Hipango HareteHARETE HIPANGO (National—Whanganui): Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker. I stand for the third time to address the House on the Military Justice Legislation Amendment Bill. I am the last speaker for the National Party and the National Party supports this bill which was introduced under the ministership of at the time my colleague the Hon Mark Mitchell as Minister of Defence on 15 August 2017. I acknowledge our current Minister of Defence Minister the Hon Ron Mark and also your service that you've given as a senior military army officer and also too our Minister of Justice across the House—I also acknowledge the Hon Andrew Little.So it's quite significant and special that I'm able to take a final call on this matter with the Ministers present in the House. Also may I share that I have just placed beside me a photo of my brother the deceased Lieutenant Colonel Waata Hīpango who gave service of many years. When I first spoke to address the House in relation to this—I'll just place Waata to the side—I referenced the significance of this because of his service but also it's because of my service as a lawyer in the civilian criminal justice system.So this is about an alignment of the military justice system with our civilian criminal justice system. So when I addressed the House first rising to take a call at the first reading I mentioned that I'd practised for many years—30 years—as a criminal lawyer as a family lawyer as a mental health lawyer and as an advocate for our people but not as an advocate in the courts martial. So speaking from that experience and the service that had been given by my brother and also many military personnel both passed and both still living it really is a privilege for me to stand to address the House today on this bill.So may I just share a brief anecdote from my experience. I come from a family that has given long military service and history dating back from the 1840s through to date. I sought to join the New Zealand Navy as an 18-year-old back in 1982. And I'm talking about alignment now because I stand before the House to address the alignment of the military system with the criminal justice system. Back in 1982 as a young 18-year-old—people may calculate my age; I'm in my mid-50s—I sought to join the New Zealand Navy as a young officer.I was denied that opportunity because I sought to pursue a legal career through the navy. My brother was a serving military officer at the time and he had friends who were junior officers and they were tracking through doing their degree through the navy. That was denied me as a woman and that was prior to the days of our anti-discrimination laws—that was 1982. We had in 1990 the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. Section 19 addressed particularly freedom from discrimination. That was not available to young women seeking to join our military forces to pursue other levels of learning. Then also the Human Rights Act in 1993: section 21 which prohibits grounds of discrimination on the basis of sex. So there was a disalignment at the time.Had I entered into the navy I may not be standing here addressing the House as a member of Parliament but I share that brief anecdote because this is very much about enhancing and very much about consistency efficiency and transparency marrying the laws of our military justice system with our civilian justice system.May I just turn now to the bill itself. I spoke about my experience as a Family Court lawyer and an advocate also in the criminal courts. Part 3 of the Military Justice Legislation Amendment Bill is specific to victims' rights. I have addressed the House about the importance of that in terms of victims now under the military justice system having the same rights the same access to justice but the same provision of justice as well under this legislation and that is commendable.I also turn to the importance of fitness to stand trial. As a criminal lawyer practising both in the criminal jurisdiction and the mental health court jurisdiction I represented many people who came before the court. Now a particular amendment that the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee have proposed—and also I believe the Justice Committee as well—is the importance of aligning the Criminal Procedure (Mentally Impaired Persons) Act 2003 under a Supplementary Order Paper for an amendment to be covered under the Courts Matters Bill to reverse the current sequence. What that means is that when I stood in court to represent a person who was mentally impaired or declared to be mentally disordered the criminal law—until such time that the Courts Matters Bill is assented to; I believe it still stands at the moment—in the provision under the Criminal Procedure (Mentally Impaired Persons) Act 2003 specifically section 7 requires that the fitness to stand trial can only occur after all evidence has been heard to substantiate whether or not the offence or the omission has been committed.So basically in short what I'm saying is that as a result of this piece of legislation it is seeking to reverse the requirement as to whether a person has committed the offence or the omission—to reverse that. So the priority comes around to the fitness of that person's mental capacity as to whether they are fit to stand before the court for a trial. This is really important and significant legislation because the committee appropriately recognised and seeks to amend by way of a Supplementary Order Paper under the Courts Matters Bill the reversal of that part.Time often escapes when one's so immersed in the importance of this legislation and the detail of it. I turn now to the onus of proof. Significantly as has been spoken to and addressed by colleagues and members of Parliament before the House the onus of proof will now shift. Previously in the military justice system the onus of proof was on the accused to prove their innocence. That does not align but will soon align with what's required under our civilian criminal justice system: that the onus of proof is on the prosecution to establish the offence or the omission.So in closing may I just share again a brief anecdote. I had a visit as many of us—I believe all of us as members of Parliament—will from the ambassador of the United States of America. Our discussions again led us into military service and history. Ambassador Scott Brown disclosed that he was a lieutenant colonel serving in the army—the national guard—and he has presented not only to myself but I believe to all other members that he is meeting with this coin. When he presented this coin we just shared our relationships and associations by way of that military history and service. In closing he had shared with me that he was aware of my brother—he'd done a little bit of background search for information.So in closing off as the last speaker for the National Party in commending this bill soon to be legislation to the House I'm immensely privileged to be able to speak not only on behalf of the National Party but also of all of those persons who have given service in our armed forces and continue to give service. It is about aligning their access to justice in an equal and appropriate way. Tēnā tātou katoa. Kia ora.