This page features computer generated text of the source audio. It may contain errors or omissions, so always listen back to the original media to confirm content. You can search the text using Ctrl-F, and you can also play the audio by clicking on a desired timestamp.
I call on Government Order of the day Number two criminal records Expungement of convictions for historical homosexual offences Bill Second reading. Mr Speaker The Honourable Andrew Little I move that the criminal records expungement of convictions for historical homosexual offences Bill be now read a second time, Mr Speaker on the This bill demonstrates the government's ongoing commitment to right the wrongs of the past For those who were convicted of [00:00:30] historical homosexual offences prior to the Homosexual Law Reform Act of 1986 I'd like to particularly acknowledge the work of my predecessor as Minister of Justice, the honourable Amy Adams, who introduced this bill originally to parliament Uh and, uh, initially shepherded it, uh, through the house. I want to also thank members of the Justice Committee for their consideration of the bill. The committee received 37 submissions and has recommended that the bill proceed with some [00:01:00] amendments. Almost every submission expressed clear support for the intent of the bill. The committee heard 10 oral submissions and I'd like to thank those submitters for sharing their stories. Many submitters commended the bill for introducing a novel scheme and were positive about the change that this bill would bring. The committee has recommended a small number of changes which will ensure that the bill achieves its intended purpose. [00:01:30] The Homosexual Law Reform Act of 1986 decriminalised sexual conduct between consenting males aged 16 years and over the rights to be free from discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation was later recognised in the Human Rights Act of 1993. Allowing historical convictions for homosexual offences to remain on a person's criminal history perpetuates the stigma that those convictions carry. And it should never [00:02:00] be beyond this house to recognise that laws passed in earlier generations when different values and more applied, uh, can have consequences which it is in the power of this house to provide redress for the purpose of this bill is to address the ongoing stigma, prejudice and other negative effects arising from a conviction for a historical homosexual offence by creating a statutory scheme for [00:02:30] a convicted person or a representative on their behalf. If that person is deceased to apply for the conviction to be expunged, if the application is successful, the conviction will not appear on a criminal history check and the person will not be required to disclose information about the expunged conviction for any purpose and indeed, anybody who then discloses that conviction, uh, we not authorised to do so commits an offence under the act. The scheme applies [00:03:00] to Crimes Act 1961 offences that were repealed by the Homosexual Law Reform Act in 1986 and their predecessor offences under the Crimes Act 19 08. The bill provides for the Secretary of Justice to consider whether their applications for expungement meet the statutory test. The test is that the behaviour would no longer constitute an offence under today's law. That takes account of the possibility that some of those convictions, uh related to, [00:03:30] uh, genuinely criminal conduct and the nature of predatory offences or assaults that went beyond, uh, merely consensual conduct between, uh between men. The committee recommended changes to improve offence provisions to better align with other legislation and to ensure that people are not put under pressure to disclose their expunged convictions. A further change is the inclusion of a provision which makes [00:04:00] it explicit that expungement of a conviction does not authorise or require the destruction of criminal records of expunged convictions. Other changes are relatively minor and technical. Some small amendments to wording have been recommended to align the bill with the language used in the Public Records Act 2005. This bill's purpose is to provide for an expungement scheme to reduce prejudice, stigma and other negative effects arising from [00:04:30] a conviction for a historical homosexual offence. The bill empowers those convicted and their representatives by providing a simple, low cost and effective way to right the wrongs of the past. With the committee's recommended changes, I'm confident that the bill will more effectively achieve these objectives and I conclude by addressing one other point that was commonly raised in the submissions and that is the issue of compensation. The committee necessarily considered that issue [00:05:00] of compensation and in the end concluded that it was not possible to consider or to recommend a scheme that would provide a compensation. Uh, that would be easy to apply or streamline and take account of the variety of different circumstances in which the original offences were committed and that would now be expunged. Uh, and so the government, at least, um, will not be providing or will not be entertaining a compensation regime. [00:05:30] Uh, as a consequence of this bill, Uh, Mr Speaker, on that basis and with those comments, I commend this bill to the house. The question is that the motion be agreed to Mr Speaker, the honourable Amy Adams. Mr. Speaker, I'm very proud to take a call in the second reading on the criminal records Expungement of convictions for historical homosexual offences. Bill, Uh, and I say I'm very proud because I do take, uh, an enormous sense of pride. Uh, in that this piece of work came about, [00:06:00] uh, under my tenure as minister of Justice and under, uh, the National Party's period of government. Uh, and I want to acknowledge the the current minister, Andrew Little, obviously, for continuing the work with the same degree of commitment, uh, and urgency, actually, to get it in place that we certainly had on this side of the house. There aren't that many opportunities in this house where you get the chance to do something. Uh, that just simply feels at a very innate level, right? Uh, and this bill feels like that to me. It's always [00:06:30] felt, uh, like that to me. And I also want to put on record that It's one of those equally rare chances in this house to do something I hope continue to be. Collectively, I certainly that