Chadwick Steve: Third Readings — 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Chadwick Steve: Third Readings — 
[Sitting date: 04 October 2011. Volume:676;Page:21650. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon STEVE CHADWICK (Labour) 
: 
 I am not an expert on criminal justice but it is quite good to get a perspective from across the House. The procedure began—and I have heard members attributing this legislation before the House today to Minister Simon Power but I will take members back—with the Law Commission report in 2004 about delivering justice for all. That was the instigator for this change to a very complex legal construct. It was Labour actually and the previous Minister of Justice in 2007 that began this process of agreeing on the one hand that there was a need to reform criminal justice procedure and went about the drafting of this legislation. Sadly this resulted in a huge bill the Criminal Procedure (Reform and Modernisation) Bill which as members alluded to was 526 pages. It was very complex. It was considered by the Justice and Electoral Committee. I understand that that was a very diligent process which was led by Chester Borrows. 
I have heard different individuals in the House today talk about who attributes the success and the outcome of this legislation to whom. I do not think that that is the issue; I think that the issue is one for all New Zealanders to have faith in the system and to believe that the system will work for them; that it is transparent and that it is fair as they go through the criminal justice procedure. Most non-lawyers would agree with the Law Commission. It said that the court system is an impenetrable maze for most non-lawyers. It is perplexing to us all. 
I acknowledge today in the House that I enjoyed hearing John Boscawen. It was probably his last speech in the House. He is a man of principle. We do not always agree but boy does he fight for his principles. That is something we as lawmakers like to see in the House. 
It is sad to hear that this legislation got a bit bogged down. It got bogged down because of the minor parties and this is the strength of an MMP Parliament. The minor parties actually said that there were aspects to this legislation that they found simply unacceptable. They held out on that. I acknowledge Charles Chauvel. He held out and said that we needed to look at changing the threshold for jury trials defence disclosures proceeding in a defendant’s absence and compliance cost orders. So well done to the minor parties that took on a reformist Minister who is being seen as rather overzealous by members of the legal profession who have really got the ta-tas about the pace of reform they have had to face. I congratulate the minor parties on taking on the Minister. 
Also we are really pleased that after the select committee process the Minister did listen to Labour’s concerns. We wanted to see one aspect of this legislation changed that was not changed which was greater certainty for sentencing provisions. What a pity that the Minister chose to ignore a member like Charles Chauvel who has a deeply critical analytical legal brain. We could have made a much more enduring piece of legislation. I noticed that Jonathan Temm who resides in Rotorua and is doing a wonderful job has said that we will be back in the House very soon to relook at this. 
I think that is because it has not been done in a cross-party considered approach. Even though Chester Borrows talked about the drivers of crime and Minister Power has attempted to look at the drivers of crime I remember the Hon Lianne Dalziel having to ask whether she could participate in that process. We in Labour felt just as we had felt about domestic violence family violence and sexual abuse against women that the legislation would be much more enduring if all parties agreed. We had to invite ourselves into that workshop on the drivers of crime. They have had a good relationship ever since. 
We are supporting this legislation now in the third reading debate because of the process that was followed at our and the minor parties’ request. I hope we will see here that this restores confidence to a very complex and often perplexing issue of access to criminal justice in a fair way for all New Zealanders. Thank you.