edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Reti ShaneDr SHANE RETI (National—Whangarei): It is a pleasure to speak briefly to this the second reading of the Intelligence and Security Bill. I would also like to acknowledge the Minister Chris Finlayson; the previous Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee chair Mark Mitchell; the current chair Todd Muller; and other select committee members.As is always the case this bill has been enhanced by the public submissions process and I want to acknowledge all those who submitted and the officials who helped us make our way through the information. I want to particularly focus on oversight provisions in the bill. At a high level a good oversight framework would have many layers and I want to briefly describe five domains and how this bill addresses each one.The first is the requirement for independent or judicial approval to issue intelligence warrants. This is effected by joint-issuing by the Attorney-General and Chief Commissioner of Intelligence Warrants. No. 2 is the independent review of the execution of warrants. The Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security has a specific mandate to review conduct in applying for a warrant. No. 3 is the robust and independent complaints and investigative functions. This bill strengthens the role of the inspector-general enhancing access to records and removing limitations on the scope of inquiries. Point four is the democratic oversight. The Intelligence and Security Committee's functions are enhanced in this bill including the ability to request investigations from the inspector-general. The fifth point is the transparent application of freedom of information and privacy laws and this bill makes agencies accountable to more privacy principles in the Privacy Act.To briefly conclude the oversight provisions were already significantly strengthened from previously when this bill began the select committee process. This strengthening has continued to be fine-tuned during the submissions process. I will leave the final oversight words to the Privacy Commissioner who in giving oral evidence to the committee said that if passed in its current form the bill would be reaching best practice" in terms of the requirements and rigour of oversight it would put in place. I commend this bill to the House."
Muller Todd; Tisch LindsayTODD MULLER (National—Bay of Plenty): I am very pleased to be able to stand and speak in favour of the New Zealand Intelligence and Security Bill in its second reading. Can I also please begin by acknowledging the efforts of Minister Chris Finlayson. I think he has worked extremely hard alongside the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee to land legislation that balances the protection of New Zealand's security interests on the one hand with in my view the enhancement of the integrity of the agencies' reputations themselves on the other. Over time significant trust in those agencies will build because of the effective oversight provisions that have been built into this legislation. It is a very good outcome.Can I also acknowledge my predecessor the Hon Mark Mitchell for his very adept chairmanship and for facilitating a very collaborative and insightful process which landed I think a very good result.In particular I would like to focus on the issues around the definition of national security". The initial bill had a particular definition that caused us as a committee some challenge. It was very unclear in terms of its scope. There were a whole lot of inherent complexities with the approach of the initial bill and there were serious concerns around its workability. After a significant discussion amongst us—and with the particular support of the officials who have done a tremendous job here—we have landed in this legislation a two-pronged approach to national security. Now in order to get a warrant to target a New Zealander the proposed activity must firstly be necessary to contribute to the protection of national security. Critically it must also be able to identify and enable assessment of the protection against a closed list of harms. We have already heard this afternoon in this conversation the list of those harms and the precise specificity if you like about those. That certainly from our perspective gives us a lot of confidence.Look there is a lot about this that I would like to talk to but I am very conscious of the fact that a lot has already been covered. Can I just echo the confidence that I have that we have landed something that is very fit for purpose and should give New Zealanders much comfort. Thank you.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): The next call is a split call. Barry Coates—5 minutes."
Brownlee Gerry; Hipkins ChrisTHURSDAY 9 MARCH 2017Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.BUSINESS STATEMENTHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House): When the House resumes on Tuesday 14 March the Government will look to progress the New Zealand Intelligence and Security Bill the Taxation (Annual Rates for 2016-17 Closely Held Companies and Remedial Matters) Bill the Resource Legislation Amendment Bill and a number of other bills on the Order Paper.CHRIS HIPKINS (Labour—Rimutaka): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I understand the Government intends to bring some racing legislation to the House shortly and I wonder whether the Leader of the House could indicate whether the Government intends to progress that before the election.Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House): The Government is always interested in racing legislation through this House. It is largely up to the Opposition as to exactly what pace that goes at—either a pace or a gallop. Perhaps though with some agreement we could trot through all of the legislation on the Order Paper.
Tuesday 7 March 2017 - Volume 720
Appropriation (2015/16 Confirmation and Validation) Bill — Second Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Appropriation (2015/16 Confirmation and Validation) Bill be now read a second time.Ayes 94New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 31; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 26Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12.Bill read a second time.
