Clendon David: Parole (Extended Supervision Orders) Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeClendon David: Parole (Extended Supervision Orders) Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 03 July 2014. Volume:700;Page:19221. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]DAVID CLENDON (Green):Tēnā koe Mr Assistant Speaker. I would like to begin by also acknowledging the courtesy shown us by Minister Tolley who went to the trouble of inviting me and an adviser to a briefing on this bill the Parole (Extended Supervision Orders) Amendment Bill. Although a briefing from a Minister will never secure our support on its own it certainly is helpful in terms of getting a good background to what is proposed. Given that there may be some—not haste but certainly if this bill is to go through then it would be helpful for it to go through sooner rather than later. The Minister’s courtesy certainly does nothing to impede that process.The Greens will support this legislation albeit with some reservations through to the select committee at least. The bill as we have heard will extend the imposition of supervision orders beyond the 10 years that is currently possible. Any legislation that allows for a continued imposition of restrictions on a person’s freedom of movement beyond the term of the sentence imposed on them by the court is not a trivial matter. That is something we need to think very carefully about in terms of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act and just basic natural justice. In this sense we are to some extent reassured by the fact that this legislation we know will affect only a very small number of people. The legislation as it is drafted does set a very high bar to have these further restrictions imposed on any individual.I read with interest as others obviously have the Attorney-General’s report in terms of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act implications and consequences of this legislation. I was interested to note that the Attorney-General found in terms of section 22 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act which deals with arbitrary detention that this bill improves the situation over what exists currently. It brings it into the criminal regime rather than the civil. I think that is a useful thing for it to have done. The Attorney-General obviously though does unequivocally state that the legislation as it is drafted is inconsistent with section 26 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act in terms of retroactive penalties and double jeopardy and as I say that is no trivial matter. It is something we need to consider very carefully before we give final sign-off to this legislation.The Attorney-General also looked at the relationship between this bill and the public protection orders legislation that is currently going through the House and considered in a sense the hierarchy of those. I think again we would need to think very carefully about what relationship this legislation will have with the public protection orders which of course are significantly more restrictive than what is proposed in this which will be the default in these circumstances. I do think we will need to look very carefully to ensure that by intent or by unintended consequence we do not end up somehow muddying the waters in terms of giving the judiciary difficult decisions to make. There will be a level of work that is required to be done on this legislation to ensure it does achieve what it is intended to do and that it does not create any unintended consequences further down the track.I would have to say that my own thinking on this bill in terms of us supporting it or not has been influenced by the fact that I had a conversation I suppose a month ago with a person who is currently under a supervision order and who with an admirable level of self-awareness recognises that he and the wider community are probably better off while he is under some form of supervision. I think that is a compelling influence on my own thinking through this bill—to have somebody recognise that there are circumstances where individuals even with the best will in the world are nevertheless compelled to keep offending. Unfortunately that is a reality and a piece of legislation like this if thoughtfully drafted and appropriately applied by the judiciary will plug a gap in a sense. It will ensure continued public safety in the appropriate management of some of these individuals.As I have said we will support this bill to go to the select committee. The Law and Order Committee is an interesting committee in many ways. We are fortunate in that we routinely get very good advice and input from the judiciary from lawyers from the Law Society from individual members of the public and from NGOs that are well informed and have an interest in this sort of justice legislation. I am quite sure that the Law and Order Committee will give this bill quite rigorous attention. I think we need to be very careful to see that we do achieve what we intend to achieve while imposing the least restrictions by doing the least harm to our shared commitment to human rights and natural justice. We will continue. We will support this bill. I look forward to the select committee process. Thank you.