O'Connor GregGREG O'CONNOR (Labour—Ōhāriu): This is a very significant piece of legislation. I'm cognisant of a scene I was part of at the downtown Auckland Central Police Station where there was a briefing and the incoming shift were being briefed and an announcement was made by the intelligence officer that a certain local offender was turning 17. All the officers in that room cheered because what that meant in their mind was all of a sudden they could deal effectively with this offender. Now that's a very narrow end of the way we deal with our young people but it is a quite an important end. When we look at any legislation as the previous speaker has mentioned it's very important we get the balance right.At the other end of the argument and when the debate around the original legislation was being dealt with at select committee and in the lead-up to that I know there were those who thought that this provision should actually go through to 21—that when we were looking at the frontal cortex and the thinking abilities of our young people in fact they needed to be under this sort of a system or some sort of a system where they could be treated and be able to avail themselves of the necessary care and protection until they were 21. That was of course the extreme of the argument and the legislation was around shifting from 17 to 18. Looking at the legislation provided we do have the backstop—again referring to the previous speaker—ensuring that when people do come into the system whether it be a care and protection issue or ultimately and what this legislation mostly deals with a youth justice issue we are actually ensuring the intention of the legislation which is to make sure we prevent and make it less likely that these young people—and 17-year-olds now will be young people—carry on to offend as adults. The experience of all those involved is that if someone is still offending as a 21-year-old it is likely they will continue to offend through their 20s and by that stage many would argue they are lost to the system certainly in the short term. So it is incredibly important we do get it right. This legislation and of course the major legislation it relates to—the decision was made that 17-year-olds would be included in this system and so having made that decision it is really important now that we are consistent. Much of this legislation is about that very thing—ensuring that we then line up that those who are caught within the change are actually fairly treated. For example if you are standing trial as a 17-year-old for a qualifying offence and you were still 17 at the time of the offence—of course having been dealt with as an adult—what then happens? Of course this legislation deals with that situation. You will actually continue to be dealt with. However where the line is I suppose is what happens when the offending happened before when you were 17 when the offending was happening before you were actually charged or came into the system? How are you dealt with then? Again this legislation is meant to deal with that situation.So what it really means is that it was quite clear that once the legislation was looked at there were some drafting errors and for all the criticism that has been around having to fix drafting errors this is one: that it didn't really take into account the fact that there were many other provisions that were going to be affected; it wasn't simply a matter of moving people from one age group to another.So when we look at the Acts that actually did need to be amended—Oranga Tamariki Act obviously; the Bail Act; the Children Young Persons and Their Families (Oranga Tamariki) Legislation Act 2017; the Children's Commissioner Act; the Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Act—that's quite a good example because under the Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Act with a certain qualifying offence the offender is required to give their DNA. The question now becomes: if the offending happened while you were still 17years old and you were arrested later are you then required to still give your bodily sample? Where is that bodily sample stored? Are you then treated as a young person? So these are all the provisions that are being dealt with in the Act. You might argue they are logical but if we're going to do it we've got to do it properly. Prisoners' and Victims' Claims Act Returning Offenders (Management and Information) Act—of course that's quite an important Act. Where our Australian colleagues are continuing to send people back across the Tasman and where they come as 17-year-olds how do we treat them particularly under legislation? They have certain obligations as we do as law enforcement and as a Government in New Zealand. The Sentencing Act Victims' Orders Against Violent Offenders Act Victims' Rights Act and Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Regulations—so these are all issues that it's important that we do deal with in this Act. It's again going back to the substantive provision if you like of moving 17-year-olds into—or retaining them as young people. Eighteen again is the age where the debate will now take place. It's taking place because 18 is when young people vote and that is where the drinking age is so it does make sense in many ways that 18 is the place that we will actually treat young people as adults. So it does make sense. Again I do reiterate the importance of making sure though that this is not seen as an easy way out that we're making sure that—like in all these provisions there's always another lot of people that have to be dealt with. Many times when we're dealing with these young people there are victims and it is very important that we don't only look at a system that we don't only look at the effect and those who have actually committed the offences; we actually also have to ensure that victims are included in this. That is where the family group conference and the systems that actually we employ do give a chance for that restitution to make sure that the victims do get a say in the system. So it is important again that as we go through the system all these factors that are relevant as we change from young people as 17-year-olds now remaining as young people until they're 18—that all these impacts of the decision are considered. For that reason I'll be on the select committee that will be considering this. I'll be commending this to the select committee with the intention that we will make sure that this legislation is as good as it can be when it comes back to this House. Thank you Madam Assistant Speaker.