Ryall Tony: Police Complaints Authority (Commission of Inquiry into Police Conduct) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Ryall Tony: Police Complaints Authority (Commission of Inquiry into Police Conduct) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:617;Page:12928] 
Hon TONY RYALL (National—Bay of Plenty) 
: 
 The Minister is indeed right that we are fortunate to have one of the best police forces that any country in the world could enjoy. Fundamental to that confidence is the belief that not only do the police act apolitically and independently but also that the police honour their constabulary oath and have standards the public can be comfortable with and proud of. For that reason the Government has launched its commission of inquiry. Fundamental to that inquiry is the ability of the commission to look at the police’s handling of complaints against police officers over the last 15 to 20 years. Under the Police Complaints Authority Act the police who provide evidence or testimony to the Police Complaints Authority have been assured of anonymity and of confidence in the giving of that evidence so that it could never be used against them and could never be published save in the case of perjury. In order to facilitate the work of the commission it is necessary to pass legislation so that the commission can have access to the files of the Police Complaints Authority. 
In order to facilitate that and to respect as much as is possible the confidence of the officers who have given evidence to the Police Complaints Authority Parliament last night unanimously agreed to an amendment to the Government’s legislation. The amendment requires the commission to give undertakings to the authority that it recognises the nature in which the evidence was given by police officers to the authority and that the commission will undertake to use whatever discretion it has in order to have the minimum undue publicity associated with that material. The concern expressed by the Parliament is that in a case started in the Whakatane District Court last year five police officers were subject to a private prosecution. That prosecution has since been dismissed. The five police officers received name suppression. If they had not received name suppression the mere fact that their names were mentioned in the District Court with regard to allegations of a quite serious nature would have led some members of the public to believe the officers were guilty. It is the old argument that where there is smoke there is fire. That was of great concern to members of all the parties on the Law and Order Committee and obviously to all parties in the Parliament so last night the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 209 in the name of Stephen Franks was unanimously agreed to. 
The National Party Opposition is pleased to support the passage of this legislation. We think it is fundamental that public confidence be maintained and restored in the New Zealand Police. I would observe as someone who has been in public life for 14 years that I have never known a time when public confidence in the New Zealand Police has been as low as it is at present. I have never known a time when people who have normally been steadfast and loyal supporters of the New Zealand Police were questioning some of the activities that were going on. As a legislator I do not like to see that situation in this country and I am absolutely determined that this House must act to restore public confidence and faith in the New Zealand Police. It is indeed a police force that New Zealanders should be proud of.