has been the experience to date, but that is absolutely above party politics. Uh, now, those of us who have been members of this house for some time know that there are more occasions than the public. Probably see where we do work, actually, for what is simply the right thing to do and in the best interests of this country, irrespective of party loans. Uh, and [00:07:00] this piece of legislation has certainly been one of those and will certainly stand out, uh, in my memory. For that reason, uh, I want to acknowledge the work of the select committee, as the Minister has done. I had the privilege of sitting on that select committee while it was considering, uh, this bill and in, uh, in in most of its consideration, uh, and again on that committee. And I acknowledge the chair, um, Mr Ray Hall, who who chaired the committee through that process again, sir, it was incredibly heartening to see, uh, a group of committee [00:07:30] members who actually hunted in a bit of a pack uh, vis a vis officials. Really? There was the committee members that are on one side all lining up with a very similar view of what we wanted to see happen, Uh, and and on occasion, running up against, uh perhaps, um, some drafters and some officials who hadn't quite understood exactly how we wanted it to work. And I want to just record in this contribution that, actually, the members of the committee representing members across the house were really clear. When this bill talked about being an expungement scheme. We wanted [00:08:00] it to be an expungement scheme IE that the conviction was as if it had never happened, not a scheme whereby the convictions still remained on record, But everyone was just directed to disregard it. Uh, and to us on the committee, that was a really important distinction. And we believed, uh, to the submitters and those of those affected by this legislation. An incredibly important distinction to make. This was always to be more than simply, uh, the clean slate Act two point. Oh, this is the first [00:08:30] time this parliament will have ever created an expungement scheme like this. Now, in one sense, it didn't help us because there was a lack of simple precedent. But actually, it reflected the the seriousness with which we took this issue and the depth of feeling about the fact that this these laws, the laws that these men were convicted under are now seen as absolutely wrong, fundamentally wrong, and that those men should not have born the scar of that criminal conviction. Now, for this parliament [00:09:00] to do what it can do to redress that it is important that the expungement goes far beyond simply a You are not allowed to discriminate on the basis of this conviction. Sorry, Mr Speaker. Certainly not you. The society is not allowed to discriminate on the basis of these convictions and becomes as close as we could, uh, physically and practically get it to a situation where these convictions and as if it as if as if they never existed, uh, for the purposes of New Zealand law. Uh, Mr Speaker, in the first reading, [00:09:30] uh, of this bill, we didn't just move the first reading of the bill and send it off to select committee in the way in which we normally did. This house also passed a motion that I moved that this parliament apologised to those homosexual New Zealanders who are convicted for consensual adult activity and recognise the tremendous hurt and suffering those men and their families have gone through and the continued effects that those convictions have had on them. We put on the record that this house deeply regretted the hurt and stigma [00:10:00] suffered by the many hundreds of New Zealand men who were turned into criminals by a law that was profoundly wrong. And for that, this house, this Parliament, put on record that it was sorry. We acknowledged that those men should never have been burdened with conviction. And we wanted to recognise the continued effects that the convictions had had on their lives and the lives of their family. Now, Mr Speaker, when we as the government at that time decided to move that motion and with the support of other parties in the house, passed [00:10:30] that motion, it was a very deliberate decision that it was this parliament as an institution that would apologise and express in its most sincere form the sense of regret, the understanding of the hurt and the desire to put it right again. Mr. Speaker that is, in my experience and my understanding quite unique. And I do hope that this bill that that apology and that the action of this house to move with some pace actually, [00:11:00] I might not always seem like it from the outside looking in, but with some pace given all of the other work that's going on to put this bill into law does reflect our real desire to bring this awful period of our history, uh, to a close, as far as we can ever rewrite history. And that was certainly a theme in the select committee. We can't change history and actually, nor should we want to, because sometimes remembering the wrongs of the past is incredibly important. So we weren't trying to rewrite history and blanket from history, [00:11:30] but we were absolutely setting out to ensure that the impact of these criminal convictions, the tag of criminality, uh, the stigma that settled on these men and their families should be removed. As far as this house could, uh, could, uh, physically make that possible, Mr. Speaker, I think the bill now is in a better state than when I introduced it to the house. So I'm certainly happy to acknowledge that, uh, I think we have got it far more to the place, uh, that we had we as a government [00:12:00] introducing it, and this house had wanted it to be at first reading. I think it does go as far as we practically can to make those Acknowledgments and to right those wrongs. Mr. Speaker, it is a bill that I'm incredibly proud of. It is a bill that I do hope and believe will help to heal those wounds. Uh, and it is a bill that I'm very pleased to support. Speaker, Um, I called Derek Wall. [00:12:30] Uh, thank you, Mr Speaker. It's a, um, a pleasure to rise on path of New Zealand first, um, in support of the criminal records expungement of convictions for historical homosexual offences. Bill, um, as we've heard from the Minister and other, um, contributions so far, this bill seeks to reduce the prejudice, stigma and all other negative effects arising from a conviction, uh, for historical homosexual offences. It also entitles the convicted