Wood Michael; Rurawhe AdrianMICHAEL WOOD (Labour—Mt Roskill): Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker. In this House and in many other forums we don't talk about death very often and it's because we find it a difficult and often uncomfortable topic. Perhaps we should in fact do so more often than we do because it is one of the universal human experiences.In the case of this bill we are dealing with the matter of death in circumstances which are often particularly troubling and difficult for whānau and loved ones of the deceased because they are cases in which for some reason there has been a referral to the coroner and by definition that creates a sense of separation. By definition that means that there may have been something in the course of that person's death which was beyond the normal. So can I say on that note that the way in which this bill has come together and the House has conducted itself is I think very pleasing because it has taken this issue very seriously and with an appropriate degree of sensitivity.Can I acknowledge in that vein the people whose work has got us to this point. I understand that this issue was originally brought to the House's attention by former member Metiria Turei the co-leader of the Greens. I acknowledge the work of the Māori Affairs Committee across both parliaments in progressing the matter and of course those people who gave submissions on the bill. I read through those and they are very intelligent sensitive and I'm sure helpful to the work of the select committee.The main comment I want to make is that I think that this bill in its construction is a very elegant bill in the way that it deals with this issue and I say that for two reasons. The first is the actual mechanism that the bill uses. We simply pick up the existing Coroners Act 2006 and use the existing provisions within section 25 which do allow the coroner to allow a person to remain with a body and then we simply insert into the Act in the next section matters which the coroner must consider. It is worth just touching on those—these being the ethnic origins social attitudes or customs or spiritual beliefs of the person who is or of a person who is suspected to be the dead person or of an immediate family member of that person that customarily require viewing touching or remaining with or near the body".So there's quite a wide ambit there that the coroner can apply. The bill isn't overbearing in respect of telling the coroner what they have to do and putting burdensome processes in the way of the coroner. It simply affirms that there is that requirement to take those considerations on board. As we've heard from the previous speaker Nuk Korako and others that is the practice but it is appropriate that that is reflected in the legislation and it will no doubt give families and loved ones a degree of comfort.Building off that the bill is elegant because what it takes is an existing public policy process which is done in quite an official and bureaucratic way and makes sure that that is responsive to cultural and spiritual concerns and that's not necessarily always easy to do in the way that we create laws. So again I say that I think the crafting of this bill is quite elegant in the way that it brings those two world views together.Finally I want to acknowledge the work of our coroners who do an outstanding job it is generally acknowledged and all of the people who are involved with these processes. This bill will be of comfort to families and New Zealanders and it will assist in the important work of our coroners. I commend it to the House. Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): I call Chris Penk—five minutes."