Please clarify whether this statement of yours to the House during the second reading of the bill – that “it allows foreign workers who are here for a contract of work of three years or less to be able to take their contributions out as well as the employer’s contribution” – therefore means that the ‘transfer value’ and a ‘person’s contributions’, as referred to in the Amendment Act, include the employer’s contribution?
And then there’s: “This amendment not only satisfies the recommendation of the Privy Council…” Could the Minister clarify what precisely was the recommendation of the Privy Council that his bill was able to satisfy?
Lastly, did the parties to the appeal accept the Privy Council’s invitation to make written submissions within 28 days of its judgment on the terms of declaratory relief? And if submissions were made, what were they?
During the same debate the Member for Murienua, James Beer, expressed some doubt that this bill, and consequentially the Minister’s statements to the House, were actually a true reflection of the findings of the Privy Council.
And as I have some further observations to make on this act it would be useful to have the Minister’s response a little more quickly than the more than two weeks now that it is taking the ‘experts’ to shoot down my interpretation of the Dogs Registration Act – ‘shoot’ being the operative word!
John M Scott