Disability (United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities) Bill — Second Reading In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Disability (United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities) Bill — Second Reading In Committee 
[Sitting date: 02 September 2008. Volume:649;Page:18334. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Disability (United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities) Bill 
Second Reading 
Debate resumed. 
JUDY TURNER (Deputy Leader—United Future) 
: 
 I stand on behalf of United Future to speak in support of the Disability (United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities) Bill. United Future does not enjoy representation on the select committee that heard the submissions but I have no doubt that they were robust and passionate. What I celebrate in this bill is the fact that people will finally have an opportunity to participate in governance options based on their individual merit and will no longer be blocked from participation because they fit into a particular category of person. I think there are some exciting opportunities that will come off the back of that. For instance there are organisations like school boards of trustees and tertiary institution councils and there are opportunities to serve on juries local authorities Maori Trust Boards boards of directors the New Zealand Council for Educational Research scholarship boards licensing trusts—the list goes on and on. A famous pop song came out a few years ago where the songwriter encouraged people to get physical. I would suggest that one of the consequences of this bill passing in the House is that people from the disabilities sector can now be encouraged to get political.  
Some of the areas in New Zealand where we still want to see a much better connect between policy and practice will be better facilitated when people with disabilities are able to serve on boards of trustees without question similar to what has happened previously with tertiary institution councils and local authorities. Frustration has been expressed by people around transport issues for instance and there has been a feeling that sometimes certain bodies are slow to take up their responsibilities to ensure the active participation of people with disabilities and to pull down those barriers that exclude participation. People will no longer be able to be do this without having to sit across the table from somebody who lives day in and day out with that barrier and they will have to continue to oppose it or neglect it while eyeballing that person across the table. I think that is an extremely good thing and I encourage the ongoing development of further participation by people within the sector. 
I was really interested to note that one of the Justice and Electoral Committee’s considerations was the financial cost of implementing the bill. United Future believes that every change will cost us and any change that does not cost us is probably not worth the paper it is written on. Of course this bill will cost—it should cost. United Future is less concerned about that aspect than obviously some members of the select committee are.  
One of the great things is that this ratification will increase the scrutiny of compliance with obligations by both the private sector and the public sector. The select committee noted in its report that it considers it “imperative that organisations companies and institutions should consider the convention when any pertinent changes are being made or policies are being developed to avoid having to make changes to comply retrospectively.” I think the great thing about what this bill does tonight is that from hereon in we should not be constantly having to retrospectively apply new gains for this sector and that those in the sector should start to see in a much more proactive way their needs for inclusion considered right at the beginning of every new issue as it comes before both national government and local bodies.  
United Future does not want to prolong this but we are very excited. We congratulate the Minister on ensuring that this bill is passed by 3 October for all the good things that come off the back of it and we congratulate and thank all the people from the Disabled Persons Assembly for being here to oversee tonight’s proceedings. 
CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (National) 
: 
 I will take just a brief call because other members have really said it all. The aim of the Disability (United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities) Bill as we know is to make amendments to certain New Zealand enactments including statutes and regulations and this will enable New Zealand to ratify the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. As the Minister said New Zealand signed the convention at the United Nations on 30 March 2007 along with 80 other States. Since then 129 States have signed the convention and 28 States have ratified it. The convention came into force in May 2008 when the convention received its 20th ratification by a State party. 
Part 1 which we will come to in a few minutes deals with certain amendments to Part 2 of the Human Rights Act 1993 which deals with unlawful discrimination. Part 2 deals with disqualification from certain public or fiduciary offices commonly on the grounds of the Mental Health (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Act 1993. As the previous speaker Judy Turner observed when one goes through the bill one sees that there is a very interesting miscellany of statutes like the Juries Act 1981 the Taranaki Scholarships Trust Board Act 1957 and the River Boards Act 1908. Finally Part 3 deals with some amendments to certain regulations like the Child Support Rules 1992. 
I congratulate the officials on the work they have done. It must have been a very exacting task to trawl through the statute book to identify the statutes in Part 2 and to make the consequential amendments but it is an important task if the job is to be done properly. Much of the legislation needing change—and I refer to the statutes in Part 2—are older enactments that have not been amended for some time and that carry over wording from the past. An example is the River Boards Act 1908. I refer to section 29 which provides that certain persons may not be members of river boards. The bill refers to section 29(1)(b) where a person is detained in a hospital under the Mental Health Act 1969. I observe in passing that this legislation was last amended in 1986 and it could be that it should have been amended in 1993 when the statute to which I referred was passed—that is the Mental Health (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Act 1993. But it is that kind of reference that needs to be dealt with if we are to have legislation that complies with the convention. 
What the convention does not do is create new rights for disabled people; rather it builds on conventional understandings of what is required to implement existing human rights as they relate to disabled people. 
