Goldsmith PaulHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (National): The National Party will support this legislation and we do so fundamentally because there are many things that this bill does and the majority of those things we agree with in the cause of trying to make it a bit easier for complainants of sexual attack to get justice. We are all very conscious of the reality of continued high levels of sexual violence in this country. Family violence and sexual violence is on the rise and sadly continues to get worse and we do want to make it easier for complainants to access justice and to achieve justice. We're all familiar with the very low rates of conviction in this space. Now this is not something that can be solved easily of course because the very nature of the crime is on many occasions hard to prove. And it is a highly incredibly high-stakes set of circumstances that are brought before the courts whereby somebody's life has been substantially ruined or attacked or threatened through an act. Of course a defendant if that defendant didn't do that act and has been falsely accused—which in life happens; we all have to acknowledge that happens—then their life will be destroyed and ruined their reputation ruined and sent to prison for a very long period of time. That is why we have trials—to try and identify the correct outcome and to achieve justice—and we all acknowledge that there is no very easy way to do that because some very difficult conversations have to be had questions have to be answered and it is a very very difficult process for everybody involved. So elements of this bill wherein the Parliament is attempting to remove some of the more difficult aspects for complainants in order to make it easier for them to achieve justice we agree with. We have outlined on a number of occasions our concern about a couple of elements—a concern widely shared across particularly the defence counsel but across the legal profession. We are disappointed that the Government didn't agree with our Supplementary Order Papers during the committee stage on two matters which I'll traverse briefly. One is around evidence relating to the sexual experience with the defendant. This bill brings in the higher threshold which in effect means that if a complainant has had a prior sexual relationship with the defendant that can be referred to as a mere fact but nothing much beyond that can be referred to. The legal concern that is raised by particularly the defendant community is that details about the complainant's previous experience with the defendant will be directly relevant to the issue of reasonable belief in consent potentially in some circumstances. So there is a real concern about the consequences of that.Secondly there is the issue around the pre-recording of trials. The New Zealand Law Society and many other legal organisations have worried about the consequences for fair trial rights in order to ensure that pre-recorded cross-examination means that the defendants have to declare their strategy much earlier in the process and the jury might not have access to all the relevant material. Now that may be something that a judge can recall the complainant back for for a second time and if that happens of course it undermines the purpose of it which means that the complainant is re-traumatised twice. So it may be that the outcome is not necessarily what is intended.The Minister very calmly says everything will be fine: it's been done in Australia and the UK and the worst fears have not been realised. Well time will tell and I am grateful that he as Minister has assured the House today that this legislation will be reviewed as a matter of course and in three four five years' time we can take stock and see what is happening because we do obviously have a very strong desire to ensure that complainants of sexual attacks have access to justice and that their integrity and their dignity is respected through the process and secondly that defendants also particularly young Māori men of the group that the Waitangi Tribunal has heard concerns around—that those men particularly—have access to a fair defence and the ability to clear their name if indeed they are innocent and that is the nature of this whole process.So look we on balance support this legislation because of its intent because of the assurances made by the Government in terms of the slight movement they've made on a couple of these issues and also the intent to review this in time. But we do remain concerned that in every respect we are conscious of the need to ensure that all New Zealand where they are accused of significant crimes that have very significant outcomes for them and their lives have the ability to defend themselves properly. So on that basis we support this legislation.