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Child Protection (Child Sex Offender Government Agency Registration) Amendment Bill be now read a third time.Ayes 106New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 31; New Zealand First 12; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 14Green Party 14.Bill read a third time.
Child Protection (Child Sex Offender Government Agency Registration) Amendment Bill — Third Reading
VoteMATT DOOCEY (National—Waimakariri): I move That the question be now put. Motion agreed to.The question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Paula Bennett to clause 7 be agreed to: in new clause 1(2)(b) of schedule 1 replace October" with "October 2016".Amendment agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That Parts 1 and 2 and clauses 1 to 3 as amended be agreed to.Ayes 106New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 31; New Zealand First 12; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 14Green Party 14.Parts 1 and 2 and clauses 1 to 3 as amended agreed to.Bill reported with amendment.Report adopted."
Child Protection (Child Sex Offender Government Agency Registration) Amendment Bill — In Committee
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Child Protection (Child Sex Offender Government Agency Registration) Amendment Bill be now read a second time.Ayes 106New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 31; New Zealand First 12; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 14Green Party 14.Bill read a second time.
Child Protection (Child Sex Offender Government Agency Registration) Amendment Bill — Second Reading
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Child Protection (Child Sex Offender Government Agency Registration) Amendment Bill be now read a first time.Ayes 106New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 31; New Zealand First 12; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 14Green Party 14.Bill read a first time.
Child Protection (Child Sex Offender Government Agency Registration) Amendment Bill — First Reading
12. Small Businesses—Asia-Pacific Small Business Survey 2016BRETT HUDSON (National) to the Minister for Small BusinessSmall Businesses—Asia-Pacific Small Business Survey 201612. BRETT HUDSON (National) to the Minister for Small Business: What reports has she received on how New Zealand's small business growth expectations compare to other economies?Hon JACQUI DEAN (Minister for Small Business): I have received the latest CPA Australia Asia-Pacific Small Business Survey which shows that 71 percent of small businesses in New Zealand expect to grow over the next 12 months and that 61.5 percent expect their local economy to grow over the same time. This is significantly higher than in Australia and in line with the Asian average. The report highlights that business confidence is up strongly in New Zealand and this shows the impact a strong economy a stable Government and resilient small business can have on business confidence. Brett Hudson: How are Government programmes such as the ultra-fast broadband (UFB) roll-out supporting New Zealand small businesses' confidence?Hon JACQUI DEAN: The CPA Australia report highlights that New Zealand is second in the Asia-Pacific region with internet connection speeds. Fifty-five percent of small businesses believe their internet speeds are fast enough well ahead of the average of 46 percent. The Business Operations Survey of 2014 reinforces this showing that businesses are increasingly seeing the benefits of ICT. One of the aims of the Government's $2 billion investment in UFB and rural broadband initiatives is to enable businesses to grow and become more productive. There is still more work to be done however which is why the Government has announced a $300 million extension which will see another 151 towns covered by the ultra-fast broadband programme.
10. Vulnerable Children Oranga Tamariki Ministry—Establishment and PrinciplesJOANNE HAYES (National) to the Minister for Social DevelopmentVulnerable Children Oranga Tamariki Ministry—Establishment and Principles10. JOANNE HAYES (National) to the Minister for Social Development: What recent reports has she received on the establishment of the new Ministry for Vulnerable Children Oranga Tamariki?Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister for Social Development): I have seen reports that show the new Ministry for Vulnerable Children Oranga Tamariki is ready to come into effect on 1 April this year. It is a fundamental shift from the crisis management approach of Child Youth and Family to a focus on ensuring better long-term life outcomes for our most vulnerable children and young people. The new ministry will focus on five core services: prevention intensive intervention care support youth justice and transition support. I have seen reports from some people labelling it as simply a rebrand of Child Youth and Family; instead what this Government is pursuing is a fundamental change in the way that we deal with care and protection in New Zealand.Joanne Hayes: How will the new Ministry for Vulnerable Children Oranga Tamariki differ from the current care and protection system?Hon ANNE TOLLEY: While Child Youth and Family had a focus on crisis management the new Ministry for Vulnerable Children Oranga Tamariki will take a child-centred approach with a much greater focus on prevention and early intervention to keep families together. This is not a quick fix. This is a long work programme of reforms over 4 to 5 years to be fully implemented and bedded in. We have already seen some of these reforms taking shape with the establishment and naming of the new independent connection and advocacy service VOYCE - Whakarongo Mai which will ensure young people in care will be heard and their voices kept at the centre of decisions made about them. They run it.Joanne Hayes: What other changes are being made as part of the overhaul of Child Youth and Family?Hon ANNE TOLLEY: There will be intensive targeted support for caregivers including some increased financial assistance and better access to support services. National care standards will be introduced so there is a clear expectation for the standard and quality of care in placement homes. We have already passed legislation to raise the age of State care to a child's 18th birthday. I have to say it is disappointing to see members who have launched and presented petitions calling on me to implement these exact changes then voting against the legislation including Labour's children's spokesperson and new deputy leader Jacinda Ardern.
