Worth Richard: Courts and Criminal Matters Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Worth Richard: Courts and Criminal Matters Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:626;Page:21696] 
Dr RICHARD WORTH (National—Epsom) 
: 
 Thank you for the opportunity to contribute to this most important debate on the Courts and Criminal Matters Bill. Progress is slow and understandably so because of the turgidity and complexity of the provisions in this bill which have so much to say and from which so much seems to be omitted that would otherwise constitute good practice. 
I start by dealing with an issue that the Hon Tony Ryall dealt with touching on Supplementary Order Paper 370. I believe that the comments made by Mr Ryall warrant some reinforcement. The first comment he made was that the Supplementary Order Paper has come late in the day. That is assuredly so against the background of a bill that was introduced on 14 May 2003. It had its first reading on 19 June 2003 and then went off to the Law and Order Committee and there languished for several years. It is a wholly unsatisfactory circumstance that with all the time for mature reflection and consideration of this bill this Supplementary Order Paper from the Government has come so late and as Mr Ryall said with no opportunity at all for public input on what are clearly critical matters. They are critical matters because the whole question of information and data matching is sensitive. Although a robust attitude should be taken toward such issues when we are talking about the evasion of the criminal law nevertheless care is also required. 
The Supplementary Order Paper as it deals with this part makes some changes of particular relevance. The explanatory note to the Supplementary Order Paper states: “The amendments to clause 7 relate to a sub-category of serious fines defaulters (referred to as “specified fines defaulters”) who are likely to be intercepted at an airport or a seaport in relation to their unpaid fines. These are persons who owe $5000 or more in unpaid fines (not including infringement fines) or any amount of reparation and for whom there is a warrant to arrest. There is provision for the amount of $5000 to be changed by Order in Council.” I argue that that threshold of $5000 has been set too high and that there is an immediate justification for a lower threshold than that fixed here. 
Second the Supplementary Order Paper proposes to add new section 280F to the Customs and Excise Act. That section provides that the Chief Executive of the Customs Service may supply information concerning specified fines defaulters to the Chief Executive of the Department of Labour. There are associated amendments to clause 15 that insert new section 141AG into the Immigration Act which members of this Parliament are all too familiar with. Those amendments authorise the Customs Service and the Immigration Service to give airlines and other carriers information about the identity of specified fines defaulters. 
In the course of this Committee stage the Minister in the chair Rick Barker has sought—and I give him credit for this—vainly and in vain to respond to particular issues as they have arisen. One of the most interesting responses that he gave was to acknowledge in his candid and frank way that there are significant gaps in this legislation. He identified the fact that there are real issues around the administration of the infringement notices regime and that those issues would be visited in the life of this present Government. I doubt that that is so because this is a dying Government that has only weeks to run. The chance of this Government ever tackling those significant issues is I am sure a forlorn and futile one. 
But they are important issues and it is in this particular part that one might have seen given the readiness of the Government to advance at very late notice Supplementary Order Paper changes the sort of changes that the Minister has said are clearly required. I say that it is simply unsatisfactory when a bill has been so long in its gestation for the Minister to say to us and to listeners that the reality is that this legislation is in some respects both incomplete and imperfect. If I may I would like to deal with the interpretation provisions in the part and seek that the Minister comment on certain aspects of those interpretation provisions.