Goff Phil: Crimes Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee Third Reading 
Goff Phil: Crimes Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:625;Page:20066] 
Hon PHIL GOFF (Minister of Justice) 
: 
 I move  
That the Crimes Amendment Bill (No 2) be now read a third time 
. 
This bill is an important update of the sexual offence provisions of the Crimes Act of 1961. I thank the United Future party for its consistent support the Green Party for its consistent support and indeed the New Zealand First Party and the ACT party for their votes in favour of this very sensible legislation. The fact that the votes in this House on this bill have been consistently 90 to 27—the 27 being the dissenting votes of the National Party—shows just how far out of touch that once-great party is with the way this country thinks and every other party in this Parliament thinks. National tried to wring political advantage out of a very sensible piece of legislation right to the end and the country will stand in judgment of that party as the TV3/CM poll will show tonight. 
This bill brings sexual offences more into line with reality—for example by recognising that women are capable of committing sexual offences against young males and that not all offending is by males against females. The bill also significantly improves protection for society’s most vulnerable groups against exploitation by predatory sexual offenders. One of the primary purposes of the bill was to ensure that all sex offences be expressed and applied in a gender-neutral manner. Although the majority of sex offenders are in fact male the loophole that has allowed women to escape prosecution for sexual conduct with under-age males has shown beyond doubt that the previous assumption in the law—that all such offenders are male—is simply wrong. This bill frames sexual offences in a gender-neutral manner to ensure that the law now provides equal protection to both male and female victims and equal sanctions against predatory conduct by both male and female offenders. In particular the enactment of this bill will mean that females may be prosecuted if they have sexual relationships with young men or boys under the age of consent. 
The one exception to terminology in terms of gender neutrality is of course the retention of the term “rape”. The term “rape” has been maintained for the traditional offence that it has described but the other offending is described as sexual violation through unlawful sexual connection. That covers all the other horrendous offences against either men or women involving sexual violation. The same penalty applies equally to all those offences and this House would expect that the court system in New Zealand would apply those penalties equally regardless of the gender of the victim or the offender and regardless of the type of serious sexual violation that is so described. 
Protections against predatory conduct for our society’s most vulnerable groups have been significantly enhanced. The penalty for sexual connection with a young person aged 12 to 16 is raised from 7 years’ imprisonment to a maximum of 10 years’ imprisonment. The existing 12-month time limit on bringing a prosecution for such offending is removed and those people who commit those offences now no longer have impunity after that time limitation under the existing law has expired. In addition a new offence of sexual grooming is created to protect young children from habitual sexual offenders who identify then cultivate relationships with potential victims. The new offence will ensure that those who are grooming children for sexual abuse are able to be prosecuted before the actual abuse takes place. I once again thank United Future’s Marc Alexander for initially raising that issue with me and for his party’s strong support in bringing that clause and this legislation into effect. 
The bill also strengthens protections for those who are vulnerable because they cannot give or refuse consent by clarifying the circumstances that do not amount to consent. That includes strengthening the position of the law with regard to drug rape and I would like to thank Dianne Yates for bringing that issue which is a serious issue in our society to the attention of the House so that the law can be applied to deal with that situation. The bill also strengthens the provisions for those who are vulnerable to the exploitation of a relationship of power and extends the offence of incest to provide greater protections for the young and the vulnerable. Incest will now apply to a range of sexual offending and not simply to sexual intercourse. This bill greatly strengthens the protections that children deserve to have within the sanctity of the family. 
Despite the fact that the bill greatly improves the law and legal protections for children against sexual exploitation by predatory offenders we have heard the usual tirade of disingenuous politicking from the National Party on this bill. Tony Ryall for example complained that the select committee did not have time to properly consider the bill. Mr Ryall was of course a member of the Law and Order Committee that had nearly 8 months to consider this bill—8 months! What on earth was he doing during that time if he claimed he did not have time to properly consider the bill? But Mr Ryall of course was the Minister of Justice who prior to the 1999 election decided not to reform sexual offence laws because he would rather just bury his head in the sand than deal with an issue that clearly makes him uncomfortable. Existing penalties for having sex with 12 to 16-year-olds were apparently sufficient for him. He would not increase those penalties. Those penalties have now been increased. He did not seem to mind that there was a lopsided similarity of age defence that could make teenage boys criminals but not teenage girls. That was OK with him apparently. He did not see the need to change that. He thought that the loophole allowing women to escape prosecution for sexual exploitation of under-16-year-old boys could stay there as far as he was concerned. He made no use of his opportunity as Minister of Justice to change that law but his party is the first to criticise the efforts of this Government finally to do something about that situation that was long overdue. This Government has been determined to move on the unacceptable loopholes in the previous legislation whereas Tony Ryall and the National Government were not prepared to do that. 
In terms of public consultation as well as the select committee process there was a broadly circulated consultation document. That was part of a PC agenda the National Party predictably said and—equally predictably—with no foundation whatsoever. In its desperation to beat up public controversy and moral outrage the National Party has railed against measures that it admits were never even in the bill. Tony Ryall has put out a press statement attacking something that was never in this bill. He attacked this Government on the issue of incest when this Government in this legislation has strengthened the provisions to protect our children against incest including by more broadly defining the family unit that they may be in. 
This bill sends an unequivocal overall message to any paedophile that exploitation of our children and young people will never be tolerated. That is a key part of the Government’s overall agenda against exploitation of children. We have already introduced post-sentence extended supervision of up to 10 years for child sex offenders. We have made it easier for judges to impose preventive detention. We have passed new censorship laws to increase tenfold the penalties for dealing in child pornography. 
This bill adds further to the protections for our children and the penalties facing those sexual predators who would abuse them. I commend this bill to the House.