6. Freshwater Management—Policy Costs and National StandardsSCOTT SIMPSON (National—Coromandel) to the Minister for the EnvironmentFreshwater Management—Policy Costs and National Standards6. SCOTT SIMPSON (National—Coromandel) to the Minister for the Environment: What is the estimated cost of the 90 percent of rivers and lakes swimmable by 2040 policy and what specific requirements will it place on councils and farms to achieve this target?Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for the Environment): The estimated cost is $2 billion. For councils this will mean upgrading water-treatment plants and waste water and stormwater infrastructure; for farms it means requirements to fence 56000 kilometres of waterways and riparian planting. The cost to farmers is $367 million although I would draw to the House's attention that three-quarters of that cost is for the reticulation of stock water which is required when animals are appropriately fenced out of our lakes and rivers.Scott Simpson: What requirements were there from the Government on regional councils back in 2008 to address New Zealand's water quality issues and what are there now?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: In 2008 there were absolutely none. We started in 2009 with the national requirements to meter water takes and the volume measured is now up from 25 percent to over 90 percent. In 2011 we introduced the first National Policy Statement on Freshwater Management which puts requirements on councils to set minimum river flows. In 2014 we added requirements to limit nitrogen phosphorus dissolved oxygen algae and ammonia. These latest proposals focus on improving swimming but there are also important new requirements in the package for improving the ecological health of our waterways.Scott Simpson: When was the standard of 540 E. coli per 100 millilitres set as the acceptable level for swimming?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: The 540 limit for swimming water quality was set in 2003 by the Labour Government supported by the Greens. This limit was included in the 2014 national policy statement and remains. The key change is for the very first time the setting of specific requirements and targets on improving the times that that standard is met.
Collins JudithAPPROPRIATION (2015/16 CONFIRMATION AND VALIDATION) BILLSecond ReadingHon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Revenue) on behalf of the Minister of Finance: I move That the Appropriation (2015/16 Confirmation and Validation) Bill be now read a second time.
Hudson BrettBRETT HUDSON (National): I rise in support of the Child Protection (Child Sex Offender Government Agency Registration) Amendment Bill in this its third reading. It has been canvassed quite strongly today that when the principal Act was passed last year it was the intention of Parliament that it would apply to all child sex offenders who had been released from prison and were subject to release conditions at the time the Act came into force. It was also the intention of Parliament that it would apply to child sex offenders who had been convicted of a qualifying offence but who had not been sentenced at the date the Act came into force.Unfortunately as the Act has been operationalised concerns have been raised that perhaps the wording of the law did not give the true effect to that intent and so we find ourselves here today as a result of 107 offenders having been taken off the register who were intended to be on it. It is important to note that they have been under monitoring conditions by police and Corrections but they would have and will have additional monitoring should this bill pass into law. This amendment bill will confirm that these child sex offenders should be on the register and I commend it to the House.
McKelvie IanIAN McKELVIE (National—Rangitīkei): There is no doubt that there is universal agreement on one thing in this House tonight and that is—Kris Faafoi: Yeah it's sloppy.IAN McKELVIE: I was thinking that this bill could have been referred to the Primary Production Committee. That would have solved the problem. We all agree that one of the top priorities for this Parliament is protecting our children from harm.This Government has in its time in Government made many changes to the law and order sector and every little change makes a difference. This amendment bill which is fixing a bill that was designed to establish a child sex offender register is a really important piece of legislation for this House. It is an important little piece of legislation in the law and order tool kit. I have a great deal of pleasure in commending it to the House.
