Hutchison Paul: Criminal Justice Amendment Bill (No 7) — Consideration of Report of Health Committee Procedure In Committee 
Hutchison Paul: Criminal Justice Amendment Bill (No 7) — Consideration of Report of Health Committee Procedure In Committee 
[Volume:612;Page:9524] 
Dr PAUL HUTCHISON (National—Port Waikato) 
: 
 This is a very important bill. I well remember that in 1999 the Health Committee worked very well together and Steve Chadwick pointed that out. However it is a huge anomaly that finally 4 long years later here we are under urgency addressing this very important matter but with no consultation on a Supplementary Order Paper of 44 pages. 
Let us have a look at the commentary in which Mrs Judy Keall had quite a lot to say. She said: “Occasionally Government departments”—and I will add Governments as well—“will propose substantive and significant changes to bills after select committees have finished hearing submissions.” She went on to say: “We disapprove of that practice. Committees are not simply vehicles for Government amendments to legislation: they are committees of Parliament with a duty to scrutinise legislation and provide for public input so that New Zealand is provided with the best legislation possible reflecting a wide range of interests. Our process of select committee scrutiny and consultation is widely recognised as one of the most important aspects of our constitutional framework.” 
Well here is a clear abuse of that process by the Labour Government. No matter what Government members might say about their Supplementary Order Paper it is very unfortunate that it is on a matter as important as this. It relates to distinguishing between those with intellectual impairment and those with mental illness or even distinguishing between those who have a combination of the two. It requires huge skill and a great deal of thought to be able to transfer that into sensible legislation. There was good cooperation 4 years ago and that was great but to suddenly have this Supplementary Order Paper imposed on Parliament under urgency is inappropriate and an example of how this tawdry Labour Government which is becoming more and more arrogant by the day treats such a serious matter. 
Let us look at the Supplementary Order Paper. Apparently the Criminal Justice Amendment Bill (No 7) is now to be called the Criminal Procedure (Mentally Impaired Persons) Bill. But if we go down to the fourth part of the explanatory note I see that one of the reasons for the Supplementary Order Paper is to remove the current requirement that persons found unfit to stand trail or who are acquitted on a count of insanity must be remanded to a hospital or facility while inquiries are made to determine how they should be dealt with. Instead of the mandatory remand provisions the Supplementary Order Paper gives the courts the option of remanding such persons on bail. 
 However in deciding whether to grant bail the need to protect the public is “the paramount consideration”. Here we have the Minister of Justice saying quite rightly that the need to protect the public is important but he is also saying that it is “the paramount consideration”. In this circumstance it is not just the need to protect the public; it is the need to ensure that those individuals who might be incarcerated or put into a treatment facility under this bill are indeed appropriately and fairly treated. 
To say that this is “the paramount consideration” where there are clearly balancing and conflicting considerations is quite inappropriate. This is the quality of the Supplementary Order Paper that the Labour Minister of Justice under urgency has put on the Parliament and that is quite wrong. 
The debate having concluded the motion lapsed. 
Bill to proceed.