, if not impossible, to match resources to demand in a scientific way. Priorities and timetables change constantly. Governments that have ambitious legislation programmes inevitably place substantial demands on their law drafters. Demand for the drafting of Bills can, despite having a legislation programme, be unpredictable. The work involved in drafting a particular Bill or set of Statutory Regulations is affected by a number of factors. These include-

The PCO has 25 drafters. At the time of writing this report, 3 drafters are on parental leave, 1 drafter is on full-time secondment to the PAL Project, and 1 drafter is on special leave. Combined with the resignation of a drafter in February 2003, this represents a reduction in the office's capacity of about one quarter. That places an unacceptable degree of pressure on available drafting staff. The problem is exacerbated if a team of 3, 4, or 5 drafters has to be assigned to the drafting of a large and complex Bill, like the Local Government Bill, in order to meet the Government's timetable.

There can be downstream consequences. There is a risk that the internal quality assurance and peer review processes will be compromised. The drafting of other Bills or Statutory Regulations has to be suspended, with the result that they do not progress according to their original timetables, even though they may be well advanced. This can be frustrating for Ministers and departments. Most organisations would regard a reduction of around one quarter of their capability as unacceptable.

The PCO has to be properly resourced to be able to cope with reductions in its staffing levels, for whatever reasons. Vacancies in the drafting staff cannot be filled by making temporary appointments. Legislative drafting is specialised legal work. While it may be possible to engage former drafters to work on particular projects, it is an expensive option, there are few of them, and it is dependent on their other commitments. The solution is to have a sufficient number of drafters and support staff so that the PCO can continue to meet demand, even if this means at times having excess capacity.

There has been an increase in appropriation for Output Class 1 (Law Drafting Services) of $1.102m for 2003/04 and $0.990m in outyears. This additional funding is to enable the PCO to recruit additional drafters, provide for remuneration and professional development of existing drafters, and recruit additional support staff. It is also designed to lessen the high drafting work load of the drafting team leaders so that they can devote more time to training new drafters, peer review, liaison with departments, and undertake some management training. In comparison with the size and level of resourcing of drafting offices in overseas jurisdictions, it could not be said that the PCO's resourcing is excessive.

Law drafting is only a part of the process of law making. High-quality legislation is dependent on a range of factors, including careful policy analysis and development, specific and comprehensive instructions, good interaction between the departmental adviser and the drafter, competent drafting, and sufficient time in which to do a professional drafting job. To some, the job of drafting legislation might be perceived as being just a mechanical or technical exercise that requires nothing more than writing down in legal form someone else's ideas. Drafters may, at times, wish that it were so. Applying the analogy to a different context, it would be like saying that all a Judge has to do is listen to both sides of a case then make a decision.

A drafter has to understand every aspect of the policy for a Bill, however complex or technical. He or she has to have a good knowledge of the subject area of the Bill, or quickly acquire it. That may involve anything as diverse as the dynamics of the electricity, building, banking, or insurance industries, local government, the health sector, the Treaty of Waitangi claims settlement process, environmental issues, or the primary sector. Consideration of the range of matters dealt with by the Table of significant legislation shows the breadth of topics. A drafter must also have a complete mastery of all legislation and case law relevant to each Bill he or she drafts, any applicable international law, the Bill of Rights, and the Treaty of Waitangi.

When drafting legislation, Parliamentary Counsel are counsel to the Government and Parliament in their legislative capacities. Part of the task of the drafter is to advise on the structure of proposed legislation and the myriad of legal issues involved, as well as on procedural issues associated with its passage through Parliament.

Drafters have had to take on more of the role of departmental legal adviser than in previous years; a matter addressed in the PCO Statement of Intent for 2003/04 and the subject of inquiry by the Justice and Electoral Committee at the 2003/04 Estimates hearing. The work of the legislative drafter has become more demanding.

For these reasons, the loss of a significant proportion of the PCO's capacity plus the pressures of the PAL Project present considerable difficulties. Not only is there pressure on existing resources, the PCO is also unable to devote time and resources to priority projects and strategic objectives identified in its Business Plan and Statement of Intent. These include completing a second revision of the Drafting Manual, organising structured courses for departmental officials and solicitors, and researching and adopting improved drafting techniques and practices.

The focus of the PCO has been almost entirely on meeting demand for the drafting of Bills and Statutory Regulations. The PCO was responsible in the 2002 calendar year for the drafting of over 6 000 pages of legislation. That is a significant achievement in light of resources committed to the PAL Project and the problems associated with it.

Concluding comments

In the year under review, the operations of the PCO have been dominated by the PAL Project. In the first half of the year, a substantial amount of work was involved with project implementation. In the second half of the year, the focus shifted to the implications of delay of the go-live date and on the resulting technical and commercial issues. At the time of writing this report, a technical review of the project is in progress. The review is directed to providing an independent assurance that the PAL Project systems are operationally stable, maintainable, and capable of future enhancement and development. The results of that review will influence the Government's decisions about the future of the project.

Many staff have made substantial contributions to the project in difficult circumstances. The annual report for the 2001/02 year stated that the "project continues to track according to plan, and to meet timeline and budget milestones". Clearly, that is not the situation now. The PAL Project Director, Geoff Lawn, and his team have been stretched in ways that they neither anticipated nor welcomed. They are to be commended for the professional and dedicated way in which they have worked towards resolving the problems with the project and in remaining positive about a way forward.

The work of the 3 drafting team leaders deserves particular comment. They are senior and able lawyers as well as being very fine drafters. They have the challenging task of managing the drafting work of their teams and of drafting complex legislation themselves. The fact that the PCO has achieved the legislative output referred to later in this report reflects their efforts.

