Dean Jacqui: Public Safety (Public Protection Orders) Bill Parole (Extended Supervision Orders) Amendment Bill — Third ReadingsText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDean Jacqui: Public Safety (Public Protection Orders) Bill Parole (Extended Supervision Orders) Amendment Bill — Third Readings[Sitting date: 04 December 2014. Volume:702;Page:1167. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JACQUI DEAN (National—Waitaki):It is regrettable that we do have to protect the most vulnerable members of our community from some people. It is regrettable but it is also very necessary that we do that. It is not good enough at the end of a period of supervision or a finite sentence to simply allow some offenders in New Zealand whom we know are at imminent risk of serious sexual offending against particularly young children to go out in society so I support the Public Safety (Public Protection Orders) Bill and the Parole (Extended Orders Supervision) Amendment Bill which we are dealing with here and it is logical to deal with them as cognate bills.As these bills both deal with managing offenders on their release from prison it does make sense to deal with them together although one of them is a civil order and the other is not. One bill manages orders for community supervision that are already in place but that will begin expiring next year so clearly in order to protect children in particular these will need to be extended. The other bill introduces new orders that will keep offenders who pose a very high risk—and throughout the Committee stage and in other speeches in this House we have examined what “very high risk” means. It means of very high risk of imminent serious sexual assault or violent offending. We wish to have those people detained at the end of their sentence. So the extended supervision orders are currently used to manage a very small number of child sex offenders who pose a very high risk of serious harm to particularly young people after being released from prison. The public protection orders bill will empower the High Court to issue a public protection order that will allow for the detention of a subject and that detention will be in a secure facility.These orders are aimed at people who reach the end of a finite prison sentence and as I said in my opening remarks we simply cannot accept the idea that these people at the end of their finite sentence or at the end of their supervision orders can then go out into society when we know that there is a very high chance of their imminent reoffending. Less restrictive forms of supervision would almost certainly not prevent their reoffending and therein is the nub of this argument.These bills work as a package and need to be passed by this House—and I am pleased to be speaking in their third readings—to ensure there is a maximum management option and that is the residential option available for very high-risk offenders who reach the end of their finite 1 year of intensive monitoring under an extended supervision order. But also and in the context of some other bills and other matters that the Law and Order Committee has considered they require the same judge to consider applications for public protection orders and extended supervision orders made for the same offenders so that there is consistency of decision making.I am pleased that the House is supporting this legislation so strongly. I think there is a very good understanding of the need for these bills and I commend these bills to the House.