person to declare that they have no [00:13:00] such conviction under New Zealand law and that the conviction would no longer appear on a criminal history. Risk? Uh, check. Um, so it's actually not that often that, um you get to stand up in the house and speak on a bill that has 100% full support from every member of this house. Um, but I think also, um, the most important part is, um, I feel from my perspective, there's no politics involved with [00:13:30] this. I think that, um we have all recognised as a country, Um, and the representatives here of that country that, um, there are There were some terrible wrongs that occurred. And we had the responsibility in this house to not only recognise those wrongs but also apologise for, um, our role as a government and the leaders of that country. Um, and though that hurt and unnecessary hurt on those individuals, [00:14:00] um, New Zealand first obviously fully supports this, uh, piece of legislation, sir, and backs the apology and this movement through the house of this legislation. It it also supports the, uh, the recommendations for the changes. The slight changes, uh, in the select committee and the amendments, uh, from the select committee. Um, this bill actually does highlight sort of double edged sword. Um, it's, uh, it highlights, [00:14:30] um, somewhat of a stain on on our country's history. Um, and the effect that we have we had on some individuals because of their personal orientation. But also, it shows, I think, um, the other side of the coin where it shows how far we've actually come. Um, since, uh, that not not so long ago. And, um, O'Rourke took the first call and was involved with the, um, with the select committee process of this bill. And I only took over this obviously this year, but, um, [00:15:00] one of the things that I know I know that I think everybody out there in the in the general public understands that it wasn't that long ago that we had a law against homosexual orientation. Uh, and you know what? What? What this bill actually highlights to me was, in fact, it wasn't. It was such a short period ago in 1986 which was in my life time. And I find that it's, um, unimaginable, uh, for anybody of the new generation that was born post that time to actually comprehend and to understand. [00:15:30] Um, of course, it's, uh It's never too late to apologise, sir. Um and it's never too late to admit to wrongdoings, and that's what this legislation allows. Uh, unfortunately, it is too late in some circumstances to avoid the massive damage that was caused to some of those individuals to innocent people. And, uh, we need to acknowledge that there's three main issues that this [00:16:00] bill seeks to accomplish, And it does. I believe so. The first is that it reconfirms the freedom of people to lawfully express their sexuality and be free from prejudice or any prejudice. In doing so, The second it avoids huge disadvantage, uh, suffering such a conviction, uh, in in, uh, in regards to having to disclose the conviction in terms of employment and so on. But most importantly, the third [00:16:30] one, sir, is that it goes some way hopefully, to restore some sort of self esteem to those individuals helps them enhance their mental well being and self-worth, uh, for all of those who suffered convictions. One of the most important aspects of this piece of legislation going through is that, um it's not just a piece of paper that they were and are real life stories and individuals that were affected by this [00:17:00] and I think that it's important to not just speak about the what's written in the legislation, the bill that's going through this house but how it has or how the previous law affected specific individuals and their stories. And I'd just like to take the next couple of minutes and, uh, 32 or three of the, um, submissions that I have, um, gone through and really stand out for me. So, um, one states that these [00:17:30] convictions destroyed careers, including, in the case of our friend, a top honours graduate of Port Sea officer cadet school, forcing his resignation from his post as a younger youngest ever captain to hold a commission in the New Zealand Army. More significantly, they cause substantial trauma and loss of dignity to those affected and the quotes from that individual. This conviction still leads up to 53 years to self hatred, worthlessness, unjustified [00:18:00] guilt and shame to relive the anguish and pain. Chronic drinking and self-destruction took control over the next 10 to 15 years until the realisation that I wasn't a two headed monster and there were many others like me throughout the world. I love my country but live in fear of being found out of further humiliate humiliation, panic attacks. When I see a an un, a uniformed police officer and a general feeling of being unworthy to myself, [00:18:30] something few others would understand Another one, sir, I had never been arrested before or been in trouble with the police. I was charged with keeping a place of resort for indecent act between males. There was the abuse, bashings and terror that followed from anti gay bigots. This conviction has affected me personally and financially ever since, hindering my employment prospects and overseas travel. I've been active doing voluntary work, [00:19:00] but I have been disadvantaged when background checks have been required for some organisations. Uh, and this one actually from a different perspective, sir, It was from a young New Zealander who didn't live in those times. They say I'm a criminal in 76 countries and I am so thankful that I'm not seen as a criminal in my home country. I am the hateful words spoken by the mouths of many, whether it is in high school [00:19:30] halls or behind some walls. Hate speech is still prevalent in our society. I am dead. The death sentence in five countries. I'm the noose tightening around their neck or the shot from the electric chair because they couldn't. They could have been me if I was born in a different place. And if I had spoken up, then some people cannot be a voice. 