Collins Judith: Public Safety (Public Protection Orders) Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCollins Judith: Public Safety (Public Protection Orders) Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 17 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13441. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Justice): I moveThat the Public Safety (Public Protection Orders) Bill be now read a first time. I nominate the Justice and Electoral Committee to consider the bill. This bill will improve public safety and save potential victims from almost certain serious harm or worse. The High Court will be able to order the detention of the most high-risk offenders under a public protection order. The new order will complement existing measures such as parole conditions extended supervision orders and preventive detention. The bill responds to situations where an offender presents an unacceptable risk that cannot be managed through these existing measures.People must ask themselves whether they would place someone who has a very high risk of imminent and serious sexual or violent offending in any community in New Zealand let alone their own. At this very high level of imminent risk the law runs out of options to manage these offenders’ behaviours once their sentence is complete. This is reflected in the small number of people expected to receive a public protection order. I expect five to 12 orders over a 10-year period. Once public safety has been assured the bill provides that the people detained under a public protection order will have all the rights of other citizens. Detention under the bill is civil in nature but within the precincts of a prison because the safety of the community cannot be assured otherwise.Some may say that the bill raises significant human rights issues. I believe this bill strikes the right balance between the liberty rights of individuals under a public protection order and our duty to protect New Zealanders from imminently dangerous offenders. The bill is necessary effective proportionate and fair. The bill specifies a threshold and a test for a public protection order. The threshold requires that a person has nearly completed sentences for sexual or violent offending or has been released from prison and is subject to the most intensive form of supervision. The test requires that the person poses a very high risk of imminent and serious sexual or violent offending. Imminence means that the person is expected to commit a serious sexual or violent offence as soon as they have the suitable opportunity to do so.The Crown must prove four characteristics that give rise to the risk. I will go through each of these characteristics in turn because they are integral to the justification for continuing detention under a public protection order. The first is an intense drive or urge to offend. Evidence used to prove this urge could include for example the individual’s rapid reoffending following previous releases from custody. The second is an inability to control behaviour and emotions. This may be shown by evidence of impulsiveness and an inability to cope with or manage any form of stress or difficulties. The third is an absence of understanding and concern for the impact of offending on potential or actualvictims. I would note here that all offenders in this group who could be subject to a public protection order will have had or been offered the opportunity of comprehensive treatment during their time in prison. The fourth and final characteristic is that the person experiences poor interpersonal relationships or social isolation or both.The Crown must prove all four of these characteristics to a high level to subject someone to a public protection order. Three out of four characteristics is not enough to support an order. Although these people have offended in the past they will not be detained for their previous crimes. They will be detained because of their imminent risk of serious sexual or violent offending at the time of the application. The test for the risk of imminent future offending will be difficult to meet.The bill recognises the serious implications of a public protection order. It also provides the following robust procedures for making the orders. Only the High Court in its civil jurisdiction will be authorised to make an order. Any application to the High Court will be accompanied by two health assessors’ reports on the level of risk posed by the person. A person for whom an order is sought will have the right to independent legal advice and psychological evaluation—funded if necessary by legal aid. The court may of its own initiative direct a health assessor to prepare a report.The bill includes a number of safeguards for the protection of the rights of individuals subject to a public protection order. There is ongoing judicial and independent supervision of the detention. A review panel will review public protection orders each year. The High Court will review the public protection orders every 5 years or more frequently on the recommendation of the review panel or on application by the resident. These regular reviews ensure that the initial determination of risk does not result in unjustifiable continuing detention. A regular review of the basis for detention ensures that a person is detained only when they pose risk.The measures in this bill will improve public safety by ensuring the detention of individuals who pose a very high risk of imminent and serious sexual or violent offending. I commend this bill to the House.