The overall work of the office can be gauged from the material in the next section of this report. All the divisions in the PCO have performed most effectively. The Office has many able lawyers and specialist support staff. The work of the PCO in the year under review reflects their fine contributions. As stated at the beginning of this section, it is a contribution to an effective parliamentary democracy under the rule of law and to the law-making functions of Parliament and the Executive.

STRATEGIC RESULT AREAS

SRA 1—BEST PRACTICE LEGISLATIVE DRAFTING SERVICES

The goals of this SRA are that—

Organisational chart

Drafting services are organised in 3 drafting teams as indicated in the drafting organisational chart. The team leaders report to a Deputy Chief Parliamentary Counsel (Drafting) who has overall responsibility for the delivery of drafting services.

The PCO works in a demand-driven environment. Governments are driven to legislate because that is a manifestation of government in its broadest sense. Legislation is required to give effect to policies that require changes in the law. To enable it to operate effectively and achieve its strategic objective in this environment, the PCO seeks to adopt sound drafting practices that ensure that legislation is clear and effective, to operate effective quality control systems, and to have adequate drafting resources.

Quantity of legislation

The quantity of legislation drafted was again considerable. The following graphs compare the number of Public Acts and the Statutory Regulations made and published in the financial years 1998 to 2003.

Number of Public Acts Enacted
(for the year ended 30 June)

Number of Public Acts Enacted.

Number of Statutory Regulations Made
(for the year ended 30 June)

Number of Statutory Regulations Made.

Number of Public Acts Passed and Statutory Regulations Made
(for the year ended 30 June)

Public Acts Passed and Statutory Regulations Made.

Significant legislation drafted

The following list describes Acts passed and Bills introduced in the year under review. Changes have been made to the Titles and contents of some Bills during the parliamentary process since 1 July 2003.

Animal Products Amendment Act 2002
Border Security Bill
Business Law Reform Bill
Care of Children Bill
Chartered Professional Engineers of New Zealand (Appeals) Regulations 2002
Chartered Professional Engineers of New Zealand Rules 2002; Chartered Professional Engineers of New Zealand Rules (No 2) 2002
Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002
Climate Change Response Act 2002
Construction Contracts Act 2002
Consumer Credit Bill
Corrections Bill
Counter-Terrorism Bill
Crown Organisations (Criminal Liability) Act 2002
Customs Import Prohibition (Dangerous Breeds of Dogs) Order 2003
Education (School Risk Management Scheme) Regulations 2003
Electricity Amendment Regulations 2002
Electronic Transactions Act 2002
Families Commission Bill
Family Courts Rules 2002
Food (Safety) Regulations 2002
Government Communications Security Bureau Act 2003
High Court Amendment Rules (No 2) 2002; District Courts Amendment Rules (No 4) 2002
Independent Police Complaints Authority Amendment Bill
Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation (Code of ACC Claimants' Rights) Notice 2002
Land Transfer Regulations 2002
Land Transport Management Bill
Land Transport (Unauthorised Street and Drag Racing) Amendment Act 2003
Lawyers and Conveyancers Bill
Local Electoral Amendment Regulations 2002
Maori Television Service (Te Aratuku Whakaata Irirangi Maori) Act 2003
Motor Vehicle Sales Act 2003
National Library of New Zealand (Te Puna Matauranga o Aotearoa) Act 2003
New Organisms and Other Matters Bill
New Zealand Symphony Orchestra Bill
New Zealand Trade and Enterprise Act 2003
Ngati Ruanui Claims Settlement Act 2003
Ngati Tama Claims Settlement Bill
Petroleum Products Specifications Regulations 2002
Prostitution Reform Act 2003
Racing Act 2003
Resource Management Amendment Act 2003
Resource Management (Forms, Fees, and Procedure) Regulations 2003
Secondhand Dealers and Pawnbrokers Bill
Securities Markets Amendment Act 2002
Social Security (Personal Development and Employment) Amendment Act 2002
Social Workers Registration Act 2003
Sport and Recreation New Zealand Act 2002
Supreme Court Bill
Takeovers Amendment Act 2002
Te Uri o Hau Claims Settlement Act 2002
Terrorism Suppression Act 2002
Trade Marks Act 2002
Victims' Rights Act 2002
Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Act 2002
Wine Bill

Local and Private legislation

The PCO provided drafting assistance on the following local and private Bills and Acts:

Local Bills and Acts
Private Acts

Factors affecting the drafting of legislation

The table of significant legislation does not show—

Other work carried out by Parliamentary Counsel

In addition to drafting, Parliamentary Counsel have also—

At the request of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Ross Carter presented a paper on New Zealand's legislative responses to UN Security Council Resolution 1373 at the Pacific Island Regional Workshop on Combating Terrorism. The Workshop, held in Honolulu, Hawaii from 25 to 27 March 2002, was jointly hosted by the Governments of the United States of America, Australia, and New Zealand, and the Pacific Forum Secretariat. This has led to other drafting assistance being provided to Pacific Islands governments.

Issues

Plain language drafting

This is an on-going issue for legislative drafting offices throughout the Commonwealth and elsewhere. The PCO is committed to clear drafting (often called "plain language drafting" or "plain English drafting") and aims to be at the cutting edge of clear drafting. Clear drafting practices are evolving in New Zealand and compare favourably to Australian practices in terms of progress and innovation.

Structure of Bills

There is no absolute rule of practice as to the number of Parts into which a Bill is divided. If drafters are left to make their own decisions about the number of Parts in a Bill, the number of Parts will vary depending on the size and complexity of the Bill, and on the drafter's own approach to structure. In some cases, the responsible Minister will express a preference.

For example,—

Another feature of structure is the use of subparts within Parts. For example, the Ngati Ruanui Claims Settlement Act 2003 divides Part 5 into 9 subparts.

