Barker Rick: Coroners Bill — In Committee 
Barker Rick: Coroners Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:631;Page:2975] 
Hon RICK BARKER (Minister for Courts) 
: 
 I think this is one of those occasions when the New Zealand Parliament the House of Representatives will perform to one of its better standards. Very often the public see dispute and disagreement in this Parliament but this is one of many occasions when we generally agree on what is to be done. This is very good legislation. 
I think the first thing we have all agreed on is that the current coronial system is less than satisfactory. I am not casting any particular aspersions on anyone or on any particular aspect of it; it is simply not as good as it could be. We have considered what needs to be done and I think there is general agreement that we need to professionalise our coronial service. We need to have leadership in our coronial service and we need to set out in the beginning of the legislation the things that are important to us. Over and over again the same themes keep coming back to me. 
The first one as mentioned by Nicky Wagner and Chris Finlayson is timeliness. People have constantly made comments about the timeliness or the delays. Mr Finalyson made note of a report that was years overdue. I have had similar circumstances drawn to my attention too and there has been quite an amount of frustration. The legislation was drafted and sent to the Justice and Electoral Committee. Under clause 5A(b) one of the functions of the chief coroner is “to help ensure coroners’ investigations are conducted in an orderly and expeditious way by overseeing them”. That was a clear requirement of the chief coroner but the select committee has decided it wants to make sure people understand exactly what the requirement is and we have a classic example of belt and braces. In some ways clause 4A is superfluous. But I agree with it being there because it ensures that this Parliament is making a clear statement that these matters are to be dealt with expeditiously—let there be no doubt about that. That is what Parliament says and we have put it there very clearly on the record. 
The second part I want to highlight goes back into clause 3 “Purpose of this Act” and in particular clause 3(2)(b)(i). I draw this to the attention of Parliament and of those who read back over this debate to see what in this legislation was so very important for this Parliament because for me it is one of the most important elements of the bill. It recognises the cultural and spiritual needs of the family and of others who were in a close relationship to a person who has died. We want to make it very clear to the coronial service that this is one of the most important elements in that service. Coroners are to be appreciative of and to understand the cultural and spiritual needs of a family. 
I have spoken to coroners in Auckland and I am impressed with the service that they have provided because they are full-time professional coroners and the service has been well developed. That to me seems to be the minimum standard we should expect in the future. In the Auckland area coroners have understood clearly the spiritual and cultural needs of the families and they take those responsibilities very seriously as all of us from this Parliament would expect them to do. 
I think this is good legislation. It is another good example of where Parliament—most of the time—works very well in progressing good legislation for the betterment and improvement of New Zealand. I look forward to the debate continuing on this legislation. I think it will be very constructive and worthwhile.