31 years ago, I could have been behind bars for just being who I am. And lastly, sir, I think everyone has heard [00:20:00] of, um well, one of the most notable examples of being convicted for their sexual orientation. Uh, and that individual was, um, Alan Turing, not a New Zealander, but, um, he was obviously British, but this suffered under the same legislation that occurred back then. Uh, he was a highly influential in the development of the theoretical computer science. Turing is widely considered to be the father of theoretical computer science and artificial [00:20:30] intelligence. He was responsible for breaking the Nazi Enigma code during World War Two. His work gave the Allies the edge they needed to win the war in Europe and led to the creation of the computer. Uh, defiant. Sorry. In 1952 he was arrested and charged with indecency after a brief relationship with another man Hamas was still a crime in Great Britain at that time. Defiant, he did not deny the charges. When he was arrested, the first [00:21:00] thing he said was he thought that this should not be against the law. He gave a statement that was unapologetic. That detailed what had happened took his own life. In 1954 2 years of being outed as gay. He died from eating an apple laced with cyanide, and he was only 41 years old. So I think that, um, those individual cases that we heard from the submitters and just a few of them and, um, [00:21:30] that one of the most famous examples of the hugely negative effects, um, that a piece of horrid legislation that that previously existed prior to 1986 does on individuals. I'm very proud of this house moving forward as one and reaching to New Zealand first is part of that and passing this legislation. Thank you, sir. I call the Honourable Maggie Barry. Thank you, Mr Speaker. It is with great pride. I rise to speak at the second reading of the criminal records Expungement [00:22:00] of convictions for historical homosexual offences. Uh, national, Of course, supports this bill? Uh, because it builds on the work of the former minister of Justice Amy Adams, who's took an earlier call in this house in July last year when the first reading came through and the apology, uh, was given. I feel it was an extremely significant milestone, Uh, really a place of watershed time in this house. Actually, I'm searching for the right words because this is a house that has lagged behind where it ought to have been [00:22:30] on this particular issue. This is a scheme that is long overdue. It is a step towards addressing the stigma, the prejudice and the pain that many New Zealanders had to live with unfairly. And it has helped to put right or wrong that has stood for too many years 32 years ago in this place the Homosexual Law Reform Act, decriminalised homosexual conduct between consenting males, 16 years of age and older. It then took Parliament [00:23:00] a further seven years, uh, to amend the law to allow the right to be free from discrimination on the grounds of homosexual orientation, which was recognised in the Human Rights Act of 1993. It then took another 25 years to pass the marriage definition of Marriage Amendment Act. In 2013, I was a member of Parliament in this house, and I'm proud to say, uh, I voted on all three readings in favour of that piece of legislation allowing same sex couples to legally marry. [00:23:30] Uh, this parliament has taken its time to address the rights of the past, but we are doing it again today with the second reading at the first reading, Uh, the then Minister Amy Adams, who referred to it again in her earlier call, made an apology on behalf of all of Parliament about the hurt and the stigma suffered by men who were made into criminals. Uh, when the provisions of this act come in and I think it will, uh, quite swiftly because it is supported across the house, as others have said, that is a rarity. [00:24:00] Uh, but the main provisions will be that people will be able to and eligible to apply if they were convicted of specific offences under the Crimes Act relating to sexual activity between males. 16 years of over those were the acts of course that were decriminalised under the homosexual law Reform Act of 1986. So there are five main offences. I won't go through them. Uh, the the presiding minister did that a few moments ago, but I think it it is very important to recognise, [00:24:30] uh, that the sexual activity, uh, must have been consensual and that both parties were over 16 years of age. I know that there were people who made admissions who felt that, uh, that the age should not be relevant. But, uh, the criminal act factor still applies of over the age of 16 now, So I know that the select committee at the time the Justice Select Committee, of which I am a member, currently uh, really debated that extensively. But I think it is important to acknowledge that the process as well is [00:25:00] one that is is a different one for this parliament. Um, there are many differences about this piece of legislation. I'll highlight a couple of them. The secretary for justice will be the individual responsible for determining determining applications on a case by case basis. But this will not mean that uh, men will be expected to come forth and give evidence here in person even, uh the secretary will be able to require applicants to provide relevant information on request if necessary [00:25:30] to make the decision. But the process should be as easy as possible, and I think that that is important. These men have suffered enough and for long enough, so if an application is approved, their conviction would be expunged and that expungement is noted in official records. But what does that mean? In practise? It means that the person, formally with a criminal record, would be entitled to declare that they have no conviction and that their conviction would not appear on any official criminal record. Uh, for those [00:26:00] of us who are laypeople and don't understand the the minutia of the law sometimes, uh, in this case, uh, it is important, I think, to note that the Justice Select Committee took a lot of time, uh, to talk about expungement, which is, as others have mentioned, very rare, uh, in New Zealand law. The significance of it is that if it went to a concealed conviction, which was, I think what was initially proposed, then that conviction may still be disclosed in certain situations, and a person must be conviction free for seven [00:26:30] years and have never been imprisoned to be eligible under the act. And expungement, though, will be available regardless of any subsequent offending and the sentence imposed. I think that is extremely important, and expungement it is if it never existed, and nor should it have. But we are putting that record straight. And that's important because of the psychological impact that this legislation, uh, the former laws really, uh, have had on the