National supports the first reading and we will support the bill through all its stages. The sooner it is the law the better. I observe that in March 2007 when signing the convention the Minister Ruth Dyson stated: “It is important to bring the Convention into force as quickly as possible so as to fill the gaps that exist without it and to redress some of the discrimination and injustices that persons with disabilities have faced over many years.” However legislation was introduced to this Parliament only in July 2008. With those comments I say that National will support the legislation and we can take a closer look at Parts 1 2 and 3 in the Committee stage. 
LESLEY SOPER (Labour) 
: 
 I wanted to take a short call on this Disability (United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities) Bill particularly after it seemed to me that a National member who spoke earlier was less than wholehearted in supporting it. I remind National members that they did try to delay the process of this bill. I offer my congratulations to the submitters. I acknowledge the people from the Disabled Persons Assembly whom we have here tonight and who I believe helped to change the National Party’s mind on the importance of this bill for the disabilities sector.  
I pay a tribute to the Minister for her consultation with the sector for her promotion of this very important bill and for her dedication over a very long period to removing barriers for disabled people and to working towards a fully inclusive society. I can say that as someone who was for some years the chair of the committee of my local district health board that dealt with the disabilities sector and I know of the very good work this Minister has done over many years towards building a fully inclusive society. The debate on this bill tonight provides an opportunity to offer congratulations to the sector and congratulations to the Minister on some very good work on an important acknowledgment about just how important it is for the sector for us to address discrimination in New Zealand and in other countries.  
This bill does several things that are really important. It removes outdated and discriminatory provisions in some of our New Zealand legislation that automatically disqualified people from certain public offices on the grounds of their being mentally disordered. What we will now have is a situation where a person’s capacity to perform will be important—and that for the sector is a very important change. Secondly the bill clarifies the provision of reasonable accommodation in the Human Rights Act in certain areas where this provision is currently rather uncertain. That is pretty important and it is very important for the sector. The removal of barriers is important. We have put a lot of dedicated work into saying to the sector that we recognise the barriers we recognise the importance to these people of removing those barriers and we will deliver on doing that.  
This Disability (United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities) Bill delivers something very important: an acknowledgment to the sector. I am proud that I can support the bill tonight. I offer my congratulations to everybody who has been involved in it. Again I offer my congratulations to those submitters who actually convinced the National Party to change its attitude and to acknowledge how important it is with regard to the legislation to get to this point in time for that date in October.  
I say in closing to those people who have come here tonight to actually listen to this final passage just how important it is for them to be involved to have their voices heard to be on the committees to tell us as parliamentarians what they want and to be part of the important consultation that helps us to deliver to a sector as important as theirs. So I thank them for being here tonight. I thank them for having submitted and having been part of the process. I look forward to working with those people in the future on what is important on removing those barriers and on addressing discrimination and I say to them that they are part of the population of New Zealand whose lives we work to improve. Everything we do in this House is important in their day-to-day lives. I am really proud to see so many of them here tonight and I thank them very much for the work they have put into what we are delivering.  
Bill read a second time. 
In Committee 
TIM BARNETT (Senior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 I seek leave for the Committee stage debate to be taken as one question with separate votes on the provisions of the bill. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Marian Hobbs) 
: Leave is sought to do that. Is there any objection? There being no objection that is how we will proceed. 
Clauses 1 to 32  
Dr PAUL HUTCHISON (National—Port Waikato) 
: 
 It is a pleasure to speak on Parts 1 2 and 3 of the Disability (United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities) Bill. National agrees entirely with it. We very much cooperated with the Government during the process of this bill. It was right that we questioned the Government from time to time on its processes. We had a rather mealy-mouthed interpretation from the Labour list member who emanates from the deep south Lesley Soper. I thought it was a bit mean in spirit compared with the very generous spirit of the National Party towards this bill and its supporters. 
If we look at Parts 1 2 and 3 we see that a huge number of pieces of legislation have to be amended by the bill in order for us to fulfil the various requirements of the convention. There are not only amendments to the Human Rights Act 1993—an excellent Act brought in by the last National Government—but also a variety of amendments to a huge spectrum of other statutes ranging from the Community Trusts Act to as my learned colleague Chris Finlayson pointed out such unlikely legislation as the Soil Conservation and Rivers Control Act the Taranaki Scholarships Trust Board Act the Te Ture Whenua Maori Act and a whole variety of others. 
I shall for a moment concentrate on some of the issues around those suffering from psychiatric disabilities. We had a very strong submission from the Mental Health Commission which pointed out that ratifying the convention was important because the vulnerability of disabled people including people with psychiatric disability demanded international safeguards at the highest level. The convention enables disability to be understood and addressed at a social level and will serve as a positive framework for positive reforms of New Zealand law Government policies and community attitudes that promote social inclusion of people with psychiatric disabilities. There are many areas of exclusion of people with psychiatric disabilities. For instance they are excluded from education boards. There is no question that many people with a mental disability are able to make a very positive contribution to such boards but under the present statute they are not able to participate to be elected or to be appointed to those boards. These changes will make it possible for them to participate and I think that is very positive indeed. 