Young Jonathan; Tisch LindsayJONATHAN YOUNG (National—New Plymouth): I am very pleased to stand in support of this bill and I do agree with the previous speaker Denis O'Rourke that this bill does strike the right balance. It is important to understand that children in our society are treasures—they are taonga—and we must do everything we can to protect them in their innocence in order to ensure that they grow up healthy and successful. One side of this bill that I think can be overlooked is the fact that when sex offenders are registered and monitored by Corrections and by a dedicated unit of the police what that does is maintain accountability. What that actually does is give them a greater incentive to live an overcoming life which in the final analysis protects their freedom. We have got to see that a bill like this which the Green Party may say sounds Draconian actually balances the freedoms of people in the best way possible. But we on this side stand on the side of the innocents and the young. We say that given the balance of rights it leans their way obviously. I am very happy to stand and support this bill in the House.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): The next call is a split call. Jan Logie—5 minutes.
Pugh MaureenMAUREEN PUGH (National): I rise in support of the Child Protection (Child Sex Offender Government Agency Registration) Amendment Bill in its third reading here tonight. Tonight we have heard quite a bit of debate and criticism of the Government's handling of this bill but I would just like to remind the House that when the bill was going through the select committee stage members of other parties were present as well. We all received the draft report and the tracked report and we all approved in the Social Services Committee the final report which led to the passage of the legislation.The bill tonight—the amendment bill—is simply adding clarity to some wording that was in the legislation. It does two things. It clarifies that those people who were released from prison but who were subject to release conditions—and those conditions could be that they attend counselling or that they are not able to be alone with a child under 16—are to be captured by this register. It is also clarified in this amendment bill that all offenders who were sentenced after the commencement of the Act but who had been convicted prior to the commencement of the Act are also captured in this legislation. There are 67 offenders who qualify for that.This is a sensible amendment bill. We stand in support of it and I have pleasure in commending it to the House.
Bakshi Kanwaljit SinghKANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI (National): Thank you for the opportunity to stand in support of the third reading of the Child Protection (Child Sex Offender Government Agency Registration) Amendment Bill. It has been said time and again that the main intent of this legislation is to ensure that we protect our children from child sex offenders. As at 25 January this year there were 1659 people on the register that has information about these people. By gathering this information authorities are able to keep track of child sex offenders while also being alert to any changes in their circumstances. Agencies continually gather and update the personal information of such people which can be assessed and analysed to determine whether reoffending is more likely to take place so that the necessary action can be taken. We want to ensure that our communities feel safe and that there should not be reoffending. All registered child sex offenders are required to report to the police within 72 hours of their release from prison or after receiving a non-custodial sentence if directed to be registered by a judge. They need to provide a range of information including fingerprints photographs address workplace employer car registration number internet details and passport details. All this information is registered in this register so that a track can be kept of these offenders—so that we can ensure that our society feels safe. The register is held in a secure database so it is not publicly accessible information. It has to be protected and the things that are on the register are safeguarded by this. We also want to ensure that when any of the information of these people is changed they have to inform the police within 48 hours and some of the information is updated so that the agencies are aware of the change in circumstances of such offenders. It is important that we should have legislation that is up to date and this legislation is being rectified after some errors were made earlier. I commend this bill to the House.
Bennett PaulaThird ReadingHon PAULA BENNETT (Minister of Police): I move That the Child Protection (Child Sex Offender Government Agency Registration) Amendment Bill be now read a third time. It is never ideal to have to put a bill through under urgency but it is vital that we put child safety first. That is what this bill does and it is heartening to see that most of Parliament actually supports us in trying to do this today.The aims of this bill have been well outlined today but I will speak briefly about them again. It has become apparent in operationalising the Child Protection (Child Sex Offender Government Agency Registration) Act that a small group of offenders whom it was intended would be covered may not be able to be put on the register. I want to make it clear that everyone convicted of a qualifying offence and sentenced to imprisonment since this Act came into force on 14 October last year has been put on the register. This bill relates only to a relatively small group—but I think any number would be significant—who when the Act came into force were on release conditions or who had been convicted but not sentenced and in that respect it was retrospective.We believe that the public expects these offenders to be covered by the register so we are acting with urgency to make Parliament's intention clear and to remove any doubt that these people are subject to registration and as such subject to monitoring at a different level which goes through when they are on the register. This amendment bill amends the principal Act to reflect the original retrospective policy intent of the legislation. It was intended that the retrospective provisions of the Act would apply to all child sex offenders who had been released from prison and who were subject to release conditions under Department of Corrections oversight. It was also intended to include all of those child sex offenders who had been convicted of a qualifying offence prior to the Act coming into force but who had not yet been sentenced.This is a straightforward amendment that clarifies those subject to registration under the Act so as to ensure that the original policy intent of the legislation is given effect to. I commend this bill to the House.
