Ghahraman Golriz; Dean JacquiGOLRIZ GHAHRAMAN (Green): Thank you Madam Speaker. I'd like to start by thanking the member in whose name this bill has come to the House Anahila Kanongata'a-Suisuiki—I hope I got that right; I practised.Hon Member: Yes you did.GOLRIZ GHAHRAMAN: Kia ora. I want to also stand here in this House and say what we don't often enough say which is disabilities rights are human rights. This bill is about rights. Others have said it but I think it bears repeating: that this isn't about charity or compassion—although there is a lot of compassion contained in the work that went into this bill—but these provisions and the changes that this will bring and the changes that this bill will in practical terms bring to people's lives who are impacted by it are in fact upholding fundamental human rights for our disabilities community.I will restate what the bill does for those watching which is that it prohibits the seizure of equipment or anything that anyone who suffers from a disability has that may be subject to a judgment debtors provision of the District Court Act if that is something that's needed by that person for their care independence participation in the community or the support that they need in the healthcare system. That is to say that it's about upholding our fundamental rights. I say our" because I think that I speak on this bill as someone who has a very real chance of being impacted by it later in life because I do suffer from multiple sclerosis (MS) and that's a chronic illness that may in future mean that I need to access a wheelchair a mobility support item and other types of equipment or expensive measures that may otherwise have come under the legislation. When you're diagnosed with MS now because the treatments have gone so far in the past decade or so—and I'm incredibly grateful for that—you do get told repeatedly at every stage of that diagnosis process and once you start on the treatment "Don't worry this is a different kind of illness. We have different treatment for it now; you probably won't end up in a wheelchair." What I wish we said was that it's OK even if you do because we'll do everything we can as a society to make sure that you are in fact included that your independence isn't affected that your health will be taken care of and you will be who you are still. This bill represents one of the very specific measures that we do need to take as a House of Representatives to acknowledge that our laws and our institutions have thus far marginalised those who suffer disability or live with chronic illness in a number of ways that we have discarded their needs that we have catered to the needs of the status quo and that we have been ableist in the ways that we have applied—even in our justice system even in this very specific way—our law. So I do thank the member for bringing that to the House's attention and I want to say that it's also an acknowledgment that we none of us whether we suffer from chronic illness or disability want to live in a society where our fundamental rights can be taken away where our basic needs can be discarded where we might not have access to life as we know it whether it's visiting friends or whether it's literally accessing a hospital because we couldn't afford the next payment on a debt. We none of us want to live in a society where the courts can be weaponised against us to protect the profits of those whom debtors owe rather than those who need basic equipment for their daily life and their basic healthcare. So this is a systems change moment even though it is a very particular very specific change. It's about disabilities rights. It's also about acknowledging I guess that we keep calling the disabled community the most vulnerable members of our community and I agree—we are vulnerable. But we've been made vulnerable and I want us to change that language. We need to call it what it is. We're talking about a community that has been systematically and systemically marginalised as others have been. Because my disabilities community is anything but passively vulnerable. They are active lobbyists they are activists they speak their truth as loudly as anyone ever can. It is just that they've not been heard for so long on access. What I love about this is that although this bill is—as we keep saying—very specific it does something else that I think brings the voices of the disabilities community into this House as much as the substantive change that the bill introduces to the District Court Act and that is that the change and expansion of the definition of disability goes further than the Human Rights Act. That came about as part of the work of the select committee. I really want to acknowledge the members of that committee for hearing the voices of that incredibly diverse community. There's not just one kind of disability one kind of person who suffers from disability and anyone who does suffer from a disability doesn't always suffer from just one type of disability. These are layered issues and this definition which I will read out is now expanded to include people who have "long-term physical mental intellectual or sensory impairments that in interaction with various barriers may hinder their full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others". This is a watershed moment in New Zealand's law because it is for the first time at least a step towards recognising the modern experiences of this very diverse community. Everyone across Aotearoa will know someone who's impacted by this type of long-term—we can call it impairment or marginalisation. Because actually once we recognise that it's our participation on an equal basis with others that's hindered and that that can be done through long-term physical mental intellectual or sensory impairment that's when we start to look at all of our laws—our education system our housing our roads our system of justice—in multiple other ways beyond this bill. So it is a good day in this House and I do commend the bill.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): The next call is a five-minute call."