Henare PeeniPEENI HENARE (Labour—Tāmaki Makaurau): Ā tēnā koe e Te Māngai o Te Whare. Tuatahi māku ka tukuna atu ngā poroporoaki ki te hunga mate rātou kua ngaro atu ki Te Pō rātou kua kapohia ake ai e Te Ringa Kaha o Aituā hai tūere hai tūkikini hei tūtāmaki. Nāna i kōwhaki ai te kauwae o tērā e tangi mai rā o tērā e tangi ake rā o tātau e tangi atu nei. Nō reira koutou e te hunga wairua haere!Ka whakahokia mai ngā rārangi kōrero ki a tātou e te hunga ora tēnā koutou tēnā koutou tēnā tātau katoa.[And so thank you Mr Deputy Speaker. The first thing for me is to accord farewell tributes to those who have passed away who are lost to the void who have been snatched up by the Mighty Hand of Calamity to be a blind eel a kind of pincer in a kind of convulsion. He was the one who plucked off the jaw of that one wailing in our direction that one wailing after us and that one wailing coming towards us. Therefore to you the spirits depart!I bring my remarks back to you the living so acknowledgments salutations and greetings to you collectively and to us all.]I thought it appropriate to farewell the departed. The reason I say that is throughout this entire Coroners Amendment Bill we have heard some very horrific stories some sad stories from families who have shared their experiences and remembered their loved ones during their time of sharing that with the Justice and Electoral Committee. Now that we have come to this final stage the third reading of the Coroners Amendment Bill Mr Deputy Speaker thank you for your indulgence in allowing us to put that part behind us and to now address the living. It is in that vein that I turn now to the Coroners Amendment Bill—thank you for allowing me this contribution. My colleague Jacinda Ardern has already made clear the position of this side of the House—or certainly of the Labour Party—about the thoughtful consideration given to the Coroners Amendment Bill. At some points in time throughout the process we were very close to supporting the bill. In fact if I recall correctly we were going to support this bill. However on balance and upon reflection we have decided not to. She has detailed quite clearly the reasons for that and I wish to touch on a few of those and also respond to some of the comments made by the chair of the select committee the member Jacqui Dean who has just finished her contribution today. Jacqui Dean mentioned that the Labour Party did not consider or regard well enough the amendment in this particular bill with regard to those of our armed services who pass away or who die tragically during service. I take my lead on this matter from the Hon Phil Goff who I thought represented his particular proposed amendment really well throughout this bill. He was very clear in his discussions with the select committee and indeed in the debates in this House. He put the family at the forefront. He put the family at the centre of all considerations with regard to his proposed amendment and this particular bill. But he also was quite I thought balanced in his view of it with regard to the ability for the Attorney-General to be able to withhold some of the information to be able to direct parts of the investigation should the coroner have to step in and investigate the passing of our armed service people while in military combat or military action. I take my lead from him because like I say I thought he delivered a very well-balanced proposed amendment. He fought hard for it and we are disappointed on this side of the House that it did not come up and make it above the bar to be considered in this particular bill. My colleague Jacinda Ardern also spoke about the need for recommendations by the coronial system to be considered seriously and at the very least to be given an appropriate response—at the very least. Recently approximately 3 weeks ago an uncle of mine passed away tragically on a farm up in Mōtatau in the far north. I understand the coronial process has kicked into gear and I wonder whether or not some of the recommendations that may come from this report hopefully will save others who find themselves on the farm and find themselves in those situations. But what can we tell the New Zealand public to reassure them that that coronial process is: one robust; two well considered and three that recommendations that it makes will keep New Zealanders safer make processes better and hold people accountable?I am reminded of a particular saying that says The first time is a tragedy the second time is a farce". If we do not allow the recommendations by the coroners' office to be taken seriously or at the very least as I have mentioned be given a response then I am afraid we may find moving forward into the future that the unexplained deaths—the tragic deaths—of Kiwis will be an absolute farce. My colleague mentioned the forestry sector which has experienced its fair share of tragic incidents over the past few years. They were highlighted in particular to the Labour caucus if I recall a year ago when we received some of the families who were dealing with the loss of a loved one from the forestry sector. They felt their voices were not being heard. They felt these kinds of deaths could have been avoided. I think about the stories they told to us when I look at the Coroners Amendment Bill which we are debating right now. We hope that in the future there will be an opportunity whereby the recommendations made by a coroner can be taken seriously and can at the very least have a response. My colleague mentioned earlier that despite the amendments presented by the Labour Party—by Jacinda Ardern by the Hon Phil Goff and by Kelvin Davis—not being considered in this particular bill and being voted down we will be continually looking at the coronial process to make sure that well one it meets the intent that is described in this bill and two we will be keeping a close eye on it to make sure that if at any time in the future we have the opportunity to come back in here to make this particular piece of legislation more robust and make sure the coronial process is more robust then we will be right at the forefront of that. We want to reassure the New Zealand public that despite our opposition to the bill at this particular point in time in its third reading we do take it seriously. We thought long and hard about it. We considered the bill and its detail for some time and debated amongst ourselves about whether or not to support it and sadly we feel that at this point in time we cannot support it. Just to my point around the recommendations which Jacinda Ardern mentioned briefly in the particular study we considered the New Zealand Coroners' Recommendations 2007 to 2012—the results of those recommendations were over a 5-year period. There were 607 coronial inquiries that resulted in 1644 recommendations. There were 309 recipients of coroners' recommendations. Government organisations received the highest proportion of recommendations—the highest proportion. The evidence is right there that all of these recommendations we believe given the robust process the coroners go through need to be considered seriously. They need to be considered seriously. In conclusion once again we reluctantly cannot support this bill. We hope that the coroners' office going forward into the future will receive the support and the capacity from this Government to fulfil its duties to the best of its abilities. Just in conclusion can I echo the words of the chair of the select committee in thanking the families the officials and those who came in and made submissions on this particular bill. I mentioned at the beginning of my contribution just how hard it was for some of us to hear the evidence and the submissions from the families. Once again on this side of the House we reluctantly cannot support the bill."