Introduction 1 It is a great pleasure for me to address the New Zealand Centre for Public Law at the Victoria University of Wellington, my alma mater.¹  Public law is a subject that has long been dear to my heart.²  When in London recently, I had dinner with Sir Paul Walker, the first Director of the Centre for Public Law at this University.   He is now a High Court judge in England.    2 Everywhere law reform agencies face serious challenges.  The primary one comes down  to  getting  the  work  implemented.    As  Justice  Michael  Kirby  of  the  High Court  of  Australia  recently  put  it,  there  is  a  “failure,  anywhere,  to  establish  a satisfactory  link  between  the  institutional  law  reform  body  and  the  lawmakers with the power to convert proposals for legal reform into action”.³  The problem exists in all countries where there is a Law Commission.   3 The New Zealand Government has recently adopted a programme to implement six previous reports of the Law Commission and has made progress towards that end.⁴  In her Prime Ministerial statement to Parliament in February, the Rt Hon Helen Clark said one of the initiatives in the justice and security area should be to                                                  1   I  am  most  grateful  to  George  Tanner  QC,  Chief  Parliamentary  Counsel  and  Dr  Warren Young, Deputy President of the Law Commission for their comments on an earlier version of this paper.   2   Geoffrey Palmer “The New Public Law: Its Province and Function” (1992) 22 VUWLR 1. 3   Hon Justice Kirby “Law Reform and Human Rights – Scarman’s Great Legacy” (lecture for the Law Commission of England and Wales, Gray’s Inn, London, 20 February 2006) 43.   See also the Cri de Coeur from my distinguished predecessor, Justice David Baragawanath, “The  Role  of  the  New  Zealand  Law  Commission”  (2001)  Occasional  Paper  No  2,  New Zealand Centre for Public Law 6–8. 4   Quite apart from the initiative to deal with older reports of the Law Commission, several of   its recommendations are currently before Parliament.  There is the Evidence Bill, resulting from a lengthy study concluding with a 1999 report in two volumes recommending a Code (New Zealand Law Commission Evidence (NZLC R55, Wellington, 1999) and the Crimes (Covert  Intimate  Filming)  Amendment  Bill  which  responds  to  the  Commission’s  2004 study   paper   (New   Zealand   Law   Commission   Intimate   Covert   Filming   (NZLC   SP5, Wellington,   2004)).   The   Criminal   Procedure   Bill   currently   before   Parliament   would implement   the   Commission’s   reports   on   criminal   prosecution   (New   Zealand   Law Commission  Criminal  Prosecution  (NZLC  R66,  Wellington,  2000)),  juries  in  criminal trials (New Zealand Law Commission Juries in Criminal Trials (NZLC R69, Wellington, 2001),  and  acquittal  following  perversion  of  the  course  of  justice  (New  Zealand  Law Commission   Acquittal   Following   Perversion   of   the   Course   of   Justice   (NZLC   R70, Wellington,  2001).  There  is  also  the  Coroners  Bill  which  is  based  on  the  Commission’s 2000 report (New Zealand Law Commission Coroners (NZLC R62, Wellington, 2000).   2