The division of a Bill into as few Parts as possible assists the passage of the Bill through Parliament. In the committee of the whole House stage, Bills are debated Part by Part rather than clause by clause. It is an incentive for governments to have their Bills in few Parts because it reduces the overall debating time. The division of Bills into Parts can assist readers. Related provisions can be grouped together in separate Parts. And those Parts can be arranged in a logical and structured way reflecting their importance, or in some other principled way. The sensible arrangement of provisions in Bills should not, however, be compromised by the idiosyncrasies of parliamentary procedure. This is a parliamentary, rather than a governmental, problem and it ought to be addressed in that context. The structure of Bills is a subject addressed elsewhere.1

1See George Tanner, QC, Confronting the Process of Statute Making, Legal Research Foundation Seminar, The Statute: Making and Meaning, Auckland, 16 May 2002.

Purpose provisions

Purpose provisions in primary legislation are now commonplace and are sometimes complemented by overview provisions. The most common forms of purpose provisions are—

Particular challenges for drafters are—

Titles of Bills

The Titles of Bills continue to attract attention during the committee of the whole House stages of Bills. Opposition parties frequently move amendments to Title clauses in Bills, and occasionally the Government does so as well. The issue usually arises with a Bill that amends an existing Act. An example of a Title of an amending Act is the Education (Tertiary Reform) Amendment Act 2002. It is usually the descriptors in parentheses, or lack of them, that causes most of the debate.

The sort of claim often heard in the debating chamber of the House is that the Title of a particular Bill is uninformative or even misleading. Occasionally, the language is more robust and words like "deceit" and "outrage" are used during Title debates in the Chamber. A related challenge for drafters is to avoid Titles that are more political rhetoric than helpful to users of legislation.

In omnibus Bills (eg, the Border Security Bill), the Title tends to be redundant because it is usually replaced by a break-up Supplementary Order Paper that divides the Bill into separate Bills during the later part of the committee of the whole House stage of a Bill.

Some examples of Titles from the reporting period are—

SRA 2—READY ACCESS TO NEW ZEALAND LEGISLATION

The goal of this SRA is that—

Overview

This section reports on the following matters:

Public Access to Legislation (PAL) Project

Objectives

The objectives of the PAL Project are:

The PCO is undertaking the project in collaboration with the Office of the Clerk and the Tax Drafting Unit of the Inland Revenue Department (IRD). Unisys New Zealand Ltd (Unisys) is the PCO's implementation partner for the project.

The PAL Project is being undertaken in 2 stages. Stage 1, which involved project planning, scoping and analysis, and evaluation and selection of system components, was completed in December 2001. The PCO's annual report for 2001/02 outlines the work undertaken in Stage 1, and the transition to Stage 2.

Background information about the PAL Project is available on the PCO's website at www.pco.parliament.govt.nz/pal/.

Stage 2

Stage 2 involves implementation of the new systems and processes to improve public access to legislation. The individual projects that make up Stage 2, which include both Unisys-led projects and PCO-led projects, are outlined in the PCO's annual report for 2001/02.

Stage 2 began in April 2002, and was scheduled for completion in early 2003. As a result of technical and commercial issues, the project has been delayed, and remains uncompleted at the end of the reporting period covered by this report. The following outlines the work undertaken during the reporting period, the issues giving rise to the delay in the project, the steps being taken to address those issues, and the consequences of the delay.

Work undertaken in 2002/03

Over the last 12 months, the following activities have been carried out:

The following comments expand on some of these items of work.

Interim website

Under the PCO/Unisys contract for Stage 2, Brookers (from whom an electronic database of New Zealand legislation has been acquired) undertook to host and maintain a temporary website of New Zealand legislation.

The interim website (at www.legislation.govt.nz) provides free public access to unofficial versions of New Zealand statutes (Public, Local, and Private Acts) and Statutory Regulations. Users can search and browse this material free of charge. The website is updated monthly by Brookers. If the PAL Project is completed, this website will be replaced by a PCO website that will provide free public access to New Zealand legislation, including Acts, Statutory Regulations, Bills, and Supplementary Order Papers.

The interim website was launched on 9 September 2002 by the Attorney-General, the Hon Margaret Wilson. The availability of the interim website was widely publicised.

Statistics provided by Brookers indicate that the interim website is being used extensively by a wide range of users, and that usage is steadily increasing. Overall activity almost tripled over the period 9 September 2002 to 30 June 2003. The total number of hits on the website per month increased from around 816 000 in September 2002 to over 3.6 million in June 2003, the total number of page requests per month increased from 183 000 to 585 000 over that period, and the total number of visitors to the website per month increased from nearly 36 000 to over 101 000. These statistics provide valuable information on likely demands on the new PCO legislation website. They also reflect the level of domestic and international interest in New Zealand legislation.

In the initial period after the launch of the interim website, the PCO received and responded to a large number of enquiries from members of the public about the interim website, the legislative process, or legislation-related issues. The number of enquiries has now decreased, but it is clear that, if the project proceeds, the PCO will need to put in place an ongoing procedure for dealing with public enquiries that arise out of the availability of New Zealand legislation in electronic form, and the higher profile that legislation, the legislative process, and the PCO will have as a result of the PAL Project.

Development of new PAL website

The principal purpose of the new PAL website, which is designed to replace the interim website, is to provide the public with access to up-to-date versions of the law, as well as Bills. However, it will need to cater for a wide variety of users of legislation, ranging from occasional users with little understanding of legislation, to specialist users, like librarians, who expect more sophisticated features and advanced searching capabilities. It is particularly challenging to strike the right balance between making the website useable for non-specialist users, while meeting the needs of more sophisticated users.

As part of developing the new PAL website, the PCO undertook some limited but valuable consultation with users of legislation. The original website designs were workshopped in May 2002 with 2 small groups: a group of public and private sector librarians, and a group comprising representatives of a range of community organisations. This consultation highlighted the fact that if the new website is to be useable by non-specialist users, a more basic approach to design and language must be taken. It also indicated that many users need to be guided through the process of locating material. As a result, the original website designs were simplified, a guided search facility was developed, and a simpler approach to browsing material was adopted.

