Collins Judith: Criminal Records (Clean Slate) Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
Collins Judith: Criminal Records (Clean Slate) Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:617;Page:12570] 
JUDITH COLLINS (National—Clevedon) 
: 
 I think that I am the fifth speaker on the bill and the fifth person to oppose it and that says a lot. So far nobody supports the bill or in fact has the wherewithal to stand up to support it. That is because this bill is all about telling lies. I have noted the comments of my colleague Mr Richard Worth and of the previous speaker Mr Franks and I concur with their views that the bill is one where the interpretation and overview of it is a disgrace. All we have to do is to look at the interpretation clause to see that there have been vast changes made to this bill. Unfortunately those changes are not always to the betterment of the bill. The changes are an indication that much concern was expressed to the Justice and Electoral Committee by members of the public and those who will have to work with this legislation. 
Speaking as someone who used to be an employer I am appalled that the Government is putting through a bill where the purpose is presumably not only to allow but to force people to tell lies. As Mr Worth said the bill does not state that the offence is deemed to have now been wiped clean and that a person can say he or she has done his or her time and that is it. This bill requires Government departments to tell lies and to conceal. Concealment in that circumstance is a lie and it is not for the betterment of the individual concerned. We all know many people who in their youth did something foolish and who were unfortunately picked up and ended up with a conviction and we all feel very sorry for them in that circumstance. Having said that the bill does not protect those people’s ability to travel overseas—not at all. Overseas Governments are not fooled by that concealment of convictions. For instance if such people fill out an application form or a visa form to go to a country and state that they have no criminal convictions they are lying. It is a big fat lie and unfortunately this Government is in fact encouraging them to do that. Those people may think that they can put that lie in their application but unfortunately they may be caught out. If they are caught out in that lie no doubt they will be deported from and not allowed back into that particular country. So we are setting up the very people we are trying to protect in the bill to end up with a further conviction in someone else’s country and that is just not OK. 
As I said we all know of many instances of people who in their youth did something foolish and were caught. No doubt those people who may now be in their fifties and sixties feel somewhat embarrassed about having to talk about an underage drinking conviction and that sort of thing. No doubt they do. However I would rather they had a moment’s embarrassment—and I think that any sensible person would understand and feel sympathy for them and think that that conviction should not necessarily stop them from getting a job—than have them tell lies about it. What about someone who is convicted of drink-driving? I see that is an offence that a person could end up being able to say did not happen. There may well be people in this House who feel that would be a good thing to be concealed. Unfortunately some people in the public will think that that is what this bill is all about—that is concealing those sorts of things. We should not be saying that. When someone who goes for a taxi driver’s licence happens to have a drink-driving conviction 8 or 9 years ago that is probably relevant. Certainly as a lawyer I would say that most people who end up with drink-driving convictions—and certainly with more than one conviction—have a very serious problem. To be able to hide that is not in the best interests of New Zealand and it is certainly not in the best interests of those people. 
I will not and I cannot support this sort of bill. It is all about interpretation—not deeming things to have never happened but to be now concealed. The thought that later on in the bill—and when we get to that stage no doubt we will talk about it further—people who tell the truth will be subject to being fined for telling the truth is dreadful. Any employer should be able to ask a person whether he or she has any criminal convictions and to be told truthfully and honestly yes or no. This bill will protect thieves. Many people who are thieves continue to steal time and time again whenever they get the opportunity. People who are thieves will do that because they are dishonest.