Barker Rick: Criminal Records (Clean Slate) Bill — Third Reading 
Barker Rick: Criminal Records (Clean Slate) Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:617;Page:12771] 
Hon RICK BARKER (Associate Minister of Justice) 
 on behalf of the 
 Minister of Justice 
: I move  
That the Criminal Records (Clean Slate) Bill be now read a third time 
. This legislation is designed to allow individuals with less serious convictions who have lived for 7 years conviction-free to put their past behind them. The legislation is relatively conservative. The threshold level for less serious convictions is that the convictions never resulted in a sentence of imprisonment. That is the least arbitrary line of distinguishing convictions that should now be clean-slated. Exceptions are made for sexual offending which is not clean-slated. The 7-year period was determined by the Justice and Electoral Committee to be a relevant period of having no further convictions on evidence that after that period individuals are generally unlikely to reoffend. All criteria must be met before persons are eligible under the scheme. 
New Zealand has been slow to adopt legislation that allows people to get on with their lives without being disadvantaged by historic convictions. The United Kingdom adopted such legislation around 30 years ago and both Australia and Canada the other legal jurisdictions to which New Zealand usually compares itself have also had this legislation for many years. It is therefore disappointing that some parties in this House have remained timid or have been politically opportunistic and continued to oppose this legislation. Such a stance is reactionary and lacks a sense of fairness and compassion which I believe most New Zealanders have on this issue. 
The Ministry of Justice estimates that as many as 500000 New Zealanders will be affected by and gain relief from this bill. The largest category of those people who have committed some relatively minor offence in their youth are now totally law-abiding citizens. There are few people in New Zealand who could claim to have led a totally blameless life. Those who received convictions many years ago for offences such as shoplifting have often continued to be disadvantaged by having convictions on their record. 
An expert on employment at the University of Waikato management school commented that the discrimination against job seekers for past offending is common. Mr Goff had a telephone call to his office last week from a man who has just returned from Australia and who received a conviction for a minor offence committed when he was young. In Australia by law he did not have to disclose it. In New Zealand he continues to have to do so and this has been an obstacle to him in his search for work. 
Having to disclose or fearing that offending committed many years ago will be disclosed has a powerful psychological effect for many people. During the Committee stage I read out a letter from a woman who 23 years ago had been convicted of a shoplifting charge. She wrote: “This has been my one and only breaking of the law and one I regret on a daily basis. It does not go away. No one in my family has any knowledge of this record. My husband would be devastated if he knew and more than likely should he find out this would put my 31-year marriage at risk.” This fear is typical of hundreds of letters Mr Goff has received on this topic. It is time we allowed people in this situation to bury their past. Convictions for minor offending should not be a life sentence. 
The bill only conceals criminal records; it does not wipe them. A concealment regime was necessary to ensure that full criminal records can also be made available in special circumstances such as during a police investigation or court proceedings and in relation to sensitive types of employment such as the care and protection of children or jobs that involve national security. The exceptions to the scheme have been provided to ensure that the integrity of the justice system is maintained by making criminal records available for police prosecutions and determining appropriate sentences where an individual reoffends. Full records will be provided in certain circumstances to ensure the safety of children and young people in vulnerable situations and for employment as a judge a member of the police a prison or probation officer and roles involving the national security of New Zealand full records will be available. 
An additional exception to clause 15 was introduced in the second Supplementary Order Paper. This will enable an individual’s complete criminal record to be considered by the New Zealand Police when determining whether he or she is a fit and proper person to obtain a firearms licence or additional licence endorsements. Some of the criticisms by Opposition members of this piece of legislation have been that it is requiring individuals to lie. It is not. It simply allows a great many ordinary and now law-abiding New Zealanders who have long suffered unnecessary anxiety about past mistakes to no longer have old and minor criminal convictions revealed. It will still be lawful to ask someone to consent to disclose his or her criminal record by the Ministry of Justice or the police but if the person has a clean slate no convictions will be revealed. 
In order to provide some safeguards to the individual two offences are created in the legislation. It will be an offence to request or require that an individual disregard the clean slate scheme when answering questions about his or her record or authorising the release of his or her criminal record by either the Ministry of Justice or the New Zealand Police. It will also be an offence for a person with access to criminal records to unlawfully disclose an individual’s criminal record that is required to be concealed. The first Supplementary Order Paper provides an additional offence provision in relation to people who breach the prohibition on publication of an individual’s identifying details following an application to disregard a conviction as well as making minor technical and drafting amendments. 
The bill will come into force on a date to be appointed by Order in Council. Delayed commencement is necessary due to the work that must be done by the Ministry of Justice and the New Zealand Police to implement this legislation both in respect of the information technology and the day-to-date work practices. Following enactment of systems design it will be finalised and development of information technology systems will commence. The information technology and business implementation of the legislation is expected to be completed to allow for commencement before the end of this year. 
The legislation places requirements on individuals employers and other people who routinely ask questions about an individual’s criminal record. Prior to the commencement of the legislation the Ministry of Justice will develop a public information strategy to increase awareness of the effect of the legislation. The real significance of this legislation however will be for those individuals who can put behind them mistakes they have made in the past and get on with their lives. When enacted the only challenge that people in the future will raise about the legislation will be about why we took so long in this country to join other countries in introducing it. I commend the bill to the House.