Ngaro Alfred: Judicature Modernisation Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeNgaro Alfred: Judicature Modernisation Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 18 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1747. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]ALFRED NGARO (National): I rise to take the final call in the second reading of the Judicature Modernisation Bill. It almost seems like a badge of honour that everyone is putting this thing here—all 1226 pages. I want to say that in the 50th Parliament I was on the Justice and Electoral Committee and we had this bill before us from 2013 to 2014. I think it was fulfilling work. It was tiring. We heard a number of submissions. On that I do want to acknowledge the Minister of Justice at that time the Hon Judith Collins and her leadership on this. I want also to acknowledge our fine chair at that point in time in the 50th Parliament Scott Simpson who was ably supported by his deputy chair—myself—and all the other committee members.I suppose the thing about this bill is that we have had many speeches about parts of the bill and the importance of it. Having been privileged to be in the committee when we had the submissions I want to sort of humanise a part of the process to bring to light some of the submissions that were actually part of the process of hearing and forming the bill as we have it now in the House. One of the comments that I took away with me from that submission as a takeaway point was when one of the submitters said that justice delayed is justice denied—justice delayed is justice denied. I think that speaks to the heart of what this bill is intending to do. From 1908 to where we are today this bill is purely about being people-centred being modern and being more accessible. That is the heart of this bill—all 1226 pages.I want to touch on a few things. One of the things is I suppose that the intent and the timing becomes really important for this bill. We know that at the moment we have the lowest crime rate in New Zealand in 35 years. That is something to be celebrated—the work that this Government has done to ensure that we are in a place where we are able to make sure that our communities are as safe as possible. There are still issues around harm and welfare that we need to be attentive to but I think that what can actually be celebrated is the work of our police and also of our judiciary. Hence the reason the timing of this bill and the modernisation of it have become critically important as well—knowing that we have got time to be able to look at what some of the drivers of crime are but at the same time too at the ways we can ensure that there is a greater customer focus especially for victims lower costs more efficiency and a more accessible justice system. I believe that the work of the Justice and Electoral Committee and also of this Judicature Modernisation Bill will contribute to that as well.I just want to draw on and highlight I suppose some of the submissions in regard to the comments that were made. If I can beg your indulgence and read just the parts of the submission that highlight what I think is important for I suppose the House and also the listeners out there to give them an understanding about the whole of the sector—the whole of the sector.Pita Paraone: Who made the submissions?ALFRED NGARO: Yes it is coming Mr Paraone. This is from the submission of the Supreme Appeal Court of New Zealand and the High Court. This was their submission on the Judicature Modernisation Bill. In the introduction this is what they say and if I can beg your indulgence to read just this part here: “The Judicature Modernisation Bill 2013 bears upon the balances struck by the New Zealand constitution in relation to the functions of the judiciary in a society based upon law. The matters covered are of importance to all New Zealanders. Being central to the exercise of judicial responsibilities they are also matters upon which judges have particular perspective and interest which we have thought it to be in the public interest to express. In the context of New Zealand’s largely unwritten constitution constitutional values and balances can be easily overlooked. The Judicature Act 1908 is constitutional legislation”—constitutional legislation—“because it is concerned with the jurisdiction and administration of the judicial branch of government. Changes to it therefore require particular care to ensure that they do not disrupt fundamental balances. Indeed our preference is that the title ‘Judicature Act’ is appropriately retained as a more accurate representation of the foundational nature of the principal act constituting the superior courts of record.”I know that was a little bit technical but the intent that I get from it is the fact that this is about making sure that we have the balances and that we do not have unintended consequences by changing a number of the laws. I take what Mrs Curran is saying—she is absolutely right—in regard to the purpose statements that we do not unintentionally create consequences that could impact on our system and our judicial system as well.One of the things that was also part of our submissions and that I think was important was that although we heard from some of the judges we also heard from those who have experienced the court system who have found for themselves that this system has at times not responded to their needs and who have at times felt—as I recall that statement—that justice delayed is justice denied.I want to read from the Red Raincoat NZ Trust—and again it is just a brief statement from its submission which I think highlights the need that we have to ensure that we have a modern judicial system that meets people’s needs particularly the needs of the victims who experience this court system. This is from the Red Raincoat NZ Trust and it says this: “I was disappointed when reading parts of this lengthy bill”—a bit of an honest critique—“that there seems to be very little consideration and provisions given for the victim and their family. The court process is one of the most significant and lengthy parts of the process for them and I would have liked to have thought that they would be a crucial consideration to this bill. The victim and their needs are therefore the basis of my submission. I will cover four important areas I believe need to be considered …”.We took these comments along with many others that talked about those who experienced the court system to ensure that it is a system that does take care of the needs of victims when they are experiencing it.In the light of that then what are some of the changes that we are making in this bill in regard to the needs of the victims? It makes it more efficient and there has been some comment about that. I suppose with modernisation it means changes to increase information about court judgments. I know that a number of submitters talked about how when they were waiting as a family—waiting for the decisions of the judges and not really knowing what was actually happening—they would like to have received information in a timely manner to actually relieve some of the stress and some of the burden that they were carrying upon themselves when they entered into the court system.We are introducing a legislative assumption for the online publication of all written judgments. I know that many members have talked about it in their speeches but I wanted to give the context: this actually becomes very importantto the victims and to the families. This will give the public greater access to what happens in courts and to the outcomes of cases. This work is an important part of raising the level of public trust and confidence in the courts as well as of providing access to information.What was also important to this which came through the Justice and Electoral Committee was when the Ministry of Justice came and presented to us some of the development that was actually happening down in Christchurch and to the Christchurch courts. Although there was capital expenditure in regard to the development of the courts along with this piece of legislation—so although the inside operations were important—we also know that the outside operation was important ensuring that the courts themselves physically responded to the need to be accessible and responded to the needs of those who were partaking in the judicial system and its administration side. We saw some of the changes and although I have not actually been there myself I know the new Christchurch court is one that has achieved that as well.Just in summarising some of my contribution just in this second reading of the Judicature Modernisation Bill I think that what has become the highlight of this is that this Government is ensuring that it is modernising the legislation to overhaul our courts. It is following the Government’s response to the Law Commission’s review. I believe the work that we have done has made a difference. I look forward to the Committee stage and third reading. I commend this bill in its second reading to the House.Bill read a second time.