Bennett PaulaHon PAULA BENNETT (Minister of Police): The Chief Executive of the Department of Corrections has already given notice to offenders as it mirrors provisions in the principal Act. These offenders were in prison at 14 October 2016 and that is the difference.
Bennett PaulaHon PAULA BENNETT (Minister of Police): Outside of those 107 because as I have been quite clear that is actually what the bill is about today—it is retrospective for that particular group. But out of respect for the member Kelvin Davis' quite serious question a period in a detention centre in Australia is irrelevant. What would be relevant in the case of a corresponding registrable offender is their conviction for a corresponding offence and whether they have been sentenced overseas to imprisonment or required to report to a corresponding register overseas. So that is what the relevant clauses would be.The police do share information with police in Australia of course and it goes both ways so that if there are those who need to be monitored or are considerably alarming to the public then they will often share release conditions and make sure that there is monitoring in that way.
Davis KelvinKELVIN DAVIS (Labour—Te Tai Tokerau): I do not want to labour this point but I guess this is the purpose of having an actual debate. Minister Paula Bennett's reply to my question saying that none of the 107 people this applies to are returning offenders—that was exactly my point. There have been over 660 offenders return from Australia. Are you saying Minister that none of those 660 are returning sex offenders or are you saying that none of them qualify to be on this list? My question is really should there be some?If they have committed child sex offences in Australia finished their prison sentence spent a couple of years in a detention centre then come over here should they be on this register or is that a gap is that a loophole? I am not asking it to be a smart alec; I am just wondering whether there is actually a loophole there. Should some of those 660 people who have returned actually qualify for this or are we letting in child sex offenders who should be on the register? That is really the question. Is there a gap? We debated the returning offenders legislation I think in November 2015. I think the bill was enacted in February of last year. Are there gaps? Are there offenders from Australia and will there be offenders from Australia who in the future may need to go on the register if they had committed the offence here but because of the length of time they have been in detention centres and all that sort of stuff does it create a gap does it create a loophole? That is my genuine question to the Minister—is that something that needs to be considered? Is that something that needs to be patched up at this stage? So I will just leave that question there. Kia ora.
Bennett PaulaHon PAULA BENNETT (Minister of Police): Just in response to one part of the member's question it went through Cabinet yesterday—just to be clear—and I actually rang Labour as soon as I could afterwards. I actually went straight back to my office and rang the spokesperson. I offered him a briefing by officials and was told that Labour did not want one.
Bennett PaulaHon PAULA BENNETT (Minister of Police): As I previously stated none of the 107 are deportees from overseas—none of them.
Davis KelvinKELVIN DAVIS (Labour—Te Tai Tokerau): I have got questions as well—and I would just like them clarified—around clause 5 in terms of a corresponding registrable offender. It is talking about people who have been in the detention centres and have been sent back. I do not want to buy into that hysteria that they are all murderers and rapists—we know that was overblown—but there will be in that group some people who were child sex offenders. I am just trying to work my way through these additional groups—to just give an example the child sex offenders serving short-term sentences of 2 years' imprisonment or less who had reached their statutory release date before 14 October 2016. I am talking about child sex offenders who were in detention centres who may have been out of prison for 1 or 2 years and been kept in detention. The question is will those offenders who have been deported but who have spent 2 or 3 years in detention centres after their sentence in say Australia—will they still be captured by this or is there some gap there? It is a genuine question. I am just really not quite sure exactly whether they do fit into this so that is just a question for the Minister. I see her shaking her head but I just do not want any person whom we think should be eligible to go on the register to miss out because of that gap in time after the end of their sentence in Australia which was the time they spent in detention centres—and technically they were free people; just freely detained" I guess are the words—before coming back here."