victims and the the people who have been supposed to be perpetrators. [00:27:00] And the previous speaker, uh, gave some very moving examples of, uh of people whose lives have been blighted, overshadowed and shortened, sometimes at their own hand. By that sense of shame, it is not to be taken lightly. Experiencing discrimination on the basis of sexuality is not something that happens in New Zealand anymore, and nor should it, uh, it can have an impact on an individual's opportunities. Uh, not only in their employment, I mean, for example, uh, they wouldn't be able to take on governance roles on [00:27:30] committees and so forth, uh, because a criminal conviction would not allow them to do that. But they wouldn't even necessarily be able to travel to places. Uh, and these are the sort of, uh, ongoing issues with people with criminal convictions, uh, that are really important to note, because it really does contain people's lives and restrain people's lives in a way that is manifestly unfair. It seems to me that this is a piece of legislation that, uh, really is tidying up some of the bad practises of the past. [00:28:00] And I think that the 10 submissions I think it was that the justice Committee heard outlined the the reasons why it was so important, uh, to to men who are alive, but also those who have passed away. And this bill allows people to be able to put their, uh, their relative or their their friends' case forward, uh, and to ask for that expungement. And I think that when you're putting right historical wrongs, it's very important to understand that, uh, for those who have passed that it is still important as it is in war records. [00:28:30] Actually, uh, when people have been, uh, um, unlawfully or inappropriately found guilty, uh, in a wartime situation, uh, their families spend sometimes generations, uh, trying to put their military record right and to put their side of the story. I think it is a very important element of this legislation that does allow, uh, that posthumous recognition, uh, of innocence and expungement, I think is the key note here. So, uh, I think that this bill will proceed [00:29:00] This this will go through the house, Uh, smoothly. I hope it does. Uh, it can't come soon enough. And I would urge all members of this house to continue to make their points, but also to move this piece of legislation through as quickly as possible. Uh, because it is a wrong that needs to be put right as soon as possible. Thank you, Mr Speaker. I call the Honourable Grant Robertson. Thank you very much. Mr Speaker. Thank you for the opportunity to contribute to the second reading of this bill. Uh, in the first reading, uh, of this [00:29:30] bill, I made, uh, a speech that really II, I hope, uh, set up for for myself and for others. The premise behind why we need this legislation. Uh, and it's been mentioned by a number of other colleagues, and and I think it's important that we don't lose sight of what now will become a slightly technical debate about elements of the bill. What we're trying to achieve here and what we are doing, as other speakers have said, is trying [00:30:00] to write AAA vastly unjust, wrong, uh, that existed in our society for so long. It was interesting to me, Mr Speaker, when reading the submissions that came in on this legislation to the select committee just how many of them came from young people from people whose life and existence is far removed from that of the men who were convicted, uh, under this unjust law And I [00:30:30] was struck particularly, and my colleague Derek Ball has already quoted from this person's submission. But from the teenager who submitted to the committee and used this phrase, which I think is an extraordinary one. Love used to carry a prison sentence in this very country until 1986. For a teenager to say that so clearly and starkly to this house is to me, uh, a validation of a number of things, including our select committee process, actually, [00:31:00] but also of the fact that we have a new generation of young um LG BT IQ people coming through who have the most extraordinary, uh, vision not only of their own lives but also looking back to the past. And I think we need to acknowledge that that happened in, uh, the select committee process. Mr. Speaker, uh, I want to talk for the most part in the second reading, as I think we're actually meant to do about, uh, the select committee process [00:31:30] and acknowledge the fact that, um, the committee has done some useful things in terms of dealing with the issues that were raised in front of them. And, um, the whole question of what an expunged conviction is, uh, the movement from defining a criminal record. Um, and replacing that with official record, I think is a step forward because I think that acknowledges that a criminal record could be defined as quite a narrow term. Uh, the official record means that we cover, uh, a wider set of public records, [00:32:00] particularly those, um, in line with the Public Records Act. And it also makes it more similar to the clean slate act. I think that will go some way to, uh, uh, meeting the concerns of of MP S. Who, uh, sorry of Of submitters who came to MP S with that. The other matter that I know a number of submitters were concerned about was the question of whether or not the language in the bill was limiting, uh, what we were doing here today to New Zealand and that it would, in fact, uh, not help, [00:32:30] uh, people who were working or travelling overseas and that, um we were, in fact writing the bill in such a way as to as to cause there. And I note that the committee is, uh is looking at clarifying clause nine to remove the word only from the phrase for the purposes only of the laws of New Zealand. Because we do, I believe, as a parliament want this, uh uh, expungement to be recognised in overseas jurisdictions. That is only right. Right. Uh, it is only right that [00:33:00] we as a parliament, take some responsibility for that. I do, of course, note that we can't take full responsibility for the laws of other countries. But what we can do is ensure that our law facilitates and supports people. Um, who have been affected by these unjust convictions, uh, from travelling overseas. Mr. Speaker, The other and, um, more far reaching thing that I think came out from the, uh, select committee submissions is the importance of noting that this, uh, [00:33:30] this piece of legislation matters not only for the people who are still alive today