SpeechDARROCH BALL (NZ First): Thank you Mr Speaker. It's a pleasure to rise on behalf of New Zealand First in support of the Contempt of Court Bill. The law of contempt is a very very important area of law for one really essential reason: because it protects the administration of justice. Everybody in this House knows that in order to have a robust democracy one of those pillars that hold that robust democracy up is a robust judicial system. We need to have those protections in place to ensure that that integrity and robustness of that judicial system is maintained. Now I've got to admit that I wasn't—and I'm still not entirely—aware of the situation that one of the members in the Opposition was involved in some years ago apparently in a court case in regards to criticisms of a judge or criticisms of the judicial system. By my understanding and by what it sounds like tonight that individual was found guilty of the law—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): Order! The member should speak directly to the bill. Now unless you can—DARROCH BALL: Well—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): Order! Thank you. Whilst the member may—as I said to Mr Greg O'Connor—mention such things we are debating the bill in front of the House. The member needs to link those directly to the bill. We're debating the bill. DARROCH BALL: In regards to the provision that was ensured it was included in this bill it was to protect the lies and the unjustified criticisms that would slander judges and bring the judicial system into disrepute. Now if you've got individuals in society that think they are above the law and that think that their opinion about the judicial system is above the law when the law is there to protect the robustness of the system and when the law is there to ensure the protection of one of the central pillars of our democracy that I think is the height of arrogance. I think that it highlights the very reason why we need this bill to pass through this House. It also highlights the flaws in the arguments from the Opposition as to why they're not supporting this bill. What it sounds like to me—especially from one of the members that just sat down—is the whole reason for the justification of the National Party's opposing this bill was because of the justification of what one of those member's actions were some years ago. Now we've heard from both the Minister and the previous speakers from this side of the House about how the criticisms of the Opposition and the National Party's argument about why they're wanting to oppose this bill are totally and utterly false. But the National Party continue to be led down the garden path by Nick Smith and his opinions about why the National Party should be opposing this bill—about why the National Party should be opposing this bill. The fact is that if one does disagree with the courts and has certain opinions about the courts there are legal processes with which to go down that track. It is not to think that one is above the law—not to think that one is above the law—and unjustly unfairly criticise the judge and to unfairly and unjustly lie about the judge and not to expect any recourse for that. To think that the minds of the National Party members sitting there think that that it is an acceptable course of action is quite unfathomable. Barbara Kuriger: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. This is not about the National Party; this is about the bill. ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): My ruling on that is that this has been a robust debate. I've been listening carefully to all of the contributions; that's a debating point. So I'm going to call Darroch Ball but I am going to warn the member that he is sailing close to the wind and to make sure he does not go over the line. DARROCH BALL: Yes thank you Mr Speaker. In the second half of my speech I just want to highlight very quickly what this bill actually does why it's important for it to pass and why it's illogical for the National Party not to support this bill. It goes to about five or six different areas of contempt that addresses the statute. Those are all very important areas and it's why New Zealand First supports it. The first is contempt. It replaces the common law with a clearer statutory offence and it prevents the publication of information that interferes with fair trial rights. It also goes into the disruptive behaviour in the courtrooms and it covers that also which is very important. It introduces safeguards for a person who has been cited for disruptive behaviour and also contempt for jurors which actually brings in a new offence where a member of a jury investigates or researches information that is relevant to the case. It also creates an offence where it prohibits jurors from disclosing juror deliberations non-compliance with court orders and untrue allegations or accusations against judges or courts—obviously one of the topics that has been canvassed quite thoroughly this evening. Lastly but by no means least importantly the bill addresses three concerns that the Law Commission did have with the current law. The first is that it makes the law of contempt accessible and it makes it clearer and easier to understand. This bill also makes the law of contempt workable which the previous law did not especially because it was developed prior to the internet age and the age of digital capabilities and the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act as well. So New Zealand First supports this bill in its entirety and commends the Minister for bringing it through to the House through this third reading and the Justice Committee for making it as workable as it is—a very effective piece of work. New Zealand First commends this bill to the House. Thank you Mr Speaker.