The website also provides an opportunity to increase public knowledge of legislation and the legislative process. To this end, the PCO has developed a glossary of terms to explain some of the more basic legal terms, and a simple guide to how laws are made.

Delays in the PAL Project

Stage 2 of the PAL Project was scheduled to go live on 17 February 2003. In preparation for go-live, training materials for the new PAL systems were developed, and training sessions were held in December 2002 and January 2003 for PCO drafting, secretarial, IT, and PPU staff, drafting and secretarial staff from the Tax Drafting Unit of the Inland Revenue Department, and relevant Office of the Clerk staff.

However, after initial user acceptance testing undertaken in early 2003, it was decided to defer the commissioning of the new PAL systems to allow time for further testing and review. It is critical that the new systems are operating fully and reliably before they are commissioned, to ensure the guaranteed supply of legislation for Parliament and the public. The complexity of New Zealand legislation (in terms of structure and format), and the complexity of the process by which New Zealand legislation is enacted, require a highly customised and integrated authoring and publishing system to achieve the objectives of the PAL Project. This is particularly true for Bills, which pass through a number of stages at which amendments can be made and must be incorporated and identified.

Since the initial testing, the PCO and Unisys have sought to identify the work required before the new PAL systems can be brought into operation. This work centres principally on format and layout issues, as well as a number of systems issues. Commercial issues also require resolution as a result of the delay in the implementation of the project.

In early May 2003, the Government established a process to enable decisions about the future of the project to be made. Cabinet authorised the Attorney-General, the Minister of Finance, and the Minister of State Services to oversee discussions with Unisys, and authorised officials from the Treasury and the State Services Commission to work with the PCO in discussions with Unisys and to report regularly to Ministers.

In late May 2003, as a result of issues identified during an independent review of a revised project plan for the completion of the project, Ministers directed that an independent technical review of the PAL solution be carried out. The objective of the review is to obtain independent assurance that the PAL systems will be operationally stable, maintainable, and capable of future enhancement and development. The review focuses in particular on the customisation of the individual components of the new system, and the integration of the components into the overall system.

The technical review is being undertaken by a small team from InQuirion Pty Ltd, led by Dr Timothy Arnold-Moore. Dr Arnold-Moore is a world expert in the development of legislative drafting and publishing systems, and was a major contributor to the Tasmanian EnAct system (www.thelaw.tas.gov.au). Dr Arnold-Moore and other InQuirion staff have undertaken consulting assignments on legislative drafting systems in various jurisdictions, including Canada, Australia, and Papua New Guinea.

The Government has indicated that it will not make further decisions about the future of the PAL Project, including further investment in the project, until the technical review is completed and its findings considered. A final report from the technical reviewer is expected in early October 2003. Unisys is participating fully in the review.

Consequences of delay to PAL Project

The delay in the implementation of the PAL Project has had a number of flow-on effects, and a number of interim arrangements have had to be put in place until the future of the PAL Project is decided.

The arrangements with Legislation Direct for the provision of pre-press services were originally due to expire on 31 January 2003, since prepublication was to have been undertaken in-house by PCO from that date using the new PAL systems. The arrangements with Legislation Direct have therefore been extended, and PCO PPU staff who were recruited from Legislation Direct are being made available to Legislation Direct on a rostered basis so that the level of service required by the PCO and the Office of the Clerk is maintained. In the meantime, PCO drafters and support staff continue to use the existing WordPerfect-based drafting system, including the revision-tracking facility introduced in the 2001/02 financial year.

The PCO entered into arrangements with the Carson Group for the provision of professional project management and project office services to the PCO for the duration of the PAL Project. These arrangements have also been extended.

Additional funding of $1.044 million (GST inclusive) was provided in the 2002/03 financial year to fund the continuation of pre-press services from Legislation Direct, and continuing project management support from the Carson Group.

The delays in the PAL Project have not affected the provision of printed copies of legislation, but have obviously prevented the PCO from using the new systems to make electronic versions of legislation available to the public. Arrangements have therefore been made with Brookers to continue to host and maintain the interim website of legislation. In addition, the PCO has come to an arrangement with The Knowledge Basket to make Bills publicly available free of charge on the Knowledge Basket website (www.knowledge-basket.co.nz/gpprint/docs/welcome.html). Only Bills introduced into Parliament since the start of 2003, and Bills that have progressed to a further stage in the legislative process since then, are available from this source.

Establishment of new Prepublication and Reprints Units

Two new units have been established within the PCO as part of the PAL Project.

A new Prepublication Unit will undertake the prepublication and publication functions currently undertaken by Legislation Direct. This includes ensuring that all electronic files of legislation and other PCO publications are properly structured and formatted before publication, transmitting those files to the contracted printer for publication in hard copy, and uploading those files to the new PAL website.

A new Reprints Unit will be responsible for the officialisation of the legislative database acquired from Brookers, the production of hard copy reprints of Acts and Statutory Regulations in accordance with a new reprints policy and annual reprints programme, and (when officialisation of the database of legislation has been completed) the maintenance of that database. Officialisation is the process of converting the database into the style and format in which it can be made an official source of New Zealand legislation.

Last bound volume of reprints published

The last bound volume in the Reprinted Statutes of New Zealand Series (Volume 42) was published in early 2003. From now on, the PCO will publish individual pamphlet copies of reprints of Acts and Statutory Regulations.

Because of the delays to the PAL Project, the PCO did not settle a formal reprints programme for the 2002/03 financial year. However, the new Reprints Unit has begun work on producing reprints in accordance with an interim reprints programme. This interim programme focuses on reprinting best-selling Acts and Statutory Regulations.

