Hipango HareteHARETE HIPANGO (National—Whanganui): Thank you Madam Assistant Speaker. In taking this brief call—like my colleagues who have addressed the House and those of you who are listening on Parliament TV—it is indeed a privilege to be able to stand and speak to this. It's an historical and significant moment as has been acknowledged by my colleagues here. As a lawyer my training is very matter-of-fact. I tend to be non-emotive. However as a mother of three adult children two of those being daughters there is a touch of emotion in my delivery this evening. They are young women who have been raised in privilege and opportunity where they will not be exposed to the type of vulnerabilities that have been raised and addressed in the House and particularly addressed in this Minors (Court Consent to Relationships) Legislation Bill.To my colleague Jo Hayes seated just in front of me I acknowledge you and also Dr Jackie Blue who was in the House previously. I say that this is Dr Jackie Blue's blueprint as this passes into law—and it is only a matter of course because of the cross-party support that is there—and it has a touch of Hayes about it. It's a Blue Hayes". Both are associated with the National Party but I acknowledge everybody cross-party for the colourful contributions and the acknowledgments that have been woven into the stories that have been shared in the House this evening. I acknowledge the Justice Committee and of course the Commonwealth Women Parliamentarians for the work and the advocacy that has been advanced to get it to this stage.I've had the privilege of speaking three times now addressing the House on this bill and I've said particularly that this bill is premised on protections and providing the umbrella of protectionism to those of our most vulnerable. We've heard the stories shared in the House this evening particularly focused on young women who have been subjected to or the target of forced or forcible marriages and the duress the coercion and the compulsion as a result of that. However I have indicated in my previous speeches that this legislation is not gender specific or gender biased. There may be the rare situation where there is a young man who is exposed to vulnerabilities in terms of that as well so let's not forget that.I'm now just casting my lens over the legislation because this bill—the Minors (Court Consent to Relationships) Legislation Bill—is really in three parts. Of those parts Part 1—specifically new section 18 inserted by clause 8—is addressing the marriage of persons 16 and 17 years of age so therefore is an amendment to the Marriage Act 1955. Then I turn to new section 19 inserted by clause 14 in Part 2 under this bill and that is an amendment to the Civil Union Act 2004. Then there is also finally Part 3 "Amendments to Care of Children Act 2004" and replacement section 46A inserted by clause 20 is "Consent for de facto relationship". The test that a judge requires to satisfy it is formulaic in each of those clauses that I have referred to so the standard and the test and the evidence is the same and applicable to each of those specific statuses or natures of a relationship.What hasn't been addressed in this House—and I'm going to draw on my years of advocacy and representation as court-appointed counsel for a child or children and my youth advocacy role as well. There have been situations in my role where I have had concerned parents who have approached me where they have an under-17-year-old 16-year-old and in a particular instance their daughter entering into a de facto relationship and the parents being powerless as to what they can or can't do in terms of curtailing that. This law is going to enable parents to have their views heard before a court before a judge and for a judge to decide and establish the views and interests of the affected parties which will be not only the young persons in those relationships but also the views of the parents and the guardians being factored in and taken into account.So conversely this law is going to adhere to listen to and to some extent protect the interests of a protective parent who's concerned about the compulsion or duress of a young woman entering into a de facto relationship or into a marriage or into a civil union. I say it's a formulaic test because for each of those statuses of that relationship a judge is going to have to be required to be satisfied that consent is willingly forthcoming; however the views of the parents are taken into account as well.In commending this bill to the House I again acknowledge everybody who has contributed to this in a very very emotional but also matter-of-fact way and in such a way that our vulnerable become the least vulnerable. Kia ora tātou."