O'Rourke Denis: Criminal Procedure Legislation Bill — Second Reading In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeO'Rourke Denis: Criminal Procedure Legislation Bill — Second Reading In Committee[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9729. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]DENIS O’ROURKE (NZ First): I did want to make some brief comments about Part 2 in particular on clause 21 but before doing so I would like to say this. There was I think quite recently really a television advertisement for Mainland cheese. Of course the best cheese does come from the Mainland and this company produced it. The theme in their advertisement was “Good things take time.” and indeed their product was a superb product and still is and it did take time. They were very memorable advertisements and what they said most people believed to be true.In the case of this particular legislation it has taken time it has matured properly it has been considered properly and we have got a good product. So good things take time—this took time and we get a good piece of legislation out of it especially with regard to the input of the Law Society and indeed the other submitters to the Justice and Electoral Committee. I would like to reiterate also what many others have said that it is a shame that with the previous legislation we debated—the Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill—we are not seeing that. We are not seeing the Government take time. We are not seeing the electorate having the time to make a good and considered submission on that legislation as it has on this. So that is a matter of considerable regret. We can easily agree to legislation of this kind which has been well considered and of course it cannot be expected that any of the Opposition parties would be prepared to support the sort of process we saw yesterday with the Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill.However I did particularly want to mention one clause in Part 2. The reason I do so is because in the first reading I questioned clause 21 which amends section 8 and that concerns “Jurisdiction in respect of crimes on ships or aircraft beyond New Zealand”. This provision would replace section 8(2) with two new provisions. The first providing that “If a person does or omits to do any act to which this section applies and that act or omission would if it occurred within New Zealand be an offence … punishable by imprisonment for life or by 2 or more years’ imprisonment then … the person is liable on conviction as if the act or omission had occurred in New Zealand.” That is fine. The second however provides that “If any proceedings are taken by virtue of the jurisdiction conferred by this section it is a defence to prove that the act or omission would not have been an offence under the law of the country of which the person charged was a national or citizen at the time of the act or omission if it had occurred in that country.” So that means that a New Zealand citizen would potentially be treated quite differently from the national or citizen of another country for the same offence in the same circumstances.I questioned at the select committee stage whether that was appropriate and it did receive proper consideration. The officials were able to satisfy me that this was not really a change at all that it was and has been for some time a provision in New Zealand law and would be consistent with the legal systems of other countries and that it would be unwise not to have such a provision in our own statute.I just wanted to mention that as I said at the beginning these sorts of provisions need to be scrutinised. We need to get them right we need to understand indeed what we are doing and make sure that they are correct and proper provisions. So as I said good things do take time. We have scrutinised that provision along with the others. We have satisfied ourselves that it is the right law and therefore it deserves support. I just thought I would place on record having raised my concern at the first reading that that concern has now been allayed and I am satisfied that this provision is good and proper and should be passed.