Belich CamillaCAMILLA BELICH (Labour): Thank you Madam Chair. This is my first opportunity to take a call on this bill on what is the substantive clause—clause 4.So I have a few questions for the Minister in relation to this bill and I also want to propose an amendment in clause 4; a new clause 4. I haven't tabled it yet but intend to and I want to get the Minister's view on that as well.Firstly just some questions for the Minister. For anyone who's ever had anything to do with the criminal justice system through going to the District Court or engaging with people who have been imprisoned I think one of the most surprising things for people can be—and I'd be interested in the Minister's thoughts on this—is the fact that when you go into a court often you are confronted not with justice but in fact with the injustice that most members of our community suffer and the reason that they've actually arrived there is to do with a great number of things which have gone wrong in their lives. The reasoning for the removal of this particular funding through legal aid seems—from what the Minister has said in answer to his previous questions—to be based on because there was an industry surrounding these cultural reports and therefore we're going to remove that. Well I would ask the Minister to take that logic to its conclusion. I imagine when the first courts of justice were first held and when barristers were paid through little pockets in the backs of their gowns that people thought of that as a cottage industry or an industry that has sprung up in order to represent—so that those charged with crimes can be represented in areas where they may not be able to articulate that for themselves. Now I haven't had a long involvement in criminal law but I did work as a duty solicitor for a short time and I did that training in the District Court. From my experience many offenders can't even read their own name let alone create anything like the type of articulate report which would lead to fairer sentencing or more thoughtful sentencing for them. So in that sense I would like to know from the Minister who is this—apart from saving money which we can agree is important apart from that for what reason would the Minister take away the ability for people who can't afford cultural reports to be able to have their case made out in court? What is the justification for the substantive part of clause 4 which takes away the ability of people who have less to articulate what their background does and what they truly need? Because in my experience that is the very thing that is most lacking in our courts: the ability for those who have little to speak up and be treated equally with those who have the ability to pay for and articulate and get the type of legal representation that they really need. So I'd like the Minister to answer that question.I did indicate in the beginning of my call that I have an amendment to make. The amendment is a review clause. We've heard from a number of eminent organisations who are not politically motivated that there are serious concerns around access to justice in this bill. I ask the Minister: does he take that opposition seriously? If so how does he respond to those organisations? If he is certain that this bill will not impact access to justice why doesn't he agree with my proposed clause to include a review clause in this bill so that after six months the Government reviews through the Ministry of Justice the access to justice impact of the passage of this bill and the Ministry of Justice reports to the Justice Committee who then reports back to the House on the impacts of it. If it is correct that there aren't going to be grave injustices as we fear caused by this bill then I'm sure that review in six months' time will indicate that. If the Minister does not agree with the review clause how can he be so confident—when he hasn't received the advice he would normally receive when this is going through under urgency when there's been no select committee process—that in fact there won't be greater injustice caused by this bill?