Burton Mark: Independent Police Complaints Authority Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Burton Mark: Independent Police Complaints Authority Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:641;Page:11525] 
Hon MARK BURTON (Minister of Justice) 
: 
 Dr Worth raised a couple of points that are perhaps timely at this early stage of the consideration of the bill to get on the record in order to clarify for members who may not be aware and also for other interested members of the public that the Independent Police Complaints Authority Amendment Bill was introduced as Dr Worth quite correctly indicated back in December 2002. It sought to implement the recommendations that Sir Rodney Gallen made in the review that he had undertaken in 2000 and of course parallel to the bill we are considering a Supplementary Order Paper that has been drafted among other things to give effect to some of the core recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry into Police Conduct which reported relatively recently. 
That in part explains the circuitous journey of this bill through the Parliament because although the bill was reported back from the Law and Order Committee it was reported back at about the same time that allegations of historical serious misconduct were made against members of the New Zealand Police. In February 2004 the Commission of Inquiry into Police Conduct that I referred to was established to inquire into those allegations about the conduct of police. One of the decisions that was taken by the Minister at the time was to put this bill on hold because it was deemed likely that such an inquiry might well bring down some recommendations that would be relevant and relate directly to the measures in this bill. So the bill was effectively put on hold. 
A decision was taken as that commission of inquiry progressed—but took longer than had been anticipated—to move ahead with the bill again. But when the commission’s terms of reference were amended in May 2005 so that it was able to continue its inquiries but not impinge on the criminal investigations and proceedings relating to any of the original allegations again it was determined that it was prudent to hold this bill in abeyance until such time as Dame Margaret Bazley’s commission reported its findings. 
That I think members generally would agree has proven to be an appropriate decision because indeed of the recommendations that came from the commission of inquiry investigation some 12 recommendations directly related to the Police Complaints Authority. So with the benefit of those recommendations it was possible for the Government to move quickly with a Supplementary Order Paper that ensures that the bill we are now considering alongside the Supplementary Order Paper deals with those matters that need to be dealt with as quickly as possible. 
The other matter that I will comment briefly on is that Dr Worth noted the name change advanced by the Supplementary Order Paper which changes the Police Complaints Authority to the Independent Police Conduct Authority. He raises the question of whether there is anything much in a name or whether there is any great point to be taken from this change. I suggest to members that there is indeed. The emphasis is on the status of this authority as an independent entity. It also clarifies its role which is not just confined to investigation of complaints but does include investigating incidents involving death or serious harm and serious misconduct or neglect of duty. In the name Independent Police Conduct Authority we see a more accurate reflection of the range—the extended range—of responsibilities which Dr Worth referred to in his closing comment. The authority will indeed have an expansion of function and it is appropriate that that is reflected in the name of the authority. 
Finally I note that whereas the principal Act currently provides for a sole authority with an option of appointing a deputy expanding the authority’s membership to up to five members including a chairperson who must be a judge or a retired judge which the bill now does will I suggest to members increase the authority’s capacity to deal with complaints allow for wider representation and in the end give greater confidence in the authority’s competence and independence. These changes reflect the nature of the expansion of the authority’s function and a desire to ensure the appropriate connection of the authority to the different strands of experience and expertise in the community.