SpeechHon MAGGIE BARRY (National—North Shore): Thank you Madam Chair. I rise to speak to Supplementary Order Paper 259 that I want to address the House about. Record-keeping and being able to establish a register is I think an incredibly important part of this legislation were it to pass. We've seen in overseas jurisdictions that many doctors—because of the onerous paperwork; because potentially they are afraid of the scrutiny that might come if they report on the deaths that they have presided over—simply do not bother or feel that they need to keep decent records. There are no penalties. There are no provisions for it in several international jurisdictions and nor are there in this bill which is why I have put this SOP forward.I think keeping accurate records is vital. Trends in any data that can highlight areas of concern for the Minister are I think a very important thing. A registry which I have suggested in my SOP is a register of cases relating to a number of key factors which I would like to spell out for the committee now and ask support for because it does appear to me that there is a level of sympathy for people who have been coerced—elder abuse and so forth—but also how do we know what has happened unless we make good records?So I have indicated in this SOP that a register should be established and maintained by a registrar and it has to record the following details: where someone died and where they asked to first access assisted dying. This is because if we are looking at regional trends—places for example where palliative care is not so readily available—when there's a large spike in deaths in Gisborne for example or Gore these places need to have a clear idea if there is a maverick doctor or if there is practice that's going on that is not good. There isn't any provision for that currently and I believe that there needs to be. It also needs to be very apparent—which is why in my SOP I have made it so—that a request if it is made under clause 8 must be recorded. It must also be recorded if a person is a victim of coercion or elder abuse in the opinion of the medical professional and the one that might tap in on Skype—that second medical professional—so that if coercion has occurred and they're refused assisted dying then there would be a record of that.It is important to understand the ethnicity the sex and the age of the individuals. These are all things that I feel are very important. Elder abuse as we've said can take many forms many of them subtle and I think that feeling worthless and a burden unloved and unwanted passed their use-by date and costing too much to keep alive are the kinds of key indicators that a registrar must keep note of and must really make provision for so that we as a society if this bill were to pass would understand what was happening.Record-keeping is woefully inadequate internationally and the second SOP that I've put forward as a proposed amendment SOP 319 states that if any of the reporting requirements were not complied with fully then there would be consequences: the Registrar must recommend in writing to SCENZ that the non-complying medical practitioner or nurse practitioner not remain qualified to perform assisted dying services under this Act." So at the moment there are no penalties. If people choose to cover up their bad practice and so forth there are no provisions in this bill to have a record of that which is why the register I think is so very important.We have talked about Michael Woodhouse's Supplementary Order Paper 295. I would like to speak to that briefly on a point that has not been covered so far tonight. As someone who's had a 20-year involvement with hospice in New Zealand as a patron and has been involved closely on many boards of many hospices I know how strongly they feel about the conscientious objection by an organisation. One of the things that hasn't been alluded to are the pressures that have come on to any State-funded organisation—that if they get public money they have to deliver euthanasia. In Canada we're seeing a lot of pressure being put on some of the faith-based organisations and as Michael Woodhouse has pointed out and has explained in more detail previously it is incredibly important that they should have that choice to refuse to provide euthanasia. I know how important it is to them from the very outset to be clear with their patients to understand that they deserve choice and that rest care facilities long-term hospital care dementia care palliative care—they have the right to choose not to be involved in this. They have the absolute right. This bill does not give them that provision.I would ask the member: should district health boards fund assisted dying yes or no? Another question that I would like the sponsoring member to get to his feet and respond to: should public funding be conditional upon delivering assisted dying being offered?"