Bennett PaulaHon PAULA BENNETT (Minister of Police): I am going to respect that the member previously speaking Louisa Wall has not listened to all of the debate. I mean that in the context where we have already stated quite clearly that they are being monitored. I just want to be really clear with the Committee and really clear with the public that all 107 have absolutely been monitored by both Corrections and the police depending on the circumstances of their release conditions because that is how it is done.Their release conditions are not based on the class of their offence but on their risk assessment. That is for a number of reasons—so whether it is around rehabilitation. Of course their actual offence is taken into consideration when those release conditions are met.There is absolutely no doubt that the register obviously and part of the main reason for it does impose other conditions. Quite frankly that is why we are here right now because from 14 October everyone is on the register and is being monitored like that. As I said previously it was completely the intention of Parliament that those 107 would be on the register. There are some sections in the Act as people can see where they have to let the police know whether for example they are moving house. I can tell you that Police and Corrections have been monitoring all of them; they know where they are. They are doing it as closely to the register as they can without quite having that.I just think we have to be careful that we are not being overly alarming for the public out there who quite rightly should be worried about people with these kinds of offences behind them. I want to absolutely assure the Committee that these offenders are being monitored. The other thing is that none of the 107 are deportees; all of them have got convictions from within New Zealand.As far as clause 5 which amends section 8 is concerned and the work that is going on there this stuff is pretty technical. Once we are changing one clause within it that being that main clause where we are absolutely clarifying the difference between the definition relying on the point of sentencing and not the point of conviction because that is the retrospective part of the legislation that has caused this problem that there is one particular quite defined group—well actually three groups because they are slightly different which is what makes it complicated. Once we changed one we then had to go through and make sure that obviously the whole amendment bill fits with that one original clause that we are clarifying for the purposes to make sure that we are doing what we intended. I think that answers the questions.
Sepuloni CarmelCARMEL SEPULONI (Labour—Kelston): I will take just a really short call because I have a couple of questions for the Minister too. The Minister has just said that the register is best placed with her ministry and what her portfolio overlooks—so the Justice and Electoral Committee?Poto Williams: It went to the Social Services Committee.CARMEL SEPULONI: No but it is with the Justice and Electoral Committee now. So she is saying that this register is best placed with the Justice and Electoral Committee. I just want to know when the Government gained that realisation because I mean the whole original legislation went through the Social Services Committee. I would also be really interested to hear from Minister Tolley—given that she was responsible for seeing the original legislation through—to find out what the reasons were for the fact that there were oversights with regard to the original legislation and now we are back here less than 6 months after it was introduced to amend that. I would like to know from Minister Tolley why that is the case rather than the Minister now who is taking over.When was the realisation gained? Was it gained once the mistakes were discovered—that perhaps the Social Services Committee was not the best place? Because it really did take the Government quite a while to work that one out. And yes definitely I would like to see Minister Tolley in the chair as well to respond to some of the questions here given that she was responsible for the original legislation. So will we be seeing Minister Tolley in the chair tonight? That would be I think very worthwhile for this Committee of the whole House.
Bennett PaulaHon PAULA BENNETT (Minister of Police): Thank you to that member Poto Williams. The Police have informed me that the 107 will be on the register within 48 hours of this bill passing through; hence the urgency for tonight. I heard previous speakers talking about processing about whether or not this should have gone to select committee. I actually considered that a lot because I do respect the process of this House and the process of all MPs and the public getting to look at legislation. It was because I am not changing the intent of the legislation at all. That was debated somewhat and I get that you have got a slightly different argument in that you are saying that actually it just gives it that level of scrutiny. But I felt that it had been right through that. Trust me this is one mistake—this is not a Minister's finest moment to have to be standing up in the Chamber and changing something.The reason that we are back here so quickly after the legislation had been passed and the Act put in place is purely because of that retrospectivity. So you will not be back again because it is that one particular if you like unique group that is causing the problems for them being put on to the register—that being around that retrospectivity. So everybody who has committed these offences and been sentenced since 14 October is on the register. I am horrified to have to say that it is hundreds of people. So they are on the register and they are going through all of that process. There is this group that has been questioned they were questioned legally and it came down to technical wording. As I say they will definitely be put on to the register. That is the whole purpose of us being here.To be quite frank with the Committee I got advice that said I did not have to do this—I could have left them off the register if you like. It was my opinion as Minister—and I do want to clarify actually while I am there as well that this has been passed to the Police from the Ministry of Social Development because that is the best place for the register to sit and for it to be owned; hence me being the Minister fronting up today to do this.But it was absolutely in my opinion the intent of this Parliament—and as a consequence of that the intent of the public—that those 107 are on the register. So there was no question for me about coming here and fronting up and getting that fixed so that they have the extra monitoring that goes along with being on the register. That is why we are here today. That is why I am putting the bill through under urgency. That is why I did choose not to go to select committee because I think—well I know that we are not changing the intent and as such I did not think it needed that level of debate and that this would do.