New contract for legislative printing

New arrangements for the printing, distribution, and sale of legislation have been made with Securacopy (a subsidiary of Blue Star Print Group). These arrangements came into force on 1 February 2003. The arrangements replace those previously in place under the parliamentary printing contract between the Blue Star Print Group, the Office of the Clerk, and the PCO. That contract, which had been in place since 1994, replaced a similar contract entered into when the Government Printing Office was sold in 1989 to the Rank Group.

The arrangements with Securacopy were intended to complement the new PAL arrangements, under which responsibility for the printing of legislation would transfer from the Office of the Clerk to the PCO, and the PCO would assume responsibility for all prepublication work on legislation for PCO, Office of the Clerk, and the Tax Drafting Unit of the Inland Revenue Department. On that basis, funding for the printing of legislation was appropriated to the PCO as from 1 February 2003. The delays to the PAL Project do not affect these new arrangements.

Changes to the Standing Orders of the House of Representatives were made in late 2002 by way of Sessional Order to reflect the change in responsibility for the printing of Bills. Responsibility for providing copies of a Bill for circulation on its introduction is now with the member in charge of the Bill. In the case of a Government Bill, this responsibility is discharged by the PCO on behalf of the Minister in charge of the Bill. In the case of a member's Bill, this responsibility is discharged by the Clerk of the House on behalf of the member, under an arrangement between the Office of the Clerk and the PCO. The PCO and the Office of the Clerk are now operating on the basis of these provisions of the Standing Orders.

As part of the new printing arrangements, Legislation Direct now provides a website that lists new legislation (Acts, Bills, Supplementary Order Papers, and Statutory Regulations) published in the current year (www.legislationdirect.co.nz). The website is updated weekly, and provides the facility to order copies of legislation online.

SRA 3—PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AND RELATIONSHIPS

The goals of this strategic result area are that—

Cambridge Conference

In July 2002, 3 parliamentary counsel attended a conference at Peterhouse College, Cambridge, United Kingdom, on the language of the law, sponsored jointly by Clarity (an international association promoting plain legal language) and the Statute Law Society. The conference considered the use of plainer language in legislation and in legal documents of other kinds, but most of its attention was directed to the drafting of legislation.

Papers were given by drafting experts from a number of jurisdictions, including the United Kingdom, Australia, the United States, Canada, and Ireland. Each paper was followed by a discussion or workshop, and the Chief Parliamentary Counsel of New Zealand chaired one of the sessions.

The conference was both a good opportunity for legislative drafters from different jurisdictions to learn from each other of new developments and techniques and an occasion that reinforced the commitment of the participants to continue the often difficult task of trying to express complex legal propositions in language that is at once precise and plain.

Regulations Review Committee Digest

During the year, the Faculty of Law at Victoria University published the Regulations Review Committee Digest. Both the PCO and the Office of the Clerk assisted by providing comments and reviewing drafts. The Digest is a comprehensive analysis of the jurisprudence of Parliament's Regulations Review Committee. It outlines the principles applied by the Committee in its work of scrutinising regulations under the various grounds listed in Standing Order 382 of the Standing Orders of the House and illustrates how the Committee applies these principles in practice.

The Digest is a most valuable resource for policy makers in government, legislative drafters, and users of delegated legislation. Publication of the Digest is an important addition to the literature on legislation. The Faculty deserves to be commended for its initiative and the author, Ryan Malone, for his excellent scholarship and sheer hard work. The Digest is available on the Victoria University Law Faculty website at www.lawschool.vuw.ac.nz.

Law School Careers Fair

Two Parliamentary Counsel attended the Victoria University Law School's Career Fair held in March 2003. The fair provides an informal environment in which law students receive information and materials about careers in, and the workings of, various legal organisations. The aim is to raise students' awareness of the range of careers available to those studying law.

Departmental survey

The annual survey of departments and other agencies was undertaken again in June 2003. Twenty-seven departments for whom drafting was undertaken in the year were surveyed. The survey seeks answers to a range of questions to establish satisfaction levels with the drafting product and the overall level of service provided by the PCO.

Fifteen departments responded; a response rate of 55.6%. The satisfaction rate is reported in the Statement of Service Performance included in the financial statements accompanying this report.

The survey is a useful means of measuring performance, but the results can be influenced by a number of factors (not only the quality of the work of the PCO), as has been described in previous annual reports. While the results need to be viewed with caution, the responses from the departments are valuable and drafting team leaders follow up on any issues raised. The level of response to the survey was the worst since the survey began. That is unfortunate because it is one of only a few possible means available to assess the quality of the office's work. The office is grateful to those departments and organisations that responded. The PCO intends to undertake a review of the departmental survey. An alternative system may have to be devised.

Seminars by PCO staff

A number of staff gave presentations at seminars during the year. The Chief Parliamentary Counsel presented a paper entitled Confronting the Process of Statute Making at the New Zealand Legal Method Seminar, The Statute: Making and Meaning, in May 2003.

Bill Moore provided 2 seminars on the role of the instructor to Ministry of Health staff.

Geoff Lawn and Julia Kennedy undertook a presentation on the PAL Project at the GOVIS (Government Information Systems) conference in July 2002, and participated, with the Parliamentary Librarian and the Deputy Clerk of the House, in a forum on parliamentary information, titled The challenge of providing seamless access to Parliamentary information, for the annual conference of the Library and Information Association of New Zealand (LIANZA) in November 2002. They spoke again on this topic at a seminar for Wellington law librarians and special librarians in March 2003. Geoff Lawn also presented a seminar on electronic service delivery to IPANZ (Institute of Public Administration in New Zealand) in August 2002.

PCO and Unisys staff provided a briefing on the PAL Project to the Standing Orders Committee of the House of Representatives in November 2002. The briefing included a demonstration of the new PAL website of legislation.

