Bishop Chris: Returning Offenders (Management and Information) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBishop Chris: Returning Offenders (Management and Information) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee[Sitting date: 17 November 2015. Volume:710;Page:8048. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]CHRIS BISHOP (National): I just want to make two quick remarks about the Returning Offenders (Management and Information) Bill. Firstly just to deal with this issue of urgency—is the bill urgent? The answer is absolutely yes. There has been some debate in the first reading about when exactly this issue arose and who exactly knew what and when. Jacinda Ardern I think in her first reading speech said that everyone has been aware of this since April 2014 and Kelvin Davis says it was December 2014 and others have said perhaps it was in the new year. But I think the key point is that regardless of when this was picked up on the effect of the Australian policy change through its migration amendments in December 2014 has been to throw into stark relief the consequence that more people will be deported from Australia to New Zealand. It averaged about 80 people before the policy change and it is now expected to be about 250 to 300. So the key point is: what is the parliamentary and legislative response to that? It is important that we get that right.Actually the Government has been working quickly over the last few months to get that right and it actually takes time to get information-sharing agreements in place. It takes time to get a register in place and to get the information from the Australian authorities to make sure that we can do this properly. So now we have the legislation before the House and the Minister of Justice has talked about how quickly the officials have moved on this. I think they have done a good job.Actually if you read the section 7 report that the Attorney-General has laid before the House under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act he commends how quickly the officials from the Department of Corrections the Ministry of Justice and from other agencies have moved to make sure this happens. I mean this piece of legislation deals with numerous rights under the Bill of Rights Act: the right to be free from search and seizure the right of freedom of movement—numerous rights under the Bill of Rights Act all of which could potentially have been impinged on by this legislation. In all respects bar one very small matter that was to do with DNA samples which is something from back in 2009 this complies in the Attorney-General’s legal view with the Bill of Rights Act. I think that speaks volumes actually about how hard the officials have worked to get this regime into place. So that is the first issue.Just very briefly on the Australian policy—does anyone like the Australian policy on this? No—no indeed. Numerous members of the House to varying intensity have expressed that view but the critical point is that we need to do something in response. I take issue with what Mr O’Rourke said briefly about how the Prime Minister has been a—I think it was a puff—public relations person for Malcolm Turnbull and the Australian regime. Rubbish. Nothing could be further from the truth. It was actually a very good speech from Mr O’Rourke so I will not go too hard on him as I sometimes am wont to do—it was actually a very constructive speech and actually it reflects the general degree of constructiveness and collegiality that the House is expressing on this bill. So with those brief remarks I commend this bill to the House.