Sharples Pita: Justices of the Peace Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Sharples Pita: Justices of the Peace Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:632;Page:4257] 
Dr PITA SHARPLES (Co-Leader—Maori Party) 
: 
 As a JP who has used his role in various ways in the past I join with the Maori Party in supporting the Justices of the Peace Amendment Bill. The Maori Party approaches every piece of legislation that comes before this House with the basic question: “How will it defend the rights and advance the outcomes for tangata whenua?”. We do this for every bill. Central to the posing of this question is the particular focus for our constituencies. 
Before we left for the adjournment break my colleague Te Ururoa Flavell brought to the House the example of Claude Anaru and his wife Hanahira Riripotaka—renowned justices of the peace in the Wairakeirohe. He described them as individuals of high integrity of considerable standing amongst our community; the types of upstanding members of the community we look for in justices of the peace. We note with some irony that such accountability and safety has not always been associated with the role of justice of the peace. Remember the West Coast Settlement (North Island)Act 1880? This was the Act that created a number of new offences such as endangering the public peace by removing survey pegs or preventing lawful occupation by ploughing the surface of the earth or erecting a fence. For these activities an offender could be arrested without warrant by any member of the armed constabulary tried before a justice of the peace imprisoned for up to 2 years and then detained in prison for an indefinite period to keep the peace. There is also the West Coast Peace Preservation Act 1882 that enabled a justice of the peace to direct the dispersal of an assembly of 50 or more Maori and provided for penalties of up to 12 months’ imprisonment. The concept of peace is thus somewhat ironic when we consider the obvious injustice and racist assault on tangata whenua enshrined in these two Acts. Maori were treated as alien prisoners of war to be held at will and with the justice of the peace in a key role of perpetuating the crimes of the State. 
So when we trace back over the history and background of the justice of the peace role within Aotearoa we must recognise the impact of legislation such as this which throws up into question the wider issues of justice and how it applies to this nation. This history is highly relevant to the ability of today’s justices of the peace to practise safety. Before the adjournment break we talked of the value of cultural safety to provoke people to think about their own biases and assumptions and about the way in which the world works. Cultural safety would require prospective JPs to take the role seriously and to try to understand how to support people who might well have different ways of being than their own. Cultural safety and cultural competency are vital to ensuring that the diverse population serviced by justices of the peace have their needs met. 
Treating everyone the same might seem a fair and ethical approach for any JP to take but sometimes it is entirely the wrong thing to do. We would suggest instead that the notion of different treatment to achieve equitable outcomes is a stronger and more inclusive approach. The political link between the Treaty and its guarantees of equity including the possibility of equal status with other New Zealanders in article 3 is as relevant to the training of justices of the peace as it is to any other sector of policy. And it is there that we believe the inclusion of an allegiance—albeit a voluntary one—to Te Tiriti o Waitangi would be very helpful in strengthening the capacity of justices of the peace to be responsive to the unique constitutional context of Aotearoa. 
The Maori Party is introducing a Supplementary Order Paper to be discussed along with the Oaths Modernisation Bill when that bill next comes before this House. Amendments will be introduced to include Te Tiriti o Waitangi in all oaths and affirmations. The Maori Party considers that being committed towards true service for the community which is integral to the role of a justice of the peace will require that a clear understanding of the implications of Te Tiriti o Waitangi will be as essential as being a person of good sense character and integrity. 
If we trace the whakapapa of the JP in history back to the early days of 1361 we will learn that the Acts of that time envisaged that peace should be kept and justice administered in each country by a leader assisted by being learned in the law. To be learned in the law of our founding partnership in the nation requires prospective justices of the peace to understand the status of Te Tiriti o Waitangi and indeed its subsequent implementation across legislation. 
The Maori Party is happy to support this bill in the way in which it supports the Justices of the Peace Association and individual justices of the peace in enhancing their capacity to be upstanding members of the community. But we would still like to see further information including specific data on the number of Maori JPs across electorates and across regions in Aotearoa. Here we have reason again to return to the report of the United Nations special rapporteur who reported that the lack of significant disaggregated statistical data identifying ethnicity was a key barrier to reducing disparities. If we do not have the right data we cannot really target our social policy. We hope that the accomplishment of the aims of this new bill will indeed achieve peace will work to enhance justice and will provide a much-needed framework for community credibility. Thank you.