Dean Jacqui: Coroners Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDean Jacqui: Coroners Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 20 October 2015. Volume:709;Page:7402. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JACQUI DEAN (National—Waitaki): In speaking to the Coroners Amendment Bill and noting the comments made by the speaker who has just resumed her seat Jacinda Ardern I can say that the issues that were raised by that speaker were well-canvassed during the select committee consideration of this bill. I am satisfied with the advice that we received from officials and we certainly looked into the issues that she raised in some depth and with a great deal of care. I am satisfied that the bill that has been returned to the House has got the balance right in terms of the rights and responsibilities of coroners.It is to be remembered that at the heart of this legislation there are going to be grieving family members and that grief is a force that remains raw and open until yet another milestone is achieved by the family and those left behind as the result of a death—until a finding has been made by the coroner. Previously and up until now those findings can in fact take a considerable amount of time—years in fact—and for those family members each time that that unexplained death or sudden death or death as a result of an accident is brought up again either in the media or perhaps in a piece of correspondence from the coroner’s office those wounds are reopened once again. I think that the committee across the House understood that concept very well. I regret that Labour cannot see its way to supporting this bill because despite the matters raised by the previous speaker there was broad agreement on the fundamental provisions of this bill.I am not going to go through each clause; there are a number of speakers on our side of the House who are very well-equipped to make comment on different aspects of the bill. However there are a couple of aspects that I wish to touch on this evening. I think one of the main provisions of the bill is that it aims to improve coroners’ recommendations by requiring their comments and their recommendations to be very specific to the case in hand and specific to the evidence before them and to be very clear about how those recommendations would reduce the likelihood of future deaths in similar circumstances.In talking to that point the committee gave some care to the matter of suicide reporting. The Law Commission made a number of recommendations to improve and also to simplify the legislative restrictions on suicide reporting. This bill picks up on those Law Commission recommendations. The current restriction on suicide reporting is quite broad. There are variations about how suicides should be reported. Social media has changed the landscape of how suicides are reported. The New Zealand judicial system has no influence over the reporting of suicides overseas or offshore.The concern for all of us including the committee is that there needs to be a balance between preventing harmful reporting which may give rise to copycat suicide episodes and enabling enough reporting to note that an event has occurred. The last thing that any piece of legislation would seek to do is enable or encourage copycat behaviour particularly by vulnerable young people. We believe that the changes to this bill strike a good balance in that regard. There is a restriction around the publishing; the method; or the site if it suggests the method of the suicide it will be prohibited unless the Chief Coroner grants an exemption in that case. This is based on international evidence that strongly suggests that the reporting of these details gives rise to copycat behaviour.I want also to acknowledge the submitters who came to the committee and made in some cases some pretty heartfelt submissions on this Coroners Amendment Bill—in particular Mr and Mrs Still whose daughter died in the hot-air balloon accident in the Wairarapa. Their submission was very strong and they submitted that the bill should require coroners to advise family members at the scene of the death of their rights under section 25 of the Coroners Act. Those rights are around viewing a body and touching or remaining near a body in the coroner’s custody. For a number of families in New Zealand it is of utmost importance that they have access to their loved one whilst in the coroner’s custody.In the particular circumstance that Mr and Mrs Still brought to the committee around the balloon crash in the Wairarapa we looked very carefully at that incident but we determined in the end—and taking advice and after much discussion—that there was no legislative remedy for it. It was a particular set of heartbreaking circumstances to them. Although Mr and Mrs Still asked for legislative change around their particular set of circumstances the committee did not recommend any change. However we wish to convey again our heartfelt thanks to them for their courage in coming to the committee to make their submission and to say to them that they were indeed heard and that the committee and this Parliament considered their request but regrettably for their particular circumstances we could not find a remedy in the legislation.In closing I want to thank members of the committee for their careful consideration of this bill. I think that it makes great improvements to the coronial system in New Zealand. My regret is that it is not fully supported in the House and we will explore that further as this bill goes through its passage in the House. Thank you.