I think it is also important to point out how significant the prevalence of mental conditions in New Zealand is. This was very much emphasised by the Mental Health Commission. It said that about 20 percent of New Zealanders are currently experiencing or have recently experienced a mental health alcohol-related or drug-related problem. Out of the 20 percent 4.7 percent of the survey population were assessed as currently having a serious disorder. Once again that points out how very important it is that the stigma prejudice and discrimination that exist at so many levels of society towards those with mental health conditions are corrected. This legislation which will help correct that situation is very welcome.  
Hon RUTH DYSON (Minister for Disability Issues) 
:  
I want to take a brief call in the Committee stage of the Disability (United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities) Bill but before I do that I thank the Committee for agreeing to have this debate in one part.  
The reason I want to take a brief call is to say first of all I have two Supplementary Order Papers in my name and I want to ensure that members are aware of their production and their content. Given that every party has signed up to supporting them this is probably an exercise in futility because we have already ensured that. But I would like to do that formally and put it on the record. Supplementary Order Papers 234 and 235 will be voted on as part of the bill.  
The second reason I want to take a brief call is to acknowledge the comments made by Christopher Finlayson in the second reading in which he acknowledged the huge amount of work that has been undertaken by officials and others in order to prepare what is actually quite a small bill. I thank Mr Finlayson for his acknowledgment of the officials. A huge amount of work has gone into a very small bill. As well as the officials of course we have had disabled people themselves being part of the discussion from the very start of the process that is the reason why we have this bill. We have developed a convention that we want to ratify and the role of disabled people in actually developing the convention was not only a reflection of the principles of the Disability Strategy but also a role model and it changed the way the United Nations operated. I just want to put that on the record.  
The final point I want to make is that the reason I want my contribution to be short is that the people who are listening to this debate have a life and actually they want to spend some of it tonight by sleeping There is no debate to be had; every single party is in agreement with this bill. I urge its rapid progress. 
CHRIS AUCHINVOLE (National) 
: 
 I take note of the incredibly popular suggestion that the Minister for Disability Issues has just made and I shall speak quickly! 
I would like to add my voice to those expressing the pleasure associated with this bill being a unanimous decision of the House. I note the huge number of pieces of legislation that have to be adjusted. Even in these days of computer technology I am sure it is a massive task. I say to my colleague Paul Hutchison that I misled him: the bill does involve trout because I notice that freshwater fish legislation is included—so yes trout are there. 
The ratification of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities is particularly important for vulnerable members of society and particularly for sufferers of psychiatric illness. Twenty percent of New Zealanders we have just been told are currently enduring some form of mental disorder. With modern psychiatric medicine I guess we can say that in most cases it will be of a temporary nature—a temporary disorder—and thank goodness for that. None the less we need legislation that prevents people from being marginalised excluded or isolated from normal life. 
Schoolchildren with special needs are worthy of special attention. I have noticed as I have gone round the New Zealand Educational Institute meetings that I have been invited to recently the difficulty associated with the Government’s decision that 1 percent of schoolchildren be regarded as needing special-needs support. How on earth can a Government decide that a particular percentage of people will be worthy of assistance? 
There is still a way to go yet in making this legislation the practical tool that I am sure everybody in the gallery hopes and expects it will be. I have enjoyed my exposure to this bill to the information it has provided and to the work of the select committee. I have enjoyed my involvement and I feel that I am a wiser person as a consequence of having been involved. It is with pleasure that National members express support for this bill. 
CHARLES CHAUVEL (Labour) 
: 
 I want to take just a brief call because Dr Hutchison made one comment that I really cannot let pass—and I am sorry to spoil what has been a multipartisan mood in the House. The Human Rights Act 1993 is excellent legislation but members opposite have no right to claim any credit for its pedigree as far as disability is concerned. The Minister of Justice at the time Doug Graham would not put disability in the Act as a ground of prohibited discrimination. It took the courage of Katherine O’Regan to put forward a Supplementary Order Paper to put that ground as well as that of sexual orientation into the Human Rights Act as the National Government of the time would not do it. Let it not be forgotten that that Supplementary Order Paper went through only due to the support of most members on this side of the House. 
I am sorry to say it but the debate I have heard tonight from members opposite is really disappointing. Those members still do not get it—this is not about trout and it is not about river boards. When there are people in the gallery whose quality of life is at stake it is really insulting to go on about the minutiae of bills like this. This is about their rights and those members need to get that. 
Part 1 agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 234 in the name of the Hon Ruth Dyson to Part 2 be agreed to. 
Amendments agreed to. 
Part 2 as amended agreed to. 
Part 3 agreed to. 
Clause 1 agreed to. 
Clause 2 agreed to. 
The Committee divided the bill into the Disability (United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities) Bill and the Human Rights Amendment Bill (No 2) pursuant to Supplementary Order Paper235. 
Bill reported with amendment. 
Report adopted.