Bishop Chris; Tolley AnneCHRIS BISHOP (National—Hutt South): Thank you very much Madam Deputy Speaker. This is a good bill and it's been through a thorough process. I do want to start by talking about the process. It started off with a good process. I have to say the last year or so has been appalling. This came out of the cross-party or cross-ministerial group in the previous Government. The Hon Amy Adams as Minister of Justice led that—Madam Deputy Speaker you'll be well familiar with that work as well in your previous role—and the discussion document was issued I think early or mid-May 2015. There was a series of public meetings around the country led by the Minister led by officials and a huge amount of engagement from people involved in the sector: non-Government organisations charities Government agencies as well. I hosted a meeting in Lower Hutt and about 150 people turned up. Probably the best thing about the meeting was actually just the consciousness raising in the community along with some good ideas. From that publication of the discussion document we had that public discussion and then the feedback went into the ministry and a bill was fashioned. It was then called the Family and Whānau Violence Legislation Bill. It came into the House and was then sent off to the Justice and Electoral Committee. So that very thorough process—that's exactly how bills particularly where you're aiming for cross-party consensus should be developed with public discussion in advance of the bill being created. Frankly I think in New Zealand we don't do that enough. That is the status quo in other countries like Australia; a lot of pre-consultation done. It needs to happen more in New Zealand; too often it doesn't happen but it did happen in this case.Where I do want to throw a brickbat at the Government is in the last year where we have been waiting for this bill to progress. I mean the Government has now been in place for a year. Nothing has happened. It turned out we were waiting for the Government Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) which is largely the Green Party's minority view. OK that's fair enough the Government can put SOPs on the Table but I am surprised it took a year and I'm surprised that it's taken a year to pass this very important piece of legislation.The other thing I do want to comment on from a process point of view is it is disgraceful that that SOP a very large Supplementary Order Paper was dropped on the committee of the whole House stage and the Minister rejected the Opposition's pleas for that SOP to be sent back to the select committee for further consideration given we basically waited a year for the bill to come back for the second reading committee of the whole House and the third reading. One doesn't think it would be too much to ask to send it back to the Justice Committee for a month or so to consider their Supplementary Order Paper. The Greens are usually the paragons of virtue when it comes to process and the dropping of Supplementary Order Papers at the committee of the whole House stage—so it's very disappointing that wasn't agreed to. It was very important that it was considered properly because there's quite a large expansion of the power of police safety orders from five to 10 days in that process and it was just dropped into the committee of the whole House stage. The Government and the Opposition are both supportive of it but I've got to say we do have some misgivings over the process. That's the first point I want to make.The second point I want to make is that this is just one part of the solution. I don't think anyone pretends that the Family Violence Bill which will soon become an Act is going to overnight solve the scourge that is family violence in our communities. Legislation can only do so much. As former Prime Ministers and Ministers and MPs have noted we need a cultural shift we need a cultural change we need Government agencies to work together more co-operatively work in the community more co-operatively. There's a lot of great stuff happening. My colleague Mark Mitchell talked about the integrated safety response pilot as just one example of good things happening in the community; innovative solutions to old problems. We need more of that. We need new fresh thinking—legislation can only do so much. And that's the second point.The third thing I want to mention before I wrap it up before the lunch adjournment is just some really good things that are happening in this legislation. The first is the name. I've talked previously in the House around removing the phrase domestic violence" from the legislation and calling it "family violence". That sounds like a small thing. Actually it's quite an important symbolic change. Domestic violence is redolent of the idea that what happens in the family home should remain in the family home and it's not the concern of the criminal law or not the concern of Government or not the concern of everybody else—that people are just having "a domestic" and therefore they can be left alone. It's very important we send the message that things that happen in the family home can be illegal should be illegal and are rightly the concern of neighbours other whānau friends and the wider society. So the first thing is the name change.Updating the definition of family violence is good. Other members have talked about expanding it to psychological control and other things. Increasing the effectiveness of protection orders intervening earlier in order to try and change behaviour so expanding the tools that can be used when it comes to protection orders. Those are very good.One thing that hasn't really been mentioned that I think is very good is greater powers for the courts to consider family violence when it comes to child safety and Care of Children Act proceedings when it comes to custody disputes. That is a very very significant and important change. Better flagging of family violence in the system both virtually and physically. Our courts have got a long way to go I've got to say when it comes to technology and it comes to the way in which things are tracked and flagged within the system. And other members have talked about the significant increase in penalties for non-fatal strangulation and members previously have talked in the House about—and I'll sit down as we commend the bill to the House.DEPUTY SPEAKER: I'm sorry to interrupt the member but the time has come for me to leave the Chair. The House stands adjourned until 2 p.m. today.Debate interrupted.The House adjourned at 1 p.m. (Thursday)"