who had convictions not only for the families of people who were convicted, but also for the wider community. Um, in the LGBTI Q community. And I think that was starkly drawn out by the submissions that came from organisations Um that represent, uh uh, uh youth, um, all the way through to the law, society and [00:34:00] others and that we as a parliament as we pass this legislation, not have to realise that not only does the weight of history land on our shoulders, but also the weight of the future and time and time again, what the submissions here, um do is call this parliament to action to continue to make New Zealand a place where people can be who they are, where people are supported to live lives of dignity and hope and free from [00:34:30] discrimination. And those submissions, time and time again raised the issues that still exist in our community. Some of them are legislative particularly for the trans community. Some of them are attitudinal for people, for young people expressing still the discrimination that they feel in their communities. And some of them are about the way in which we continue to support people, be it the Transcom community seeking, uh, gender surgery [00:35:00] or be it, Uh, uh, health services, social services that are provided. And, Mr Speaker, while this particular bill cannot do much about that, I think we owe it to the people who submitted to the committee to acknowledge and to recognise the fact that we are on a journey here. And it's a journey that this bill takes an important step in. But it is not the end of that journey. And there were several submissions, Mr Speaker, that went [00:35:30] down this path. And I do want to make a special reference to someone who is known to me. I should say, Uh uh, Greens West, who in his, uh, submission, I think very eloquently talked about the issues that are in front of us. Um, today and I just want to quote briefly from the end of his submission. Everything that I do in my life is to ensure that those LGBT kids coming through the system today do not have to experience the same struggles that I did [00:36:00] growing up in New Zealand. These are exactly the same goals of those brave men who fought for decriminalisation in the nineties, in the eighties and of those who suffered in silence for decades. We have a long journey before us in order to treat achieve true equity and equality for LGBT New Zealanders. And Ted is writing to the committee here. I invite each and every member of the select committee to join me and the hundreds of other G BT New Zealanders in that journey. We need you. [00:36:30] Parliament needs to hear the call of those in our community who are saying they still need us. This is an important step. This is a useful and important piece of legislation that will mean an enormous amount to the people who carry the shame and the stigma. Still, today of the convictions that they got, we must make sure, as we move through the remaining stages of the bill, that we make the bill as clear as possible. And I believe the Select [00:37:00] Committee changes do that, that that is what we will be doing today for them and for their families. And then we must redouble our efforts to make sure that as a parliament we do everything we can to support the young people. Not only those who submitted, but those who are still, uh, working their way, uh, through, uh, their own journey, Mr Speaker I. I won't delay the house much longer on this matter. Other than to say I'm very pleased that the legislation has found its way to this stage. There is an important [00:37:30] issue that needs to be acknowledged in my final period, and that is the call for compensation. We need to acknowledge that members of our community have come to the select committee and asked for this. We also need to acknowledge that this is an issue where there are divided opinions about compensation. I hope as we move through the committee of the whole house, stage members of the committee will talk through the way they came to their decision about this. It is not an easy topic, but it is [00:38:00] important that we give honour to those who submitted, uh on this matter and the people that they represent. I continue to believe there are a number of ways available to the government and to this parliament to think about how we honour the men who were so unjustly convicted the men whose lives were ruined and the men whose lives were ended by this. There are a number of ways forward for this parliament in this country. I want that dialogue to continue. And I think it's [00:38:30] very important that, uh, we do that as part of of this bill process. Mr. Speaker, I want to end my contribution by acknowledging every single person who made a submission to the select committee the people that they represent and the committee members themselves. This is our democracy working. Well, it is also a lesson and a story for us to continue to hearing here in the years to come. Mr. Speaker, I call Chris Fisher. Well, thank you very much. Uh, Mr Speaker. And, [00:39:00] uh, I just want to, uh, agree with what Mr Robertson's said in the house so far. Uh, this is a profoundly important, uh, bill, uh, for New Zealand's Parliament and for our democracy. Uh, and it's fantastic that it will, I believe, receive unanimous support in the parliament and 32 years on from homosexual law reform in 1986 and the rancorous, uh, antagonistic, putting it mildly, [00:39:30] uh, debate and the tortured passage of that piece of legislation through the parliament on a personal vote, a conscience issue. Members divided morally and politically. Uh, and, um, engaged, some of whom Some of them engaging in appalling behaviour 32 years on from that, uh, it's just a testament to how far we've come as a country that, uh, we will have a bill before the house [00:40:00] that not only affirms homosexual law reform in 1986 but actually seeks to wipe from the record books, uh, convictions under the law as it existed prior to 1986. And that bill will pass parliament unanimously. Uh, and the apology that Parliament has given at the same time, uh, that the honourable Amy Adams delivered when she was minister of Justice in the last parliament. Uh, because of the bill [00:40:30] passed unanimously, Parliament is every single person to a man and a woman, uh, endorsing, uh, that message of reconciliation and of, um, justice and doing justice to be more precise I do want to echo what Grant Robertson said in his remarks about how