Overseas visitors

During the year, the PCO hosted several overseas visitors wishing to learn about the PAL Project. Two Japanese legal academics, Dr Professor Makoto Ibusuki, Faculty of Law, Ritsumeikan University, Kyoto, and Professor Takato Natsui, Meiji University, Tokyo, visited the PCO in December 2002. Mr Ryuji Akimoto, Liaison Officer of the Secretary Division, General Secretariat, Supreme Court of Japan, visited the PCO in February 2003.

Increase in public enquiries

One impact of the PAL Project, and the availability to the public of the interim website of legislation, has been the increase in the number of public enquiries received by the PCO. Arrangements have been entered into with the Parliamentary Librarian for all public enquiries that are emailed to the PCO to be dealt with by the Parliamentary Information Service. Enquiries that are outside the scope of the Information Service are referred back to the PCO. A new position of Communications Adviser has been established in the PCO to ensure that proper systems are in place to respond to enquiries and to develop the PCO's non-legislative publications programme, including the PCO website.

PCO website

The PCO website (www.pco.parliament.govt.nz) has been upgraded to comply with the State Services Commission guidelines. A search facility has been provided, the home page has been amended to include a link to the Government Web Portal, text links have been created to all sections of the website, and all publications intended for the public are created in HTML and often also in PDF.

Information provided on the website includes corporate information, updates on PCO projects, links to other drafting offices, and staff vacancies. The Client File provides information specifically tailored to those in government departments and other agencies who provide drafting instructions.

www.pco.parliament.govt.nz/pal is the website that is kept up-to-date for the PAL Project. The GOVIS and LIANZA presentations, referred to above, are available on this website.

PCO Newsletter

The PCO Newsletter continues to be published and is distributed to solicitors in government departments. It is now published only in electronic form and is available in the Client File section of the PCO website.

SRA 4—PROCESS AND SYSTEM MANAGEMENT

The goals of this SRA are that—

PCO Drafting Manual and Style Guide

These 2 important manuals are the repository of much institutional knowledge relating to legislative drafting and PCO work practices. Use of these manuals is an important component of the PCO's quality assurance systems.

The opportunity was taken over the 2002 election period to begin a complete revision of the PCO Drafting Manual. The work is about 80% complete, and it is expected that the manual will be made available during the next financial year in both print and electronic form and on the PCO website.

A revision of the PCO Style Guide was also undertaken in the year under review, and is close to completion.

The diagram below outlines the structure of the PCO's quality assurance system.

Quality Assurance diagram.

Security policy

Work on the PCO's security policy was completed during the year. The development of the policy identified the need for a PCO Security Officer. This role is incorporated into the responsibilities of the Management Support Co-ordinator. The role of the PCO Security Officer includes monitoring compliance with the standards and guidelines for physical security, keeping the policy up-to-date, co-ordinating training in the policy and procedures, and undertaking audits of the operation of the policy. As the Management Support Co-ordinator resigned during the year, the policy will be implemented when a new appointment is made.

Information technology systems

A major focus for the PCO IT team has been on the PAL Project. This has involved the review of a significant amount of system documentation, a test build of the entire PAL system using the system documentation, workshops, and support for the test environments. An additional staff member was recruited to the IT team to assist with helpdesk and general support issues to allow the other members of the IT team to maintain their involvement with the PAL Project.

New hardware was installed during the year, including new file servers and printers. Despite the demands of the PAL Project, the IT team has planned and progressed various other projects. These included the following:

New document management software

As a result of requirements for the PAL Project, the system that manages the administrative and legislation databases was replaced in August 2002 with a new content management system, Documentum. The opportunity afforded by the 2002 general election was used to roll-out the new system. This was a major exercise that involved the migration of over 50 000 documents (including all versions and security settings) from the existing system, iManage, and the provision of training and support for all staff. The roll-out was completed as planned with a seamless transition to the new system.

Proofreading database

This is a new database developed in Microsoft Access 2000 for the Legal Publications Officers within the Editorial Services team. It tracks information about the proofreading of each drafting assignment. It replaces a manual system of recording the number of jobs and the number of pages read by the Editorial Services team.

PCO helpdesk

The PCO helpdesk database was upgraded during the year. It has been converted to Microsoft Access 2000 and has links to the staff database for staff names, and cross-references to hardware and software databases.

IT forum

Three PCO staff attended the IT Forum of the Australasian Parliamentary Counsel's Committee in July 2002. The Forum was held in Sydney and included a demonstration of the new authoring tool that is being implemented in the New South Wales Parliamentary Counsel's Office. The PCO team gave a progress report on the PAL Project.

The Forum is attended by IT, publishing, and drafting staff from federal and state drafting offices in Australia and New Zealand, and provides a valuable opportunity to discuss and exchange ideas about the use of technology in drafting and publishing, and the production of reprints.

Library and records systems

Four projects initiated to strengthen the PCO management of records and the library collection were successfully completed. The project on collection development has led to the purchase of dedicated library software. The framework for a permanent records management solution has been developed with the assistance of Archives New Zealand. Four common-use sets of Statutes and Statutory Regulations have been established. It is expected that the number of sets held in drafters' offices can now be reduced with a corresponding reduction in the costs of providing hard copy legislation.

The PCO Librarian is leading a project to establish a new catalogue of the collection that will better reflect the needs of the PCO. This will entail a reorganisation of the classification system that, with the new software, will make the collection more accessible.

SRA 5—CAPABILITY MANAGEMENT

The goals of this strategic result area are that—

During the year, a number of initiatives were taken to strengthen the PCO. Additional funding was obtained for the recruitment of drafters to strengthen the law drafting capability of the PCO, the Prepublication Unit and the Reprints Unit were established to undertake work that improves access to legislation, and additional support staff were recruited.

