Parker DavidHon DAVID PARKER (Labour): Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker and could I thank the last speaker Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi for his contribution. I just want to elaborate on something that the last speaker averted to. One of the submissions that was made in respect of the drug and alcohol testing of people who are on bail was made by the Law Society which said that it ought not to be in the power of registrars to impose a drug and alcohol condition as a condition of bail if the defendant did not agree to it and that that sort of imposition on the person who was seeking or being granted bail should be left to a judicial officer. The Law and Order Committee agreed with that and it has proposed an amendment that says that a registrar must not impose a drug or alcohol condition unless the defendant consents to that condition being imposed. That effectively means that if the defendant does not agree and says it is not appropriate then it is up to a judge to make a decision as to whether it is an appropriate condition to be imposed. I think that is a wise change. We should remember that people who are on bail have not yet been convicted of an offence. Sometimes they are innocent and they certainly have not had their guilt proved so they are in a slightly different situation to someone who has already been convicted and is within the justice system and the justice system can impose more—or there is more justification for imposing these sorts of conditions against the will of the person concerned if their guilt has already been proven. So I think it is appropriate that in respect of bail decisions the registrar should not be able to impose a drug or alcohol condition unless the defendant consents to the condition being imposed. That does not mean to say that it will not be imposed; it does not mean to say that it should not be imposed. It does mean that sometimes it should not be imposed and where the line is to be drawn between those who should or those who should not have those conditions is appropriately a decision for the judge rather than a registrar. The other concern that the Law Society raised was that continuous monitoring obligations in its view amounted to a major infringement of liberty that breached the rules. It said that it seemed wrong for police and corrections officers to be writing the rules that allow themselves to blood-test people who are not even in prison—so they could be on a community-based sentence. It thought that it was wrong that the police and corrections officers were the ones who were empowered by law to write the rules about testing in the community given that they are the ones who are going to be applying them. It thought that that duality of roles was wrong. The Minister of Corrections at the time Sam Lotu-Iiga said that the principles were included in the bill to guide officials in setting up the drug-testing regime and these included a requirement that the testing could not be unreasonably intrusive or frequent and that the person who is being monitored should be given as much privacy and dignity as possible. That is an issue that we can delve into more at the Committee stage of this bill and if I am in the Chamber at the time I will be asking that question. The Law Society went further and said that it did not think that any person should be required to wear an alcohol-monitoring bracelet without a judge's approval. The legislation as it stands in respect of someone who has previously had a conviction puts that decision in the hands of the police and corrections officials and again we will be asking the Minister to justify why—Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I think we should remind the member that this is the third reading of the legislation.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Yes. That is not the member's role. I mean he is the least likely member to be warned for being disorderly but actually it is disorderly.Hon DAVID PARKER: No actually I think that that was a fair comment. I will defend the member for saying that. So—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): The Assistant Speaker was attempting to signal to the member and if he was looking and not reading it would have been easier.Hon DAVID PARKER: Well it was certainly a less rude gesture than if you had been indicating it was the second reading Mr Assistant Speaker so thank you for that. Thank you for that assistance. I accept what the member who has just made that point of order said in his contribution to this debate—that that issue had been covered off by the Law and Order Committee and that he was satisfied and so were the other members of this House that the concerns of the Law Society were appropriately dealt with in the protections that are found in the legislation as to principles—and I am not going to inquire about that at the Committee stage because it has already passed. So Labour Party members are supporting these bills because I think most people in society would agree that for some people who have alcohol and drug problems it is necessary for both their own protection and the protection of the community that we have some forms of intervention that ensure that as people are transitioning from a custodial sentence back into society they are encouraged to stay drug and alcohol - free. I would note that monitoring is only part of the solution and the Police Association said that in order for these things to be effective you actually have to have the drug and alcohol treatment courses that are available to people who have come out of custodial sentences. Sadly a lot of them will not have had those treatment services available to them while they were in prison because those services are still not broadly enough available. It is also true that some people whilst in prison may not be willing participants in them but once they get out into the community might have changed their mind and recognise that they need help with their drug and alcohol addictions and they should have services that are available to them for their own betterment and for the protection of society. It is a sad reality that one of the reasons—and it is only one of the reasons—why we have an increasing prison population in New Zealand is that we actually have not got those services under control yet in New Zealand. We have large numbers of our prison population suffering from drug and alcohol problems which as my colleague Kelvin Davis has already said is a contributing factor to their offending. He does not present it as an excuse for their offending; he just states it as a fact that it is true that the people who have drug and alcohol problems are more likely to offend and that is ameliorated if they have the ability to deal with their drug and alcohol addictions through services that are available. Of course it is true also that disproportionately the number of people who are in prison also have other problems. Some of them are very very poor. Some of them have psychiatric problems as well. A lot of the people who are in need of these services to deal with their drug and alcohol problems are less able to afford to pay for them and if they are not provided by the Government at low cost or free they will not be accessed by them. That is one of the reasons why it is important that we as taxpayers and we in this House support the provision of those services in the community so that the drug and alcohol problems of people who have offended can be dealt with. I do not think I have got anything to say other than that. There are three parts to this really: people who are on parole people who are on bail and people who have had community-based sentences are all affected by this legislation. So long as there are appropriate safeguards this should work OK. I think if those who have these powers overuse them and use drug and alcohol testing to an excessive degree and it becomes oppressive then it actually will not meet its social purpose of helping people to overcome their problems. In fact it could have the opposite effect and it could amount to a post-sentence infringement of their liberties if taken too far. I trust that the authorities will be cognisant of that and I hope that these pieces of legislation work to improve outcomes for our society. Labour supports these bills.