Williams PotoParts 1 and 2 and clauses 1 to 3POTO WILLIAMS (Labour—Christchurch East): I am pleased to take a call in this Committee of the whole House on the amendment bill to correct a piece of legislation that was passed only in October of last year.I have got a specific question that I would like to ask the Minister in the chair the Hon Paula Bennett and that question is: will this amendment actually correct the legislation so that the 107 offenders who have been excluded by the original primary legislation will now be captured by the amendment? Will they now actually become eligible for the sex offender register? Why I ask that question is that during the first and second readings of this amendment bill we were very clear that we were concerned that we had to come back to amend the piece of legislation so soon after it was originally adopted by the House. There were some concerns that the original promoter of the bill and the original select committee were not entirely appropriate and perhaps equipped to deal with the technical aspects of the legislation given that some very smart legal people have since the introduction of the primary legislation managed to find this loophole and I presume managed to get the people whom they were representing off the register or to become ineligible to be part of the register. So I am really hoping that the Minister will be able to answer that question.We are very concerned about the truncated nature of the process in that we want to make sure that we get this amendment absolutely right. The primary role of legislators of course is around public safety and the safety of our children is absolutely paramount and the child sex offenders register has some real resonance in the community. Many parents expressed some real concern particularly during the debate on the primary legislation and their fears could be allayed by the introduction of the register. Then we find that no sooner has the legislation come into force we have found some fault with it.We would want to ensure that we get it right. It is right and proper that we are in urgency to conduct this amendment but we want to ensure that we can allay the fears of members of the public parents in particular and particularly those of I think Hutt South and Māngere who expressed concerns when sex offenders were released into their communities—that they would be monitored appropriately.We know that in the primary legislation there were certain conditions with regard to the release of sex offenders. But I would like to be assured if the Minister has got the information that this will make sure that those 107 offenders who were excluded from the primary legislation due to the technicality around release conditions and conditional release and the date of sentencing—that this issue will now be resolved and they will actually be eligible to be part of the register. Thank you.
Sepuloni Carmel; Tisch LindsayIn CommitteeCARMEL SEPULONI (Junior Whip—Labour): I seek leave to take all provisions as one broad-ranging debate.The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is no objection.
Kuriger BarbaraBARBARA KURIGER (National—Taranaki - King Country): This is just a short call on the Child Protection (Child Sex Offender Government Agency Registration) Amendment Bill. The amendments are being introduced today to make it clear that the registration requirements apply to all child sex offenders who were intended to be on the register when it came into force on 14 October 2016. It is about protecting children from harm. It is my pleasure to commend this bill to the House.
McKelvie IanIAN McKELVIE (National—Rangitīkei): My very brief contribution to the second reading of this bill will primarily concern the need for some urgency around correcting I suppose mistakes that from time to time occur in the drafting of legislation anywhere. That is not unusual—well I suppose it is comparatively unusual but it is certainly not completely unusual for that sort of thing to have happened in this House over the last many many years. But the need for some urgency in correcting this in my view relates to the fact that when you have got a piece of legislation that is intended to deal with a set of circumstances and it does not do it then it is urgent that we recover that position and that is in fact what this bill is doing. It is a very simple piece of legislation. It does not change the intent of the policy or the intent of the legislation—well it does change the intent of the legislation somewhat but I think it is a common-sense bit of legislation. I commend it to the House.
