Pillay Lynne: Courts and Criminal Matters Bill — First Reading 
Pillay Lynne: Courts and Criminal Matters Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:663;Page:11000] 
LYNNE PILLAY (Labour) 
: 
 It is a pleasure to stand and speak in support of the Courts and Criminal Matters Bill. I join many colleagues from all sides of the House in congratulating Rick Barker because the drafting of this bill was done under the previous Labour Government. I do not want to be churlish but it is a pity perhaps that this bill was not brought forward. It could have been in the raft of bills that was rushed through under urgency when this Government first came into office; I think this bill would have been far more effective than many of the bills that were passed at that time. Labour is supporting this bill not just—but mainly—because Labour drafted the bill. However one thing missing from the bill that Labour drafted is an overarching agency with responsibility for fines. There is no provision for it in the legislation. Like other members I welcome the bill’s referral to the hard-working Justice and Electoral Committee I think— 
Hon Member 
: Law and order. 
LYNNE PILLAY 
: —no it is the Law and Order Committee. It is a relatively hard-working select committee. It is not quite as hard-working as the Justice and Electoral Committee of course but the bill will go to that select committee where as members who have spoken earlier have said the public will be able to make submissions and the bill will be given very careful scrutiny. It amends at least 20 pieces of legislation. I know that with the support of the hard-working staff of the select committee and officials extra bits are often picked up during that process to enable the legislation when it is enacted to work effectively. This bill is certainly long overdue and members on this side of the House support it. 
Basically the bill introduces the driver licence stop orders proposal that we have seen in other countries. If I can use Australia as an example it has increased the success rate for the collection of fines there. I will pause and look at how large the amount of unpaid fines is. Between July 2008 and June 2009 the courts wiped $95 million in fines and that was out of a total of $806 million in unpaid fines. The amount wiped was absolutely substantial. As we are all aware if fines are not paid then the penalties mount up and it becomes an ever-decreasing circle for offenders. Given the large and growing number of outstanding penalties the effectiveness of having monetary penalties as a sanction becomes eroded because it almost becomes impossible once the fines are not paid and the penalties mount up for offenders to look realistically at paying them. Also if we look at the number of unpaid fines that were remitted to community work we see that their monetary value has more than tripled over the last 5 years from $16.6 million in 2005 to $55.7 million last year. We are talking about a substantial amount of money and it is very important that we retrieve that money. 
I will talk briefly about some of the amendments to Acts made by the bill. Part 1 amends the District Courts Act 1947 to allow deductions to be made from wages and benefits in order to pay debts. The bill is aiming to streamline the enforcement process by enabling judgment creditors to file a financial statement to enable deductions to be made. This is obviously of assistance in terms of getting the money but it also assists someone who is in trouble. As there is a process for paying off those fines then obviously there will not be an escalation of penalties for the offender that would only escalate the problem of paying back the money. 
Part 2 amends the Land Transport Act 1998. That part authorises driver licence stop orders. This is a new enforcement measure. As I said before it is successful. It will allow for the suspension of drivers’ licences where the driver has not made any arrangements to pay overdue traffic penalties. Under this new measure liable persons would be sent a warning notice so there is that warning. The bill gives them 14 days in which to resolve those penalties before the suspension of their licence. If that does not happen then the driver licence stop orders would suspend all drivers’ licences held by people in default and that would include limited licences. So it is getting quite tough. There is the warning. You have to—not you Mr Deputy Speaker; certainly not you—but offenders have 14 days in which to pay those penalties. But if that does not happen then the regime is able to be followed through. Following a driver licence stop order until all the overdue traffic penalties are resolved through payment or there is a negotiated payment agreement that order stays in place. If a person drives in breach of that order then his or her vehicle will be impounded for 28 days. So there are behavioural consequences. There is some clarity in terms of how to get the penalties paid—to either pay them or enter into an agreement. If those penalties are breached there will be actions taken against offenders. 
Part 3 relates to amendments to the Summary Proceedings Act 1957. There is also streamlining of the infringement system. The Act will be amended to improve the operation of the infringement system the court collection and enforcement processes by addressing inconsistencies that are already in place and by increasing operational efficiency and flexibility. That operational efficiency and flexibility will be very very positive. It is not all Draconian; it will actually enable offenders to take responsibility for their actions and at the same time not have mounting debt because they face up and get that debt paid off. As I said before it is a pity that there is no single agency that has responsibility for fines. It will be interesting to see whether it is within scope that some amendments can be made. But history has shown us and I think the Ministry of Justice research shows that when people cross a certain threshold of money owed—and that is around $2000 for a young person—they become unwilling and unable to even attempt to pay off those fines. That is a lose-lose situation. There are no winners in that. If we can address this matter and begin to get those fines paid off then it will obviously be to the advantage of offenders because they will not have escalating debt and it will also be of advantage to the Ministry of Justice coffers. 
So along with my colleagues I again offer my congratulations to Rick Barker and even to the National Government—being perhaps a little tardy but none the less picking up this bill. I am very happy to speak in support of it.