we have a long way to go, Uh, in that strive for equality and tolerance in our society and creating a New Zealand where [00:41:00] every young person in particular, uh, no matter their sexuality or their gender, uh, can grow up living in a society where they feel they are valued and they feel that they are they are respected. Uh, and that, uh, they are acknowledged, Uh, and their dignity is upheld. Uh, we have a long way to go. We have come a long way. Uh, but we have a long way to go, and I'm looking forward to being part of that conversation, uh, as [00:41:30] we move forward into the 21st century. It was a privilege to work on this bill, um, in the Justice and Electoral Committee in the last parliament and the renamed Justice Committee, uh, in the new parliament. Uh, it's a shortened committee title, but we seem to have picked up double the work because law and order has been folded into us. Um, and, uh, I see my colleague Raymond Ho, Uh, perhaps a bit because, um It looks like from, uh, the order paper. We're going to get even more work, Uh, over the next few months. But that's OK. We're very hard [00:42:00] working committee. Um, and, uh, I know members from both sides really enjoyed working on this new colleague, Uh, Greg, uh, O'Connor from And, uh, Jenny Anderson from Labour, Uh, and rarin from labour as well. We really enjoyed working on this really important bill. Um, and I think we've made some useful changes, actually, Uh, Madam Speaker, um, we, you know, we interrogated the substance of the bill really closely. We really did, uh, get really down into the weeds of the bill because the operation of the expungement regime is [00:42:30] of vital importance to, you know, the purpose of the bill, Uh, and giving effect to what? What the purpose of it is, which is to wipe from the statute books and wipe from the record books. Uh, the the history of that conviction and the conviction, uh, itself and, um, members previously have gone through some of the, um, quite technical changes we've made around, uh, criminal records. Uh, what official records means, uh, amending the definition of a sponge conviction in [00:43:00] section uh, in in section nine. And clause nine of the bill. Uh, and those are very useful. Uh, changes. Uh, Madam Speaker, um, enough. The only thing left for me to do, uh, madam Chair is to commend the bill to the house. And I'm looking forward to its speedy passage through committee of the whole and also its third reading I call Jan Logan. Thank you, Madam Speaker. Um, it's also with great pleasure that I rise to speak to this the second reading of the criminal records [00:43:30] expungement of convictions for historical homosexual offences bill, um, and want to share the views and the sentiment that's being expressed in the house tonight of the importance of this bill and also, um, acknowledge the origins of this and the fact that I think it's also a victory for the parliamentary process and democracy in itself where we'd had quite [00:44:00] a few years of members of the LGBT Q i community calling for the expungement of homosexual con actions, and that seemed to be falling on un hearing ears. And then, um, a young person put together a petition that and got over 2000 signatures which was presented to parliament asking for an [00:44:30] apology for, um, those who were convicted of homosexual, um, crimes and for this legislation. And through that process, the view of the government changed and to the point that we now have unanimous support in this house for the apology previously and now this legislation to expunge those [00:45:00] convictions. And it is a wonderful thing to see that working effectively. Um, I, too, just want to, um, echoes some of the sentiments that were in the submissions and noting that while the primary purpose of this bill is to seek to reduce prejudice, stigma and all other negative effects arising from a conviction for historical homosexual offence, um [00:45:30] that this legislation which is so significant to those men and their families because lives were ruined and ended early as a result of the prejudice that was created by our laws, the impact has also been wider, and the significance of this legislation is wider. And I would also like to quote from the submission from Ted Green Smith West that Grant Robertson also previously, [00:46:00] um, referenced as well, where he was saying that as a younger, um, queer man that for him The primary purpose of this bill was that this is an opportunity to recognise and address the wrongs of the past, to remember and recognise the sacrifice of these brave gay and bisexual men and to pave the path forwards so that as a society [00:46:30] and as a parliament, we never make the same mistakes again. And for me, that's there's a lot of things in that short statement. It's about recognising the harm and the wrongs and how profound they were, but also recognising that journey of sacrifice for those men, many of them who were got those convictions from being brave [00:47:00] enough to push against that prejudice, to try and still express themselves love in a way that created a crack that opened up to enable the later homosexual law reform that enabled people like me and others to stand in this house, stand in our identity, um, proudly. And that was an extraordinary sacrifice that so many of us have [00:47:30] benefited from. And it also speaks to the point that has previously also been made is that we still have a long way to go to remove prejudice and discrimination and totality from our law books and from our society and that still too many members of the LGBT Q I play a plus community, particularly trans and intersex. People suffer very [00:48:00] severe discrimination, and their lives, too all too often end early because of that discrimination. So this piece of legislation is significant. It places our history in front of us to enable us to make choices about how we move forward. And that is a challenge to us as well as a moment [00:48:30] to celebrate how far we've come. And I also want to pick up on some points made in a submission, um, from the University Students Association Queer Support Group in Dunedin, where they talk about, um that this legislation tells young people that the Ile IEG illegality [00:49:00] of homosexuality was a thing of the past and that some wrongs can be righted, not reversed, but right, it and that diversity is important and needs to be celebrated and not shunned. And I think that calls