SpeechHon MAGGIE BARRY (National—North Shore): Thank you Madam Chair. I rise to speak at the committee stage of the End of Life Choice Bill. This is Part 2. It outlines the process of how euthanasia would actually be delivered and how it would work in process and in practical terms. So as other colleagues have pointed out we have a range of Supplementary Order Papers (SOPs) and amendments that are intended to make this bill as safe as it is possible to be because the sponsoring member might like to stand up at some point and tell us exactly how many amendments are in his SOP 259. It's sort of over about 50 I think. Some are minor and technical; some are profound. They still don't make any difference in our view to the safety of this bill. This part of the debate will focus on what this bill does not do and that's plenty. It does not define the standards of safety and the standards that need to be applied to something as important as a life and death issue and what categories there are in terms of the eligibility. These are not included in any meaningful way and what protections are not there and there are plenty that are not there. In fact the SOPs that I'm going to be talking to and have tabled are around elder abuse coercion and the protection of New Zealand's most vulnerable because this bill doesn't even come close to looking after their interests.There are a number of things that we will draw attention to as the debate continues. A panel of independent practitioners has been proposed by my colleague Chris Penk. I think that that is an excellent idea. It is an excellent mechanism for ensuring that people have the right and the time to really consider what it is that they are signing up for. When we look at what's available in other jurisdictions there are things that include: it does not require witnesses to the signing of a euthanasia request—that's international. A person does not have to make multiple requests as they do in other jurisdictions. Medical practitioners do not have to be qualified in the field of a person's illness. Again would the sponsoring member like to answer why it is that these are in other jurisdictions but not in this one?Even the basic protections are not there and when we look at the concerns expressed by experts who deal with life and death scenarios every day we have consulted with them widely on the Supplementary Order Papers and amendments that we are putting forward tonight. Without people trying to be dismissive of what we are doing here we are representing—as the Hon Alfred Ngaro has said—some of the 39000 people who expressed their concerns to the select committee. It is here in Parliament that we can really define them.So let's look at clauses 8 to 16. They're supposed to deal with the dangers and the problems that might occur. They are woefully inadequate which is why this Supplementary Order Paper suggesting and wanting a person who is a support person to be provided free of charge either by the Ministry of Health or by the Ministry of Justice—we're open to discussion around that. But for a vulnerable elderly person who is potentially being coerced—and that can certainly take many subtle forms that are not easy to detect—it is not easy for an older person to be able to articulate it. For example an elderly Tongan woman came before our select committee and made submissions. She said her English language was not good enough and that she would like somebody to support her through the process of inquiring about assisted death. She would like somebody who can speak in her language and can translate for her and who also understands the cultural endeavours that she has always lived her life by and her community has. So it's very important that those individuals those support people are available for older people who perhaps are not particularly savvy with dealing with the medical profession. They are people who are weary and worried and may be being coerced.Picking up coercion is a really difficult thing so our suggestion—mine in the SOP; in subclause (3) of what I propose—is that that be in writing by the medical practitioner so that there is time for consideration because all of this stuff is too fast. There's no cooling down period. There's no real ability to consult with others but the attending medical practitioner as soon as practicable must give in writing soon after the request is made the offer of a free support person and providing that vulnerable elderly person with that level of an individual who can speak to them about the concerns that they have. So these are some of the issues that we'll be talking to in more detail over the next couple of hours. Even if you are supportive of euthanasia in principle this is certainly not the bill to deliver it.