Warren-Clark AngieANGIE WARREN-CLARK (Labour): Thank you Madam Speaker. I'm excited to speak in this third reading of the Human Rights (Disability Assist Dogs Non-Discrimination) Amendment Bill in the name of the member Ricardo Menéndez March. I want to once again congratulate the member for having this bill pulled from the ballot but also for having the foresight and the agreement to actually take on this bill from Mojo Mathers. I just want to acknowledge and correct the Hansard. I had said that the bill sat for five years in the ballot; actually it was seven years—2015; bad maths on my part but I just wanted to correct the Hansard in regards to that.This is a useful and important bill; it's a very small bill but it's actually a very meaningful bill. So I want to acknowledge Mojo Mathers—as the member has previously done—for her work in this area and it must be a really nice feeling to have this bill progressed through the House and come to the final reading today. So I hope that Mojo is in fact participating from afar and having a celebration. I also want to acknowledge the 75 submissions that we received from interested groups and individuals and from the 20 submitters we heard orally—thank you. It's important I think that even though this is a member's bill we've actually had a lot of real interest in this bill and I think we had really good participation. I also want to acknowledge the Social Services and Community Committee team—as the member has acknowledged. I think that we all worked very collegially. We all agreed that this was a piece of legislation that aligned with all of our values—particularly our Labour team; it aligned with our values absolutely—and we were delighted to see it come to the House and progress. We found it quite fascinating I think in the process of exploring how we could in fact make the bill better—or not as the case has been. So I'd like to acknowledge the Ministry of Justice officials that came before us to support us. It was because it was under the Human Rights Act 1993 and therefore the Justice officials came and helped us. We really want to acknowledge and thank that team for their great contributions to us. They were very patient with us so thank you. Before I come to the bill I'd also like to acknowledge some of the work that happened in the select committee process itself. The member has acknowledged this but I think it is for the record for Hansard to actually acknowledge what we tried and attempted to do to support accessibility in the process and I agree hopefully this is a template for moving forward and not an exception. So what I'd like to acknowledge is that behind the scenes our clerks worked particularly diligently to support engagement. They were really proactive working with the Office for Disability Issues and the sign language community as well—the interpreters. I'd like to also acknowledge and appreciate the interpreters that supported us and are supporting us indeed today. So I'm going to try this: [Begins signing in New Zealand Sign Language] Thank you and welcome today for coming and helping us. I think one of the things that is really difficult about trying sign language is that we have the courage to do it. So I think that even though it was probably quite an average attempt I think it's important to try these things. I gave it a go.So I note for Hansard the things that we did in order to support accessibility or the participation of some of the disability community but generally actually our community. When we called for written submissions we recorded a video encouraging people to submit. We used various formats to encourage participation—so that was social media and a whole pile of other formats to do that. We made sure to directly contact the disability networks and to make sure that they knew that this legislation was before the House. We enlarged the font for our written information for visually impaired people and as someone who does need a little additional-sized font I found it very helpful I must say. We had all of our oral submissions translated into sign language and we captioned and transcribed these live as they were rolling out. Then those transcripts were also made available so that people could use those as well. And then we also gave additional time for oral submissions—that's important because when interpreting into another language things slow down. So those were some of the things that we did as a select committee and there is more that we can do—absolutely—and we welcome learning ways and talking with the community to engage better in the future.I come now very quickly—I've talked quite some time—to the bill. It amends the Human Rights Act 1993 and it makes it clear that any discrimination against someone because they have a disability assist dog would be considered discrimination on the basis of disability. It's a very simple bill but actually very meaningful. The list of prohibited grounds for discrimination set out in the Human Rights Act replaces guide dog" which was kind of a little bit too restrictive with the broader term "disability assist dog". When we look at that term it's defined within the Dog Control Act 1996 which defines a "disability assist dog"—so broadening the definition—to a dog certified by one of the organisations listed in Schedule 5.Now I'm just going to read out these organisations because they spend a lot of time training these dogs. These dogs are incredibly expensive because it's two-plus years often to train these dogs. The work that they do is often incredibly important to the people who receive these dogs but it's often work that we don't really recognise or see. So the organisations are: Assistance Dogs New Zealand Hearing Dogs for Deaf People New Zealand K9 Medical Detection New Zealand K9 Search Medical Detection Mobility Assistance Dogs Trust New Zealand Epilepsy Assist Dogs Trust Perfect Partners Assistance Dogs Trust and the Royal New Zealand Foundation of the Blind Inc. We all recognise—we all know—the "guide dog" but actually there are many many dogs out there under the "disability assist dog" definition that are covered now.In short this bill makes it clear that if a person is denied services or access because they have a disability assist dog that person is being discriminated against on the basis of disability. I think really that makes perfect sense if you think about it in the context of those animals being a tool—as much as we love them and adore them as a sentient being and cute and fluffy and all of those things they're also a working tool for people with disabilities. It would be like for example people saying to someone who is in a wheelchair "You cannot enter this shop or this restaurant because you have a wheelchair." Those are the types of discrimination that have happened for people with dogs. I absolutely agree with the member Ricardo Menéndez about the fact that we need more education so that people understand that the disability assist dog is not just a Labrador—there's a whole series of dogs—and we look forward to perhaps when the new Disability Ministry is stood up looking at the matter further. I commend this bill to the House."