Logie Jan; Rurawhe AdrianJAN LOGIE (Green): I'll just take a very brief call on this the final committee stage debate actually to respond to some of the issues that were being raised by the Opposition members and the point about questioning the Minister about whether there'll be changes if it doesn't meet a New Zealand Bill of Rights Act vet. This has had two Bill of Rights vets as it's gone through the process. It's quite extraordinary to me that somehow that can't quite land with some members in the National Party.Also I do just want to restate for the record at this stage actually what's in the legislation around the process of pre-record because we've had the suggestion that it will just become the default. So what is in the legislation is that the prosecutor will be responsible for selecting the way that evidence would be given after consultation with the witness. That may be pre-record that may be behind a screen or that may be CCTV depending on what the witness's preference is and what they deem is most appropriate for the case. That decision will always take into account the benefits and the risks and there is not an absolute entitlement at all in this legislation. The defence has the right to contest that application and the judge will consider and can decline on their own motion. There are checks right through in terms of that process.It has been well established by our Court of Appeal that pre-recorded cross-examination does not necessarily clash with the defendant's right to a fair trial and that's been shown again and again in overseas jurisdictions where this is the norm. You know this has been in place in Australia since 1992 and it has been well reviewed in those jurisdictions and found not to have any negative impact and in fact some positive impacts on the quality of trial evidence. Also even when the method has been nominated and if it's going to be pre-record there is the ability to reschedule if the defence or the prosecution does not have their evidence together for that time frame. Then finally there's the ability to recall a witness which we hope—and in overseas jurisdictions that has been very rare.So I really just wanted to put that on record because there's been a lot of discussion as if this is just you know carte blanche pre-record is always going to happen a year in advance. Also with this is that there is now a process of working out the guidance and I think from memory regulations around the process of pre-record and that will involve the defence lawyers in that process. Everybody in every step of the way in this legislation has been incredibly conscious of the need to protect the right to fair trial. It is at the heart of our justice system. But the problem is at the moment when we look at our prevalence data of sexual violence and our conviction rate it shows we have a 1 percent conviction rate and that is telling us clearly that a large number of victims are not getting a fair trial. Our duty as a country is to hold the integrity of the system for every party and this legislation is a really important step towards achieving that.Clause 1 agreed to.CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): The question is that the Minister's amendments to clause 2 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 105 be agreed to.Amendments agreed to.Clause 2 as amended agreed to. Progress to be reported.House resumed.