Dean Jacqui: Human Rights Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDean Jacqui: Human Rights Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 11 March 2015. Volume:703;Page:2193. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JACQUI DEAN (National—Waitaki): Well the House will not be hearing from me the argument that we have reached the peak in terms of equal opportunities or race relations nor indeed the peak in terms of disability issues which is why I want to focus much of my speech tonight in the second reading of the Human Rights Amendment Bill specifically on the establishment of a commissioner with responsibility for leadership in disability rights within the Human Rights Commission. I acknowledge that Jacinda Ardern the speaker who has just resumed her seat was a member of the Justice and Electoral Committee in the last Parliament—I am pretty sure of that—whereas I was not so I have not had the benefit of sitting through the full parliamentary process. But I do know some things as do we all and one is that disabled people in New Zealand suffer—in myriad ways large and small—discrimination most days of their lives from a very early age through to adulthood and that those casual discriminations often continue well into adulthood.I will say on a personal note being very close to a person with a significant disability that that person has had to fight from childhood from babyhood. First of all—and I will generalise it out to anybody—any child any baby born with a significant lifelong disability will have to fight for their whole life. Their family will have to fight for them. They will have to fight the social welfare system perhaps. They will have to fight to get good medical treatment and to get good treatment through their schooling years in whatever form their education takes and that may or may not start at 5 and it may or may not end at 16—it may go on for many many years and take many forms. But always always always that disabled person and their family and their support will have to fight so that that disabled person continues to get the rights that those of us New Zealanders without a disability can sometimes take for granted.It does not mean—and I do not want to say—that disabled people are necessarily hard done by. And God forbid because they would not want to be regarded as being hard done by—far from it. But what I think it does for people of disability in New Zealand is it makes them very very strong of character and very very full of resolve to live good lives. Despite all that—despite all the support that disabled people should could and can get from their families from their supporters from their loved ones and from the State—they are still prone to suffering discriminatory behaviour disparaging comments misunderstandings and deliberate or maybe casual slights and insults. It does not matter where it might pop up and they certainly will not be expecting it or anticipating it but bang there it is and there goes their day. And that is the lot of a disabled person. So in this Human Rights Amendment Bill—and look I have not had the benefit of sitting through the select committee process and of hearing the submissions coming from the community but I guess from my own second-hand experience—I am so pleased to see the establishment of a full-time commissioner with the role of advocating on behalf of disabled people.As parliamentarians—those of us who hold regular constituency clinics and who go and see people—often we have disabled people and their representatives coming to see us who are struggling with maybe a Government agency or maybe an NGO or maybe something that is happening in their lives. Maybe there was an incident at the supermarket or an incident at the movie theatre—it does not matter. Those people come to their parliamentarians for assistance and we all do what we can because that is our job and we care about people—that is why we do this job. But now when this bill is enacted and I think when it receives the Royal assent there will be the ability for a full-time commissioner with responsibility for disability rightsto be appointed. Good stuff good job—really pleased to see that.I think of when just a couple of weeks ago somebody came to see me who had been treated in the most appalling way in a public place. They had been treated most appallingly and probably not even intentionally but this person had been humiliated in public for no better reason than he was not quite normal—he was in a wheelchair. Those little slights and humiliations—the person perpetrating them well they will be held to account I do hope. But for the person who is offended against in this way they need a recourse; they need somewhere to be able to express the impact that this hurt and humiliation has had upon them because it might not be unlawful. The person doing it to them might not have contravened a law or a rule or a regulation but harm has still been done to that person and now we have a commissioner whose role it will be to back their corner. Good job is what I say.But of course that is not all that is contained in this Human Rights Amendment Bill. There are some changes being made to the structure and form of the commission and this is designed to strengthen its performance. So I do have to disagree with the contention of the previous speaker—and I enjoyed her contribution; I think it was a thoughtful contribution—that the roles of the Equal Employment Opportunities Commissioner and the Race Relations Commissioner have been somehow diminished by beingfolded back if you like into the Human Rights Commission. I would probably say this in response to that concern: it is not so much that the roles of the Race Relations Commissioner and the Equal Employment Opportunities Commissioner have been diminished but rather that they have been unified together with the Disabilities Commissioner and unified under the banner of the Human Rights Commission—and that is I guess a wider term and it brings a more unified approach to the Human Rights Commission. So it does not matter whether it is a disabilities issue it does not matter whether it is an equal employment opportunity issue or indeed a race relations issue; they are commissioners and they are part of the Human Rights Commission.So going back for just a moment to the Disabilities Commissioner of course the Act did not allow for that commissioner position to be created and so we have this bill before us. The Act does not currently allow for formalised leadership roles in other prioritised areas. So although it was obviously the desire of many of us to have a Disabilities Commissioner the Act simply did not allow it. So this bill brought forward by the Minister of Justice satisfies that need. It also provides for a more focused approach on behalf of the Human Rights Commission. I have no problem with the Human Rights Commission consulting with the Minister. Is that not what they should be doing? Is not dialogue one of the most useful things we have when we have an Act of Parliament which in this case is the Human Rights Act and we have commissioners appointed? They are not there to take direction from the Minister but I think dialogue going both ways can only be helpful because the Minister does not have the ability to direct the commissioners and no good commissioner will allow themselves to be directed and they should not do that. But I think that consultation and a focusing of the Human Rights Commission can be only a good thing.Finally I just want to note that this amendment satisfies our requirements under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. New Zealand is responding to its responsibilities under the UN convention and so we bring this bill to the House. I endorse it. I think it is a good step forward in recognising the rights of people with disabilities. It brings a focus to the Human Rights Commission and I commend the bill to the House.