Worth Richard: Criminal Records (Clean Slate) Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
Worth Richard: Criminal Records (Clean Slate) Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:617;Page:12568] 
RICHARD WORTH (National—Epsom) 
: 
 National does not support the Criminal Records (Clean Slate) Bill. In this part of the debate we are concerned with Part 1. There are only two parts—I am excluding the title clause which is yet to come. Clearly the substantive material is contained in Part 2. Part 2 sets out the application of the clean slate scheme its effect on an eligible individual certain offence-creating provisions and then of course the exceptions. I will confine my comments to Part 1 in the context of where we are in this debate. I pick up the obvious point that even in Part 1 the overview provision does not give a fair description of this particular set of clauses. Clause 3 “Overview” which has been amended in substantial measure states: “(1) This Act establishes a clean slate scheme to limit the effect of an individual’s convictions … if the individual satisfies the relevant eligibility criteria.” But this legislation does much more than that. That is of course why National has some concern about this legislation and would not wish that if it is enacted it continue on the statute book for any significant period of time. 
If there was to be an accurate statement of what this legislation was about it would certainly include the following elements as minima. First of all this legislation enables criminal convictions to be concealed rather than wiped or expunged so to talk about a clean slate is a complete misnomer. The concept of a clean slate is that one starts wholly afresh and the slate is completely cleansed. What we have here is a means for criminal convictions to be concealed provided of course they are criminal records that are eligible for concealment and for such records to be protected from unlawful disclosure. When we come to look at Part 2 we will see just how widely and loosely worded those protections are. The next thing about this legislation is that the clean slate scheme is automatic in the sense that it does not require individuals to make application to have their convictions clean-slated. So presumably significant numbers of the population who have the misfortune to be criminal offenders will never know whether in fact the process has been applied in that automatic sense. There is no plan to tell them they have been clean-slated. 
The third aspect of the legislation is that it is an all-or-nothing regime. That means that an individual must meet all the criteria in order to become eligible and that a record can become unconcealed in the event of a subsequent conviction. So much then for the concept of clean slating. Not only is the slate not wiped clean for all purposes but the slate may become again darkened just as the phoenix rises in the event of subsequent wrongdoing by a particular offender. The fourth point about the scheme is that it is question based and it requires those with access to criminal records to treat questions about an eligible individual’s records in a manner that is consistent with the scheme. The Justice and Electoral Committee spent a considerable amount of time looking at that issue in the context particularly of the employment relationship. Finally the scheme takes the phrase “criminal record” to mean an official criminal record only and it includes all material held about criminal records by Government agencies. 
That is the first point that emerges from consideration of clause 3 and what I am highlighting in the points I am making now is really that the overview of the legislation is demonstrably short in terms of its accuracy.