Jones Dail: Crimes Amendment Bill (No 6) — Consideration of Report of Law and Order Committee 
Jones Dail: Crimes Amendment Bill (No 6) — Consideration of Report of Law and Order Committee 
[Volume:609;Page:6245] 
DAIL JONES (NZ First) 
: 
 New Zealand First supports this legislation. It is a law and order bill and in terms of our three policies at the last election we are strongly in favour of law and order matters. It is wonderful to follow the Green speaker—it makes life seem normal once again. Mr Locke is very consistent and I suppose I very consistently oppose him in his views when it comes to things like interception warrants and suchlike. Obviously from his past he knows a lot more than me about those things—interception warrants and the sorts of ways that someone can look at things. If people have been involved in— 
Ron Mark 
: Very left-wing party. 
DAIL JONES 
: Very left-wing parties will know what is involved because those parties have the opportunity to and the knowledge of how to use those things. As my friend and colleague Ron Marks says following Mr Locke is like shooting a duck on the water but sometimes one has to if one is to eat. I really will not say much more than that. We disagree entirely with the Greens on law and order issues time and time again and it is great to feel normal once again. 
This is fairly straightforward legislation. I was interested not having seen this legislation before to realise that it came into the House in September 1999—just before an election. I looked at the interpretation clause and saw it talked about home invasion. That was a big issue in 1999. It is surprising how some issues like that are not quite as big after the passing of time. I am disappointed that the Labour Government did not keep moving this legislation along because home invasion was a very very big issue and I am sure in 1999 people made big promises about it. Labour has failed to keep its promises on the home invasion amendments and here we are in 2003 4 years later looking at this bill which was reported back to the House on 20 July 2001. This bill was reported back to this House 2 years ago and has sat on the Order Paper since then. That is how much the Labour Government really cares about law and order and about being tough on things like home invasion. 
I really have only one point to make on this legislation and that is that people practising in criminal law ought to get themselves a copy of this legislation because of the virtual repeal of Part 10 of the Crimes Act and the introduction of a new Part 10 dealing with crimes against rights of property. It covers the entire ambit of that part so duty solicitors and people doing legal aid work at the District Court level and suchlike should really bring themselves up to date with this legislation because it is the day-to-day stuff of anyone who is a duty solicitor or who is trying to conduct a defence in the District Court. 
I would like the Minister to tell the House when he expects this legislation to come into force. We have seen the bill take 2 years at the select committee and sit for 2 years on the Order Paper. Should people start to worry about it or will it be another 2 years before it becomes law—another 2 years before the Labour Party shows any regard for home invasion? 
Ron Mark 
: There will be an election before then! 
DAIL JONES 
: Yes there will be an election before then and New Zealand First in Government will have the opportunity to make sure that this bill is brought into effect. 
This is fairly straightforward legislation as I have said. I notice that in schedule 2 there are amendments to the Criminal Investigations (Blood Samples) Act. I seem to recall that there is a discussion on the blood sample legislation at the moment and I would have liked the Minister to comment on that and on the way that aggravated burglary robbery aggravated robbery assault with intent to rob and suchlike are now to be dealt with as a result of that legislation with regard to blood samples. That will be a very interesting point. 
I see a reference to the Motor Vehicle Dealers Act is still there in schedule 2. Has that Act not been repealed? I thought we repealed that Act a little while ago. The Minister said that he would make a number of consequential amendments and of course they will be on Supplementary Order Paper 84. Any lawyer who is looking at the bill should also look at that Supplementary Order Paper because there will be consequential amendments as a result of it. 
I really do not want to take up the time of the House any further. New Zealand First wants to make sure that legislation proceeds promptly and I will now resume my seat.