Yates Dianne: Armed Forces Law Reform Bill — First Reading 
Yates Dianne: Armed Forces Law Reform Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:637;Page:8066] 
DIANNE YATES (Labour) 
: 
 I welcome the introduction of the Armed Forces Law Reform Bill. As the previous speaker said we look forward to its coming to the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee. It is a bill about the modernisation of the law of the armed forces. I must say that a good deal of preparation has gone into this bill. It is one of the best pieces of legislation I have seen. The explanatory note is extremely good. Not only does it talk about the policy statement but also it outlines the public policy objectives discusses the analysis of the clauses and outlines the consultation processes. As I have said this bill is one of the best pieces of legislation I have seen come before this House. It is a doorstopper. It is a really thick bill and it will take the select committee a good time to work through it. But the bill is excellent. 
I refer members to the explanatory note. The general policy statement states: “An effective and fair military justice system is essential to the maintenance of discipline in the Armed Forces in peace and war whether in New Zealand or overseas.” It does state that there has been no substantial reform of the military justice system since 1983—as both the Minister of Defence and the member opposite have said and the National Party has agreed. This reform comes about through domestic and international developments in human rights—and the Minister has mentioned those in Australia and Canada—and it comes from a review conducted by the New Zealand Defence Force which recommended a large number of reforms. Those reforms are reflected in the bill which will amend—as has been said—the Armed Forces Discipline Act 1971 the Courts Martial Appeals Act 1953 and the Defence Act 1990. 
The general policy statement then talks about the amendments that the bill makes. It states: “the Bill will make a number of miscellaneous reforms to military law that will—improve the compliance with commonly understood principles of justice … close gaps in the application of military law …”—and Dr Mapp has just outlined some of those—“… and produce a modern military justice system”. 
I also refer to the part of the explanatory note that talks about the public policy objectives: “The objectives of this proposal are to reform New Zealand’s military justice system to—improve its consistency with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990; and maintain or improve its delivery of the following vital elements:”— 
John Hayes 
: We can read. 
DIANNE YATES 
: I remind Mr Hayes that he has an opportunity for a 10-minute speech when I finish—“focus on the maintenance of discipline: consistency in all strategic environments:”. 
The explanatory note then goes on to say something that I think is really interesting and that has not been mentioned which is that there will be a small increase in legal aid costs associated with the granting of legal aid to suspects and that that will be met from within existing baselines. With regard to most bills that come before a select committee we ask how much the provisions of the legislation will cost—what the extra expense is. In the extensive amount of planning that has gone into this bill I think a lot of the questions that a select committee might ask have already been answered. 
There has been consultation with the Chief Justice the President of the Court of Appeal the Judge Advocate General members of the panel of Judge Advocates members of the panel of courts martial counsel the New Zealand Law Society and—I am sure Dr Worth will be interested in this—the Armed Forces Law Association of New Zealand. The New Zealand Defence Force intranet site has provided all members of the New Zealand Defence Force with information about the review of the military justice system and the opportunity to comment. We have a list in the explanatory note of the stakeholders and the consultation process that has been gone into. Finally it talks about the Government departments and agencies that have been consulted: Treasury the Ministry of Defence the Ministry of Justice the Crown Law Office and the Parliamentary Counsel Office. There have been a number of meetings between the New Zealand Defence Force and both the Ministry of Justice and the Crown Law Office. 
As one of my colleagues has said many of us have been impressed with the process that has been gone through. I recommend that those who are interested in legislation—and those who are drafting future legislation—take a good look at the explanatory note of this bill and at the actual structure of the bill itself. I am sure the select committee is looking forward to undertaking a closer examination of its content.