Strengthening the Secretarial Services team

In preparation for the implementation of the PAL Project, the Secretarial team was strengthened at the beginning of 2003. This has reduced the ratio of drafters to secretaries, and enabled secretaries to be fully involved with the user acceptance testing programme of the new authoring tool. All secretaries are now fully competent in both the present systems and in Epic, the new authoring tool.

Seminars for PCO staff

The PCO runs a seminar programme for drafters. The PCO is grateful to the contributors from within and outside the PCO who gave generously of their time. In the year under review, the speakers from outside the PCO were Professor Jeremy Waldron (the Maurice and Hilda Friedman Professor of Law at Columbia University, New York, and visiting Professor of Law at Victoria University of Wellington), Wellington barrister David Goddard, QC, Human Rights Commissioner Joy Liddicoat, and Professor J F Burrows from the Law Faculty at Canterbury University.

During the year, a number of drafting demonstrations were provided using the Epic authoring tool that is being customised for PCO use as part of the PAL Project.

Throughout the year, drafters and support staff attended seminars relevant to their work organised by the New Zealand Law Society and other organisations.

Personnel

Retirement of Hugh Turnbull

Hugh Turnbull, ONZM, LLB, MCom, Assistant Compiler of Statutes, retired on 12 February 2003.

Hugh Turnball retirement.

Farewell function for Hugh Turnbull on 12.2.2003. From the left: Assistant Compiler of Statutes, Hugh Turnbull, Mrs Vie Turnbull, and Chief Parliamentary Counsel, George Tanner.

Hugh Turnbull had a long and productive career with the PCO. He started work in the Compilation Department of the PCO in 1947, preparing reprints of Acts and Statutory Regulations. He then worked on the 1957 Reprints of the Statutes of New Zealand (published in 16 volumes), and from 1958 to 1978 was involved in the work of reprinting individual Acts and Statutory Regulations which, over that period, were published in the annual volumes of statutes and regulations. Hugh Turnbull's involvement in compilation work continued with the introduction, in 1979, of the Reprinted Statutes of New Zealand Series (the brown volumes). The last volume in that series, Volume 42, was published in early 2003.

He also collaborated with other compilers in the production, in 1978, of the Western Samoa Statutes Reprint 1920—1977 (consisting of 6 volumes).

On the occasion of Hugh Turnbull's retirement, the Attorney-General moved a motion without notice in Parliament acknowledging his public service, and TV One broadcast a short item about his long career.

Hugh was made an Officer of the New Zealand Order of Merit in the 1999 Queen's Birthday Honours for services to the compilation of legislation. Through his professional skill and dedication, Hugh Turnbull has made a valuable contribution to ensuring the availability of the general statute law of New Zealand.

Drafting staff

Two appointments to the drafting staff were made during the year. Richard Wallace was appointed as a Parliamentary Counsel and Leeanne O'Brien as an Assistant Parliamentary Counsel. Scott Murray and Adrienne Meikle, both Assistant Parliamentary Counsel, were appointed as Parliamentary Counsel.

Access to Legislation staff

During the course of the year, the PCO recruited managers and staff for the new Prepublication Unit and the new Reprints Unit. Both managers were internal appointments. Michelle Antoine was appointed as Prepublication Unit Co-ordinator, and Juliet Price was appointed as Reprints Unit Co-ordinator. Five staff, all of whom were former Legislation Direct employees, were appointed to the new Prepublication Unit, and 3 staff, all of whom were previously employed by legal publishers, were appointed to the new Reprints Unit.

Laurence Ilott was appointed as Publishing Systems Development Adviser. This role involves working closely with the PCO PAL Project Director, the Prepublication Unit and Reprints Unit Co-ordinators, and the IT staff of the PCO, to put in place the new publishing systems and procedures required to provide access to legislation in both printed and electronic form.

Support staff

The new appointments to the Secretarial Services team were Ana Visala and Jaana Salo. Carol Murray and Jillian Penn were appointed to the Editorial Services team as Legal Publications Officers. In order to fill the gap created by the appointment of the Co-ordinator to the Reprints Unit, Daphne Brasell joined the PCO as Acting Information Services Co-ordinator.

View photo of the Staff of the Parliamentary Counsel Office, 12.2.2003. (135KB, JPG)

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF THE PARLIAMENTARY COUNSEL OFFICE
For the year ended 30 June 2003

Introduction to the Financial Statements

The Parliamentary Counsel Office (PCO) is responsible for discharging the functions set out in the Statutes Drafting and Compilation Act 1920, and certain functions set out in the Acts and Regulations Publication Act 1989.

The PCO is funded by appropriation of money by Parliament.

The financial statements of the PCO for the year ended 30 June 2003, including the Statement of Service Performance, now follow.

STATEMENT OF RESPONSIBILITY
For the year ended 30 June 2003

In our opinion, the financial information presented in the Statements and Notes to the Accounts fairly reflects the position and operations of the PCO.

The PCO has a system of internal control, and this system has provided reasonable assurance as to the integrity and reliability of the financial report of the PCO.

In terms of sections 35 and 37 of the Public Finance Act 1989, I, George Tanner, Chief Parliamentary Counsel, accept responsibility for the preparation of the financial statements and the judgements used in the financial statements.

G E Tanner, QC
Chief Parliamentary Counsel
30 September 2003

Julia Kennedy
Manager Support Services,
Parliamentary Counsel Office
30 September 2003

STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE
For the year ended 30 June 2003

30/06/02
 
Actual
$000
  Note 30/06/03
 
Actual
$000
30/06/03
Main
Estimates
$000
30/06/03
Supp.
Estimates
$000
  Revenue        
6,203 Crown   9,393 7,741 9,393
48 Other 1 57 35 35
6,251 Total operating revenue   9,450 7,776 9,428
         
  Expenses        
3,988 Personnel 2 4,542 4,676 4,529
1,945 Operating 3 3,932 2,042 3,837
228 Depreciation 4 333 695 696
51 Capital charge 5 275 363 366
6,212 Total expenses   9,082 7,776 9,428
39 Net surplus 6 368 0 0

Note: The accompanying notes and accounting policies form part of these financial statements.

