Martin TraceyMARRIAGE (COURT CONSENT TO MARRIAGE OF MINORS) AMENDMENT BILLSecond ReadingDebate resumed from 13 June.Hon TRACEY MARTIN (NZ First): Kia ora Madam Assistant Speaker. Thank you very much. I rise on behalf of New Zealand First to support the Marriage (Court Consent to Marriage of Minors) Amendment Bill which will undergo a title change I believe at the committee stage.I'd like to congratulate the women of the Commonwealth Women Parliamentarians because that is one of the places—this bill started originally with other women and one of those women was Jackie Blue so let's make sure that we keep the name of Jackie Blue on the records. Then it sort of morphed into a cross-party women's conversation at the Commonwealth Women Parliamentarians. That is an organisation that many people—many people don't think that consensus decision or collective collegial decision-making goes on in this House and it does. It does and through the Commonwealth Women Parliamentarians is one of those organisations where it happens.I remember that it was actually that particular group of women cross-party—there were only two parties not represented there and that was because they didn't have any women so they couldn't. But what we did as a group of women was we actually asked the Speaker at that time—this was in the last Parliament—Can we please put this bill forward with the name of every woman from each party inside this Parliament?" and unfortunately there is no capacity for that to be done.Louisa Wall: No there is.Hon TRACEY MARTIN: Uh oh! There is apparently so I'll allow—I was giving the benefit of the doubt to the Speaker of the day so let's just leave it there.But if it is true—Louisa Wall tells me that it is possible to be done; I will leave that for her. She's probably technically more correct on many levels than I am. But if it's not true then that's a failing because there are issues like this where a member from every political party could place their name on a bill because there is no contention here it's something we all agree that we need to do as a Parliament and we should have the capacity to do it.But because we couldn't do it Jo Hayes who was the co-chair at the time of the Commonwealth Women Parliamentarians and at that time a member of the Government took up the cudgels of this particular bill and we thank Jo Hayes for doing that. She needed the permission of her caucus to do so and she gained it so you have to give credit to the caucus that she was sitting in because they allowed her to place this particular piece of legislation into the members' ballot and as fate would have it it was drawn.Can I also acknowledge the author of the bill and the select committee that worked upon it the Justice Committee for the inclusion of de facto relationships inside this bill. In the passage of this bill up till select committee it had never been raised. It hadn't been raised in any of the conversations that I had had as a collective so that was smart—really really smart. So to whoever anywhere brought that piece of knowledge to the table thank you very much.Let's get real about what this bill does. This bill recognises a problem. In numerical terms it might be a small problem. If we think about the number of young people—in one of my first reading speeches or my second reading speech; I can't remember—back in 1933 I think there were 247 young women who were married at the age of 12 in this country because that was what the legal age was to be married. But of course time moves on and society moves on and we all learn new ways of doing things and we all think about things differently. I think on the foreword of this bill it talks about the fact that there's probably only 30 young people a year who with parental consent currently get married at 16 and 17 years old.For many of those young people that's probably not a problem because they're in love they care about each other and they have the emotional maturity and the intellectual maturity to make that decision. But even if it's only one or two of those young people who aren't there of their free will even if it's only one or two—and ultimately if I look at the numbers what it tells us is most of the young people the 16- and 17-year-olds who are currently getting married with parental permission are young women. So even if it's only or two of those young women who are not there of their free will that is enough for this Parliament to say "Let's put in another step."—let's put in another step.I also want to acknowledge the member of the National Party Parmjeet Parmar. I want to acknowledge her contribution to this conversation because she quite clearly articulated the difference between "arranged" and "forced" and I think that's really important because this is not a judgment on cultures. This is not trying to judge individual families. This is trying to accept that in a few cases we have people being—whether because of a cultural pressure in a small instance or whether it be for some other reason—forced into a relationship. I remember the conversation—the articulation between myself and Chris Bishop where he said you can't prove that it's a sexual issue inside this relationship. But the reality of most marriages is there's a consummation that takes place and if we're saying that even one or two of the young people that are being forced to marry somebody that they do not willingly of their free will choose then in those few cases that is State-sanctioned rape.That's not what many of us want to articulate about our nation so this small measure—which is that a 16- and 17-year-old who wishes to marry or wishes to enter a de facto relationship will have to go and talk to a Family Court judge on their own away from all other influences so the Family Court judge can make a decision about their emotional capacity their mental capacity their ability to understand what they are entering into their ability to be making this decision of their free will—is a small price to pay to make sure that even if it's only small in numbers we are ensuring that when people enter into the institution of marriage when they enter into a civil union or a de facto relationship they are doing so of their free will.Every single one of us could reach out not too far from us today and find a story where there has been a young woman—more often than not a young woman—who has found themselves under a pressure to do this against their will. In my situation I know two young women. So I applaud all the members across this House because this was a collective effort. I want to acknowledge the Assistant Speaker in the Chair who also has placed her weight as an MP in a previous Parliament and in her time as a huge advocate for women across this Parliament and also pushed her weight behind this bill. So I want to acknowledge all the women but I want to acknowledge all the members of Parliament because there has been no man who has opposed this. We have been supported by the men of our parties. There's never been a question of anything—this is fully supported by our Parliament. It's a small step that will make a huge difference to a few people but the difference it will make is enormous. Thank you very much Madam Assistant Speaker."