Chauvel Charles: Human Rights (Women in Armed Forces) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Chauvel Charles: Human Rights (Women in Armed Forces) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:633;Page:5259] 
CHARLES CHAUVEL (Labour) 
: 
 I am delighted that my first substantive speech in the House apart from my maiden speech supports the broadening of human rights in New Zealand. I rise to support the repeal of section 33 of the Human Rights Act. 
I worked closely with the Hon Katherine O’Regan and others in the early 1990s to ensure that the new Human Rights Act would be a satisfactory law. At the time that Act was passed the New Zealand Defence Force had a policy of not allowing women to serve in combat roles. That policy was formally rescinded in 2000 but section 33 of the Act remained as part of the law of New Zealand. Section 33 no longer reflects the reality of New Zealand’s modern defence force. Women already take a full part in the operations of our armed forces in New Zealand and around the world. Their contribution is invaluable and repealing this now-redundant provision will help to acknowledge that contribution. I am proud of this Government’s commitment to upholding and advancing human rights in New Zealand and internationally. It has made an excellent contribution to the goal of creating and sustaining a world-leading human rights environment where people are able to reach their individual and collective potential. This is the latest in a series of Acts that have attempted to put in place a progressive and comprehensive human rights framework in New Zealand. The 2001 amendment to the Human Rights Act the Care of Children Act 2004 the Civil Union Act 2004 the Relationship (Statutory References) Act 2005 and the New Zealand Sign Language Act 2006 can be seen in common with this legislation as part of that effort. 
At present New Zealand maintains reservations to the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination Against Women reserving the right not to apply the provisions of the convention to the service of women in situations involving armed combat. This is New Zealand’s only remaining reservation for the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination Against Women after the Government was able to withdraw two reservations relating to paid parental leave in 2003. The reservation was originally entered due to practical difficulties accommodating women on military vessels and aircraft and beliefs at the time about women’s physical ability to serve in combat roles. If these reasons ever had any validity they certainly do not apply to the New Zealand Defence Force today. Overall New Zealand maintains just 10 reservations to five international human rights treaties. That small number indicates this country’s strong commitment to human rights and to our international obligations. It is good practice periodically to reconsider the need for such reservations and in my view the time has come for this reservation to be withdrawn. 
In 2003 the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women urged New Zealand to expedite the steps necessary for the withdrawal of this reservation to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination Against Women. There no longer appears to be any policy or operational reason for maintaining that reservation but the ongoing presence on the statute book of section 33 precludes full compliance with the convention. The repeal of section 33 should allow the Government to consider whether the remaining reservation to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination Against Women should then be withdrawn. 
The reservation also applies to the recruitment and service of women in the police to the extent that they are required to serve in situations involving violence or the threat of violence. Before the reservation can be withdrawn the Government would need to consider obviously whether it is necessary to allow different standards to be applied by the police for recruitment and fitness maintenance although this is not directly relevant to the repeal of section 33. Obviously the Government would also need to consult the Governments of the Cook Islands and Niue before withdrawing the reservation. 
As I have already said this Government seeks to continue to promote a fair and inclusive society and to demonstrate leadership in the area of human rights. This amendment and the future withdrawal of reservations to international human rights treaties where possible demonstrate our commitment to the international human rights framework. The bill is timely and I want to take this opportunity to commend Lynne Pillay for its introduction. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley) 
: Just before I call the member there has been a power surge. The lights will come on in about 10 minutes.