Naylor Jono: Child Protection (Child Sex Offender Register) Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeNaylor Jono: Child Protection (Child Sex Offender Register) Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 15 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6648. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JONO NAYLOR (National): Can I just say that it has been wonderful to hear such widespread support for this bill across the House this evening. I guess the reason why people have been so supportive of it is that keeping vulnerable children safeis at the heart of what this bill istrying to achieve. I think we can all agree on that. I think we would all agree that that is a very good thing for us to be doing so that reason aloneis I guess the main reason why the Minister for Social Development has chosen to put this legislation through the Social Services Committee. I have heard a bit of disquiet around people being concerned that perhaps this bill should have gone to the Justice and Electoral Committee or the Law and Order Committee. I can see the rationale behind what has drawn people to that way of thinking but actually when you consider that at the heart of this bill is the protection of vulnerable children that is exactly what we are about in the Social Services Committee. I am sure that that committee will do an outstanding job of looking at the benefits of such a bill coming into law and that it will be able to weigh up those justice issues. There is a little bit of crossover between those committees anyway and so I am sure that people will bring their expertise from the Justice and Electoral Committee and the Law and Order Committee into the Social Services Committee to be able to assess this bill as it takes its passage through Parliament.As I have said I think the great thing about this legislation is that it is about looking after potential victims—people who are yet to suffer abuseperhaps—but it also looks to protect past victims from being abused again by people who may have offended against them. A bill like this and putting together legislation like this is in fact a balancing act—a balancing act between the personal freedoms of the offenders and the safety of victims and potential victims. I have always been one who has believed in the fact that people should be given the opportunity to be rehabilitated and to come to a place where they can perhaps be reformed and where they would perhaps no longer offend and no longer be tempted to offend. I think this is something that can happen. But at the same time we should not just presume that because somebody has shown some level of contrition they are therefore not at risk of offending again. So as I say for the sake of those victims and potential victims we need to put some protections in place.This is of course a private register and the reason for this is that it is not always beneficial for information like this to be sitting out there in the public domain. I am sure that we will get submissions coming into the select committee from people asking: “Why don’t you just publish a public register so that we can all know who these people are?”. I think that is not the answer because it can lead to vigilante-type behaviour. It can even lead to the victimisation of offenders who have perhaps been rehabilitated and who are trying to make the best of living a good life again after having made some bad choices. So making this a public register is not the right thing to do. Therefore it is important that we remember this and ensure that we keep the parameters of the privacy of this intact.Also this is not a new concept. I remember sitting in the staffroom at Child Youth and Family close to 20 years ago with people talking about whether or not a register like this would actually be helpful. I think that when you are looking at placing vulnerable children with families this type of information would be good for Child Youth and Family to know particularly if it is looking to make a placement with a kin caregiver or with someone within the whānau. Having access to this information via the police might be particularly useful because the last thing that we would want to do is place a young person who has come into the custody of Child Youth and Family into the care of somebody who is a known sex offender. Perhaps they are not in any particular ongoing contact with the justice systemnow. It might be historical but still you would not want to take the risk of placing a child with them. So it is appropriate that people within Child Youth and Family have access to this information.I think it is really important to understand that it is the police and the Department of Corrections that are going to have direct access to this information and they will have the ability to share it with authorised people within the Ministry of Social Development and Housing New Zealand Corporation. There has been a little bit of a suggestion that there is some concern about whether that information gets shared any further and I think it is important to understand that the police or the Department of Corrections may then disclose this information to a third partywhen it is deemed necessary to protect a child or when a child is at risk. So it is not just that the police or the Department of Corrections have the ability to share this with absolutely anybody. For example if a parent of a child or children was moving in with a new partner and that person was on this register it might be appropriate for that parent to know about that because it might not be something that they knew about that person. So there will be some parameters around how and when this information can be shared but it does not mean that it is then becoming a de facto public register. It will still be a private register limited to those people who are authorised to view it and who will have some discretion if they deem it is appropriate to disclose that to a third party in order to keep a child safe from harm.At the moment offenders can disappear back into communities when they finish a sentence. If they have got to the end of any protection orders or any ongoing parole it is appropriate that we want the authorities to be able to continue to keep track of them. What it means is that those people who know the offenders who know their patterns of behaviour and who know the things that are most likely to be triggers that might lead to them reoffending will then be able to assess the living arrangement that somebody is moving into. They will be able to look and say “Actually that’s not a good idea.” and perhaps at that point provide some level of intervention. It also means that we will be able to ensure that when those offenders are perhaps tempted to reoffend the knowledge that there is somebody who is keeping track of them will also act as a deterrent for them.So even though they are not actually being punished they are not having to still perform some sort of sentence and they are not listed under ongoing monitoring there is at least something in place that says: “Actually someone is keeping an eye on us. Someone is keeping an eye on me to make sure that I am behaving and to make sure that I am not reoffending.” And do you know what? If they really are fully reformed if they really have been fully rehabilitated then those people will not have anything to be afraid of because that information will not be shared with anybody else. They will be able to continue living a normal life but our communities can continue to operate in a way that makes them at least in some way better protected than they are now. It is not onerous for those people who are in this situation to have to report in once a year the information that is required to be on the register.So it is a good piece of legislation. It achieves hopefully good outcomes. I am looking forward to the select committee process when we can perhaps iron out any of the kinks in the bill that might need to be ironed out and when we can fully debate that trade-off between people’s right to go about their business and personal freedoms and the needs of vulnerable children in our society. Thank you.