Mitchell Mark: Juries (Jury Service and Protection of Particulars of Jury List Information) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Mitchell Mark: Juries (Jury Service and Protection of Particulars of Jury List Information) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 31 July 2012. Volume:682;Page:4127. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
MARK MITCHELL (National—Rodney) 
: 
 It is a great pleasure that I get to rise and speak in support of the Juries (Jury Service and Protection of Particulars of Jury List Information) Amendment Bill and in particular Part 1. 
Hon Lianne Dalziel 
: Part 2. 
MARK MITCHELL 
: Sorry Part 2—thank you. As a new member of Parliament I feel strongly that when we have the opportunity to be able to give New Zealanders more choice and to make legislation that is going to offer more protections to them then we should take those opportunities. I have listened very closely to the debate tonight and I have to say that—and I will be getting to Part 2; this is leading to Part 2—when a New Zealander does reach the age of 65 they probably have made in that time a major contribution to the country. They have made a major contribution to the country and they probably have given a lot of community service. When they get to the age of 65 and they are presented with an option in terms of whether or not they will be a juror I have to say that jury service can be very daunting to some people—for the people in this House perhaps not so much but for someone to actually go in and have to sit in a court and confront a defendant in a murder trial or a rape trial— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: Can I assist the member? We are on Part 2. I think what the member is referring to is actually in Part 1. I ask the member to come to Part 2. 
MARK MITCHELL 
: I am coming to it. I have actually moved into Part 2 and that is that when someone does come—and this particularly does relate to someone who is probably over 65—and it becomes a bit more daunting for them it is nice for them to have a choice. When they do come to court I am sure that if they were asked before becoming a juror whether their decision would be influenced based around whether their details were going to be provided to and available to the defendant that would have a profound effect on their decision. That is why in actual fact this piece of legislation is not only very good in relation to providing those protections for them and actually encouraging them and providing them with more incentive to want to come along and be a good juror but also very good in providing more incentive for those people over 65 because it does provide more protection to those older people. 
I have an electorate myself with a lot of retired people in it and older people and a lot of them are going to want to become jurors. A lot of them are going to want to continue to provide a service to their community. But what is going to make them a lot more motivated to do that is knowing that they have some strong protection wrapped around them in terms of knowing that a defendant will not have their details. That is what this legislation is providing. I am very happy to stand in support of this legislation. Thank you.