For information on major variances against budget, refer to Note 12.

STATEMENT OF MOVEMENTS IN TAXPAYERS' FUNDS
For the year ended 30 June 2003

30/06/02
Actual

$000
  Note 30/06/03
Actual

$000
30/06/03
Main
Estimates
$000
30/06/03
Supp.
Estimates
$000
 
568
Taxpayers' funds as at
1 July
   
2,368
 
2,368
 
2,368
39 Net surplus   368 0 0
 
 
39
Total recognised revenues and expenses for the year    
 
368
 
 
0
 
 
0
1,800 Capital contributions   3,800 3,800 3,800
 
(39)
Provision for repayment of surplus to the Crown  
6
 
(368)
 
0
 
0
 
2,368
Taxpayers' funds as at 30 June  
 
 
6,168
 
6,168
 
6,168

Note: The accompanying notes and accounting policies form part of these financial statements.

For information on major variances against budget, refer to Note 12.

STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL POSITION
As at 30 June 2003

30/06/02
Actual

$000
 


Note
30/06/03
Actual

$000
30/06/03
Main
Estimates
$000
30/06/03
Supp.
Estimates
$000
  TAXPAYERS' FUNDS        
2,368 Taxpayers' funds   6,168 6,168 6,168
2,368 Total taxpayers' funds   6,168 6,168 6,168
           
  Represented by:        
  CURRENT ASSETS        
1,094 Cash and bank   844 1,054 657
10 Debtors and receivables   51 0 0
0 Prepayments   34 19 19
329 Debtor—Crown   3,239 251 328
1,433 Total current assets   4,168 1,324 1,004
           
  NON-CURRENT ASSETS        
2,530 Fixed assets 7 4,634 5,597 5,934
2,530 Total non-current assets   4,634 5,597 5,934
3,963 Total assets   8,802 6,921 6,938
           
  CURRENT LIABILITIES        
1,247 Creditors and accruals 8 1,870 423 423
39 Provision for payment of net surplus    
368
 
0
 
0
 
98
Provision for employee entitlements  
9
 
153
328 347
1,384 Total current liabilities   2,391 751 770
           
  NON-CURRENT LIABILITIES        
 
211
Provision for employee entitlements 9  
243
 
2
 
0
1,595 Total liabilities   2,634 753 770
2,368 NET ASSETS   6,168 6,168 6,168

Note: The accompanying notes and accounting policies form part of these financial statements.

For information on major variances against budget, refer to Note 12.

STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS
For the year ended 30 June 2003

30/06/02
 
Actual
$000
  30/06/03
 
Actual
$000
30/06/03
Main
Estimates
$000
30/06/03
Supp.
Estimates
$000
  Cash flows from operating activities      
  Cash provided from:      
6,981 Supply of outputs
—Crown
6,483 7,819 9,394
40 —Other 2 35 45
7,021 Subtotal 6,485 7,854 9,439
         
  Cash disbursed to produce outputs:      
(3,952) Personnel (4,425) (4,153) (5,023)
(2,401) Operating (2,882) (2,546) (3,078)
(568) Net GST paid 429 0 0
(25) Capital charge (301) (363) (392)
(6,946) Subtotal (7,179) (7,062) (8,493)
 
75
Operating activities net cash flows  
(694)
 
792
 
946
         
  Cash flows from investing activities      
0 Cash provided from sale of fixed assets 29  
0
 
0
 
(1,218)
Cash disbursed to purchase of fixed assets  
(3,346)
 
(4,100)
 
(5,144)
 
(1,218)
Investing activities net cash flows  
(3,317)
 
(4,100)
 
(5,144)
         
  Cash flows from financing activities      
  Cash provided from:      
1,800 Contribution received 3,800 3,800 3,800
  Cash disbursed to:      
(430) Payment of surplus to the Crown (39) 0 (39)
 
1,370
Financing activities net cash flows  
3,761
 
3,800
 
3,761
227 Net increase/(decrease) in cash held (250) 492 (437)
867 Add opening cash brought forward 1,094 562 1,094
1,094 Closing cash 844 1,054 657

Note: The accompanying notes and accounting policies form part of these financial statements.

For information on major variances against budget, refer to Note 12.

RECONCILIATION OF NET SURPLUS TO NET CASH FLOW FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES
For the year ended 30 June 2003

30/06/02
 
Actual
$000
  30/06/03
 
Actual
$000
30/06/03
Main
Estimates
$000
30/06/03
Supp.
Estimates
$000
39 Net surplus 368 0 0
  Add/(less) non-cash items      
228 Depreciation 333 695 696
4 (Inc)/dec non-current employee entitlements 32 19 38
232 Total non-cash items 365 714 734
         
  Add/(less) movements in working capital items      
(8) (Inc)/dec in debtors (75) 0 (9)
(778) (Inc)/dec in Debtor—Crown (2,901) 78 1
75 Inc/(dec) in creditors and payables 623 0 220
8 Inc/(dec) in current employee entitlements 55 0 0
853 Working capital movements—net (2,307) 78 212
         
  Add/(less) investing activity items      
0 Loss on sale of physical assets (14) 0 0
(1,049) Credits for purchase of fixed assets 894 0 0
(1,049) Total investing activity items 880 0 0
 
75
Net cash flow from operating activities  
(694)
 
792
 
946

Note: The accompanying notes and accounting policies form part of these financial statements.

STATEMENT OF COMMITMENTS
As at 30 June 2003

30/06/02
Actual
$000
  30/06/03
Actual
$000
3,791 Capital commitments 2,035
3,791 Total capital commitments 2,035
Operating commitments