Kanongata'a-Suisuiki Anahila; Dean JacquiDISTRICT COURT (PROTECTION OF JUDGMENT DEBTORS WITH DISABILITIES) AMENDMENT BILLSecond ReadingANAHILA KANONGATA'A-SUISUIKI (Labour): I move That the District Court (Protection of Judgment Debtors with Disabilities) Amendment Bill be now read a second time. According to the Office of Disabilities Issues we have 1 million New Zealanders who are disabled. That's 24 percent of our team of 5 million. The vision of the New Zealand Disability Strategy 2016-2026 is that and I quote New Zealand is a non-disabling society—a place where disabled people have an equal opportunity to achieve their goals and aspirations and all of New Zealand works together to make this happen." This bill is not a major legislative change but I do believe that this bill aligns with the vision of the New Zealand Disability Strategy. The spirit of the bill is in its name: protection of judgment debtors with disabilities. It will prohibit the seizure of any item from a judgment debtor with a disability that is necessary for their care support or independence or to promote their inclusion and participation in society. At present the principal Act requires judgment to be exercised by the bailiffs to act fairly and reasonably. The principal Act does not prohibit the bailiffs seizing property that enables independence of disabled persons such as their modified mobility vehicles. The system has proven that good judgment has failed our disability community as in the case of 'Epalahame Tanginoa where the mobility vehicle was seized by the bailiff due to a judgment debt resulting in his hospitalisation because he could not afford the taxi or have proper transport to attend medical appointments. I know that it was 'Epalahame's wish that this does not happen to anyone else. In the spirit of working together I want to thank Mr Soane Foliaki senior solicitor of the community law centre South Auckland for bringing this matter to my attention and for his advice in the initial drafting of the bill. I'm grateful to my Labour caucus for approving this bill to go into the ballot. I am grateful to the Green Party for their firm support of the bill. I'm grateful that ACT too has supported this bill and I'd like to make a special mention of Simon Bridges in his leadership for his National Party caucus to support this bill.Hon Member: You've done a great job.ANAHILA KANONGATA'A-SUISUIKI: Thank you. I acknowledge New Zealand First. New Zealand First is no longer in Parliament but they too supported the bill at first reading. It's an example that it is possible to work together in this House and I look forward to the tautoko o Te Paati Māori in this reading.This second reading is the opportunity for members of the Justice Committee to report back on key aspects of what they've heard during select committee. I firstly want to acknowledge the submitters that took the time to provide feedback to the select committee and I want to name them because I think it's important. I believe it is important that they believed it so much that they needed to voice their opinion: Age Concern New Zealand Auckland Disability Law CCS Disability Action Disabled Persons Assembly Financial Services Federation FinCap Human Rights Commission Te Ope Whakaora—the Salvation Army New Zealand Fiji Tonga and Samoa Territory Kapo Māori Aotearoa and Blind Low Vision New Zealand Parents of Vision Impaired New Zealand and to individuals Angela Desmarais Anita Easton Arihia Hartley Curtis McNab Kay Robertson Lisa Cowe Lucia Bercinskas Sean Kirton James Parlane Tania Strauss and Kate Cosgriff. I repeat that I wanted to acknowledge and have their names recorded in Hansard as my expression of gratitude for their choice to engage in making law that contributes to the protection of disabled persons in Aotearoa. I take this opportunity to thank the chair Ginny Andersen and members of the Justice Committee and officials for their leadership and due diligence in examination of the bill. They have enhanced the bill and have unanimously recommended the House pass the bill with amendments. So these amendments are clarification of the definition of "disabled person". Initially the bill as drafted stated "disability has the same meaning as in section 21(1)(h) of the Human Rights Act 1993." The committee proposed the insertion of new section 167(5) giving a definition of disability that aligns with section 21(1)(h) of the Human Rights Act 1993. This will allow the wider disability community to be included in the group that the bill will provide protection for. The committee also provided a definition for "mobility device". It would also insert a definition of mobility device that aligns with section 2(1) of the Land Transport Act 1998. The committee also specified the circumstances where property cannot be seized from a judgment debtor. Initially as drafted the bill only referred to the judgment debtor with disability. However the committee were concerned that this would not prohibit seizure of property from a judgment debtor who was the principal carer to a person with a disability. So I thank the committee for their inclusiveness and their concern which they have proposed a new subparagraph 167(2)(a)(iii) to cover any item necessary for the care support or independence of a person who is in the care of a judgment debtor. So thank you. Thank you select committee. You've really done fantastic work on this bill. The select committee also notes that it does not prevent the repossession of goods provided for a credit contract pursuant to the Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Act. However they make an important point to lenders and industry bodies to be informed about the provisions of the bill and what the rights and responsibilities of creditors and debtors are.This bill codifies the need for the rights of disabled New Zealanders for bailiffs in primary legislation. For comparison as I've stated in the first reading the District Court Act of 2016 currently specifically says the bailiff can't take a tradesperson's tools to repay a debt because they are vital to their livelihood. Items that a disabled person needs to support them should be protected—should be protected. It is the right thing to do.I want to acknowledge the people that I've spoken with. Again I've said in first reading and again here in the second reading that they had reminded me that a disability is a disability; it is not an illness. It is not something that they can take medication to be cured from and to remind us all here in the House and in Aotearoa that it is a disability and it's not an illness. I have made an effort to speak with the person—I've mentioned his name 'Epalahame Tanginoa—about this bill because I remember him saying on the media on Stuff that he would not like anyone else in New Zealand to experience what he had gone through. I hope to make it to 'Epalahame by the third reading and I am confident that the House will support me in this. Often with these members' bills it's about relationship and engagement. Through my engagement with this bill from conversations with members I'm proud to know that people across the House actually have a passion for vulnerable New Zealanders to do well and to be provided with the system to ensure that they are kept safe here in Aotearoa and that when we see that it's the right thing to do we put all politics aside and say "It is the right thing to do. We must do this." So I conclude as I started with the vision of the New Zealand Disability Strategy 2016-2026: "New Zealand is a non-disabling society—a place where disabled people have an equal opportunity to achieve their goals and aspirations and all New Zealand works together to make this happen." The bill is not my bill. It belongs to all of us. I therefore commend the District Court (Protection of Judgment Debtors with Disabilities) Amendment Bill to the House. Mālō 'aupito. ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): The question is that the motion be agreed to."