Salesa JennyJENNY SALESA (Labour—Manukau East): Thank you for this opportunity to make a speech on the Child Protection (Child Sex Offender Government Agency Registration) Amendment Bill. I think you will find agreement from most members of this House because protecting our children is absolutely the right thing for all of us to be doing. As parents and as caregivers—as a mother of two young daughters—we usually do whatever it takes to protect our children. Indeed it is crucial to manage any risks posed to all of our children especially risks posed by convicted child sex offenders. This bill we are debating today is supposed to manage the risks and harm that might possibly befall our young children in the community—risks that might be posed by convicted child sex offenders who have finished their sentences as well as those who are serving their time out in the community. We know from coverage in the media that there have been many many cases where convicted child sex offenders are sent out into the community and some of them—in South Auckland and Māngere specifically—have been placed right opposite schools. There are some out in my area as well who have been placed right next door to various families. It is unfortunate that this simple measure with such a large impact has been botched up and we are here today debating this bill in urgency in order to ensure that the law works properly. Due to faulty drafting the principal Act which was passed in October of 2016 has meant that some of the offenders who were meant to actually be captured by the register may not be registrable which is why we are debating this under urgency. Labour does not have a problem with Government agencies sharing information. However we do have a problem with shoddy legislation like this which requires urgent fix-ups. It is what we are having to spend a few hours today debating. One of the non-governmental agencies—just yesterday actually—referred to my office for me to go and check out a boarding house. This is a boarding house that is not even in my opinion safe to walk into. You walk up to the front door and you cannot even walk up and knock on the front door because the front door itself has been taken down and made into a plank so that it is safe for you to walk into the building. These are the sorts of boarding houses that a lot of our convicted folks are sent out to. There are seven different individuals living in this particular place not just in the house but in sheds outside as well as in caravans. Labour supports this bill because it is absolutely the right thing to do. However we want to make it absolutely clear that mistakes in drafting legislation such as this—potentially very serious ones—are not OK and the public should be made aware of that. Thank you.
Young Jonathan; Tisch LindsayJONATHAN YOUNG (National—New Plymouth): I just want to acknowledge the previous speaker. I think he has a good grasp of the intent of the purpose of this bill. I cannot quite understand and still do not why the Green Party has objections to it. Just briefly how the register works: there are 1659 people on the register as at 25 January this year so there are a substantial number of people whom this applies to. However there are 107 child sex offenders who ought to be on this register as intended by the legislation but are not. That is a substantial number of people and this bill is to ensure that those who are intended to be on the register are.By gathering information authorities are able to keep track of child sex offenders while also being alerted to any changes in their circumstances. Agencies continually gather updated personal information which can then be assessed and analysed to determine whether reoffending is more likely to take place so that the necessary action can be taken. This is all intended to be preventative not punitive. It is to protect communities and also to put the necessary support around those sex offenders who have come out of prison or who may be in fact on a non-custodial sentence. All registered child sex offenders are required to report to the police within 72 hours of their release from prison or after receiving a non-custodial sentence if directed to register by a judge. They need to provide a range of information including fingerprints photographs aliases addresses workplace and employer car registration internet details and passport details.The register is not open to the public but in some cases where there is a threat to the safety of children information may be released to a third party such as the parent or guardian of the child or a teacher or caregiver responsible for a child. The reason why it is not made public is that a public register would increase the risk of vigilantism and have the potential to drive offenders underground where authorities would have no information on them and would not be able to manage and assess their risk. As I said before in my first reading speech this is one of the most complex areas of justice regarding our communities and I believe that this bill lands it in the right place and we are ensuring that.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): This is a split call and I am calling Jan Logie—5 minutes.
Pugh MaureenMAUREEN PUGH (National): I rise again in support of the Child Protection (Child Sex Offender Government Agency Registration) Amendment Bill now in its second reading this afternoon just to clarify that this bill does not actually introduce new policy. It is simply clarifying and giving effect to the original policy intent of the legislation that was passed last year. There has been some confusion about two aspects of the original bill which has allowed some offenders who should have been on the child sex offender register to have been removed from it.The two compartments are those who have been convicted and subject to release conditions—there are 107 of those offenders who have been taken off the register as a result of that confusion—and also those who were convicted but not yet sentenced. Of those there are 67 offenders who qualify in that category. So the intent of this amendment is to clarify for all concerned that all of those offenders should be on the register and will indeed be on the register.This Government has invested half a billion dollars in its Safer Communities package and part of that includes 74 additional specialist investigators who are targeting the serious offending against our children and our most vulnerable people and that includes sexual assault and family violence. So this bill clarifies the intent of the original policy and I have pleasure in commending it to the House.