Wilkinson Kate: Evidence Bill — In Committee 
Wilkinson Kate: Evidence Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:635;Page:6640] 
KATE WILKINSON (National) 
: 
 Thank you Madam Chairperson for allowing me to take this call. I must say that I am absolutely delighted to take a call on the Evidence Bill—on Part 1 in particular. I was interested in the explanatory note of the bill which stated: “In 1989 the Law Commission was given terms of reference by the Minister of Justice to make the law of evidence as clear simple and accessible as practicable”. As one who studied the law of evidence some 30 years ago I have to say it was neither clear nor simple nor even very accessible even in those days. Having not appeared in court for some 26 years I have to say that the law of evidence is not really very much easier either. 
This bill has been a long time in the making. I too congratulate the subcommittee of the Justice and Electoral Committee on having the patience the tenacity and the ability to wade through the current evidence complexities and to tie them into a comprehensive codifying and hopefully simpler bill. 
To reiterate on the current situation and by way of introduction evidence law is largely judge-made and the statutory provisions that deal with evidence are contained in a number of statutes. Evidence law has been reformed on a piecemeal basis since about 1908 and issues have been responded to reactively as they have arisen. The explanatory note of the bill was rather descriptive: “The Evidence Bill brings the current mosaic of case law and statute into one comprehensive regime.” This bill’s fundamental principle is that all relevant evidence is admissible unless there is some reason to exclude it—for example if it is irrelevant if its probative value is outweighed by its prejudicial effect or if it would needlessly prolong any proceedings. 
It is indicative of the complexity of this area firstly that my colleague Mr Finlayson finds it so intriguing but secondly that the Law Commission spent a decade reviewing aspects of evidence law publishing discussion papers and seeking the views of those involved with the justice sector. This legislation is hugely technical but it is also hugely important and it is pleasing to note that it has been dealt with in a non-partisan way. 
 I turn to Part 1 which is one of the shorter parts. Mr Finlayson has already mentioned some of the definitions in the interpretation clause. The definition of “document” will hopefully be amended by Supplementary Order Paper 79. The new definition is fairly self-explanatory. It will include any material whether or not it is signed or otherwise authenticated that bears symbols images or sounds or from which symbols images or sounds can be derived. The point about definitions is that they have to be able to foresee what is happening in the future. With technology advancing as quickly as it is at the present time the definition of “document” does have to be very very wide. It has to take into account future technology. In that regard the Supplementary Order Paper will amend the definition of “document” to include information that is electronically recorded or stored and information derived from that information. 
One of the cornerstones of evidence law is of course the hearsay rule. That is included in the interpretation clause and further referred to in clause 17 which comes under Part 2. The basic rule and fundamental premise of evidence is under clause 7. Subclause (1) states: “All relevant evidence is admissible in a proceeding except evidence that is—(a) inadmissible under this Act or any other Act; or (b) excluded under this Act or any other Act.” Subclause (2) is the corollary: “Evidence that is not relevant is not admissible in a proceeding.” There is further provision in clause 9 that evidence that is not otherwise admissible may be admissible by consent of the parties. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 79 in the name of the Hon Mark Burton to Part 1 be agreed to. 
Amendments agreed to. 
Part 1 as amended agreed to.