Barry MaggieHon MAGGIE BARRY (National—North Shore): Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker. It is with great pride I rise to speak at the second reading of the Criminal Records (Expungement of Convictions for Historical Homosexual Offences) Bill. National of course supports this bill because it builds on the work of the former Minister of Justice Amy Adams who took an earlier call in this House.In July last year when the first reading came through and the apology was given I feel it was an extremely significant milestone—really a watershed time in this House actually. I'm searching for the right words because this is a House that has lagged behind where it ought to have been on this particular issue. This is a scheme that is long overdue. It is a step towards addressing the stigma the prejudice and the pain that many New Zealanders had to live with unfairly and it has helped to put right a wrong that has stood for too many years.Thirty-two years ago in this place the Homosexual Law Reform Act decriminalised homosexual conduct between consenting males 16 years of age and older. It then took Parliament a further seven years to amend the law to allow the right to be free from discrimination on the grounds of homosexual orientation which was recognised in the Human Rights Act of 1993. It then took another 25 years to pass the Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Act. In 2013 I was a member of Parliament in this House and I'm proud to say I voted on all three readings in favour of that piece of legislation allowing same-sex couples to legally marry.This Parliament has taken its time to address the rights of the past but we are doing it again today with this second reading. At the first reading the then Minister Amy Adams who referred to it again in her earlier call made an apology on behalf of all of Parliament about the hurt and the stigma suffered by men who were made into criminals. When the provisions of this Act come in—and I think it will quite swiftly because it is supported across the House; as others have said that is a rarity—the main provisions will be that people will be able to and be eligible to apply if they were convicted of specific offences under the Crimes Act relating to sexual activity between males 16 years and over. Those were the acts of course that were decriminalised under the Homosexual Law Reform Act of 1986.So there are five main offences. I won't go through them the presiding Minister did that a few moments ago but I think it is very important to recognise that the sexual activity must have been consensual and that both parties were over 16 years of age. I know that there were people who made submissions who felt that the age should not be relevant but the criminal Act factor still applies of over the age of 16 now. I know that the select committee at the time the Justice Committee of which I am a member currently really debated that extensively. But I think it is important to acknowledge that.The process as well is a different one for this Parliament. There are many differences about this piece of legislation; I'll highlight a couple of them. The Secretary for Justice will be the individual responsible for determining applications on a case by case basis. But this will not mean that men will be expected to come forth and give evidence or appear in person even. The Secretary for Justice will be able to require applicants to provide relevant information on request if necessary to make the decision but the process should be as easy as possible. I think that that is important; these men have suffered enough and for long enough.So if an application is approved their conviction would be expunged and that expungement is noted in official records. But what does that mean in practice? It means that the person formerly with a criminal record would be entitled to declare that they have no conviction and that their conviction would not appear on any official criminal record. For those of us who are laypeople and don't understand the minutiae of the law sometimes in this case it is important I think to note that the Justice Committee took a lot of time to talk about expungement which is as others have mentioned very rare in New Zealand law.The significance of it is that if it went to a concealed conviction which was I think what was initially proposed then that conviction may still be disclosed in certain situations. A person must be conviction-free for seven years and have never been imprisoned to be eligible under the Act. An expungement though will be available regardless of any subsequent offending and the sentence imposed—I think that is extremely important—and expungement as if it never existed and nor should it have. We are putting that record straight and that's important because of the psychological impact that this legislation—the former laws really—have had on the victims and the people supposed to have been the perpetrators. The previous speaker Darroch Ball gave some very moving examples of people whose lives have been blighted overshadowed and shortened—sometimes at their own hand—by that sense of shame.It is not to be taken lightly. Experiencing discrimination on the basis of sexuality is not something that happens in New Zealand any more and nor should it. It can have an impact on an individual's opportunities not only in their employment—for example they wouldn't be able to take on governance roles on committees and so forth because a criminal conviction would not allow them to do that—but they wouldn't even necessarily be able to travel to places. These are the sorts of ongoing issues for people with criminal convictions that are really important to note because they really do contain people's lives and restrain people's lives in a way that is manifestly unfair.It seems to me that this is a piece of legislation that really is tidying up some of the bad practices of the past and I think that the 10 submissions I think it was that the Justice Committee heard outlined the reasons why it was so important to men who are alive but also those who have passed away. This bill allows people to be able to put their relative's or their friend's case forward and to ask for that expungement. I think that when you're putting right historical wrongs it's very important to understand that for those who have passed it is still important—as it is in war records actually. When people have been unlawfully or inappropriately found guilty in a wartime situation their families spend sometimes generations trying to put their military record right and to put their side of the story. I think it is a very important element of this legislation that it does allow that posthumous recognition of innocence—and expungement I think is the key note here.So I think that this bill will proceed. This will go through the House smoothly. I hope it does. It can't come soon enough and I would urge all members of this House to continue to make their points but also to move this piece of legislation through as quickly as possible because it is a wrong that needs to be put right as soon as possible. Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker.