Andersen GinnyGINNY ANDERSEN (Labour): Thank you Mr Speaker for the opportunity to speak on the Criminal Cases Review Commission Bill. It's interesting just to quickly recap on some of the arguments tonight that I've been quite puzzled with as to why the National Party are not supporting this bill. I've taken a few notes while I've been listening. One is that this would establish a new bureaucracy. Another argument has been that instead of having a criminal cases review authority we should just simply have another layer of appeal or create another court. We've heard that there's been concerns that this would potentially revictimise victims of crime. We've also heard from the members opposite that this would be too expensive—it would simply cost too much. Chris Penk thought that we should change maybe just a few things Tim Macindoe favoured the status quo and now we've just heard that this will open the floodgates. Well that one clear deduction that can be made from that is that the National Party simply didn't have any key lines as to why they were opposing this bill. They just don't like it and that's the problem. We over this side of the House are quite united as to why this forms a very good piece of legislation and why New Zealand in fact will be benefited quite substantially from a bill that will enhance justice processes and give New Zealand citizens better-quality justice. So the policy content behind establishing the commission is to enhance the independence the timeliness the quality and the fairness of investigations into miscarriages of justice. The commission is expected to achieve this objective because amongst other things as an independent Crown entity the commission will be independent of Government policy and also ministerial decision-making and that gives an added layer and a better sense of justice in New Zealand. Dedicated resourcing and additional powers to access information will be likely to make it more efficient than the current process so that speaks to the argument also of simply creating another layer of appeal. The specialist skill that will be available of the commissioners and the commission's staff will ensure that investigations are of high quality and also less burden is being placed on the applicant so that in itself will be of benefit for those going through the process. It is designed to be more accessible and more transparent than the current system—particularly for Māori and Pasifika communities—and that's a point that's been picked up by some of the changes that we saw go through from the select committee process. The select committee was a really interesting time to hear from different submitters and we received 32 different submissions from individuals and from organisations. Now out of that pile eight of those didn't give a particular view but I would like to say that none of them—none of those submissions—outright opposed or said that this new commission should not be set up. All submitters expressed a view in support of the intent of the bill and many submitters suggested some clarifications in terms of how things could be improved but I think it's a very important point to note that all those that we heard thought that the principle and the concept of doing this was a valid one and one that would enhance justice processes within New Zealand. We heard changes that were recommended in terms of the size and the composition of the commission and also the ability of whether the commission should be able to consider historical cases where the person convicted and sentenced is now deceased. We also heard whether the commission should be able to refer sentences back to the courts or not and whether the information-gathering powers in the bill achieved the right balance between the need for secure information and sensitivity—including privileged and confidential information—and individual rights. What the Justice Committee did in addition to the submissions that it received was that we also took the time to write back to the New Zealand Human Rights Commission to try and understand and we asked for some further information. One of the areas that the committee particularly wanted additional information on and received it was also to know how often were there issues of structural discrimination institutional bias and overrepresentation of vulnerable communities in the criminal justice system. That was a particular area that the committee went back to the Human Rights Commission and received additional information on. Can I just say thank you to the Human Rights Commission because they were so engaging so willing and so forthright and able to come and give additional information in quite a short period of time in order to allow the committee to get its work done. It has been a really interesting process to be part of and the concerns that have been raised in the past—and let's be frank there have been some high-profile cases in New Zealand where there have been some really significant concerns regarding the miscarriage of justice. Instead of just maintaining the status quo as some of those members opposite would have us do this Government is taking the initiative to actually take action and to put into place a far more rigorous and a clearer way for people to have that right to justice should they request that. Concerns have been raised in the past about the timeliness the quality the fairness and the independence of the current system for investigating suspected miscarriages of justice and this bill replaces the royal prerogative of mercy by establishing the Criminal Cases Review Commission as an independent Crown entity to review convictions and sentences where there is that concern. By having those in place the commission will substantially improve New Zealand's system for responding to miscarriages of justice. We've seen times in the past where we've had to have additional inquiries we've had ministerial involvement there's been speculation in the media and there's been ongoing issues. But by having a purpose-built commission set up to take this role it gives certainty gives transparency and gives—I think—greater rigour to New Zealand's justice system. This is a great idea. I'm proud that this is a part of our coalition agreement with our partners New Zealand First. It forms a really important part of strengthening our justice system in giving victims and offenders a strong sense of confidence that when people come before our courts and before our judicial system it will be done with the confidence that it operates fairly. Thank you.