us to action. Still, they also made a point that I think is worth repeating later on in the submission where they spoke about and, [00:49:30] um, as young people talking to older gay men that had experienced this legislation and living in the environment of this legislation. Where, um, this person had spoken to an older man and he was talking about when he was stopped by police when he used the public toilets, because he was indecently exposing himself to other men in the toilet when he was only using the bathroom. And I think [00:50:00] that story for me speaks to how pervasive the impact of that law was. It was not just the harm that was done to the men who ended up convicted and living lives, stigmatised by that conviction and spending time in prison for being who they were. But it was the environment that was created for [00:50:30] many, if not many men who had to live in a way that was unnatural to them, to be able to try and protect themselves from that prejudiced law. And that that man had spoken as well about how he married a woman at 23 as many of his friends did, because that is what you did. That was what you had to do to hide and protect [00:51:00] yourselves. And obviously that would have had a profound impact on his life as well as the lives of the women that these men married and their families. So there is much for us to fix. And it is great to have this legislation in the House to be able to enable the expungement of those deeply wrong, um, convictions. And I would like [00:51:30] just to touch on two some of the points in the work that was done in the committee to make sure that it better reflected the intent of this house to ensure that it, um, would address the issue for people travelling internationally and not just limit it, um, for providing that expungement and um in New Zealand. And that also, [00:52:00] um, that there was a change to from criminal records to official records so that it's similar to the clean slate bill and affects a wider set of records and thus better protection. And a more complete, uh, implement, I guess, enables a better implementation of the intent of the legislation. And I also too, want to finish on the point about the call for compensation and [00:52:30] hope to see wider discussion of that either in this house, through the debate on this bill or within government, and would again touch on, and I know that there were different views presented in the select committee of some men saying, and people saying that was not the point of this The point was to make it clear that this law was wrong and to expunge those convictions. It wasn't about money. I would, though, point [00:53:00] that in one of the submissions. The example was given of international recent international precedent in Germany, Um, where compensation has been provided and men were expected to receive about 4760 New Zealand dollars in compensation for their convictions, plus 2380 for every year they spent in prison. It's not huge. It's doable. We can do this if I call Matt [00:53:30] King. It's a pleasure to speak on this bill, uh, which we all support. Uh, quite frankly, it's a NO-BRAINER. I'd like to acknowledge the honourable Amy Adams for the large amount of work that she carried out on this important piece of legislation, which was referred to the Justice Select Committee last year. I'd also like to acknowledge the current government for reinstating this important piece of legislation, and I'd like to acknowledge the current Justice Select Committee chair Raymond who? Who does a fantastic job as part of this, uh, current Parliament's [00:54:00] Justice Select Committee. I I've heard some pretty convincing and emotional submissions from people grossly affected by these outdated laws. Quite frankly, this legislation is well overdue. It allows people that have previously been convicted of sexual specific sexual acts that in our modern society are now not considered criminals to stand before us and declare that they are conviction free. This fact is very important for many men we've heard [00:54:30] from. In my view, it's pointless having offences such as these removed from the statute book without having this expungement legislation to accompany it. We have heard some harrowing submissions from members of the public about how this has affected their lives, and I want to recount one particular story which stuck with me. We heard from this poor man who recount who recounted how many years ago, at the age of 19, [00:55:00] he had been caught and convicted of a sexual act with another male, an offence which has now been removed from the statute books but back then was illegal. He had been employed in a chosen profession which I won't disclose for privacy reasons for over 30 years, very successfully, he decided to take some time away from his profession and return to it. A few years later, on returning, he applied for [00:55:30] two different jobs and he would have been successful but for a refusal due to failing to pass the background checks based on his prior conviction. Now this background check by an anomaly included references to sections covering sexual offences which are not relevant today due to the removal of the offence from the statute law. Ultimately, he was devastated by this, and it eventually led to suicide attempts [00:56:00] and a very low point in his life. I felt that there was no one in that select committee room that day that did not feel this man's pain. It's one of the reasons why I became a politician to help right the wrongs. Accordingly, we support this very worthwhile and life changing legislation. We see. I called Ginny Anderson. [00:56:30] This is a split call. You have five minutes. This bill is part of a progressive journey for want of a better word of, uh, change in New Zealand. And I'm proud to see, um, that there is agreement across the house on making positive change that directly affects the lives of many New Zealanders. I vividly remember as about seven or eight years old coming out on the streets of Christchurch after a family meal to [00:57:00] stumble into a protest on the streets, and I'd never seen anything like it before. I'd never seen people so angry people calling out obscenities at one end words that I was never allowed to use at home or even at school and on the other side, people calling out out of the closets and into the street. I didn't know what it meant. I remember asking my parents, What was it about? Why were these guys in the cupboard anyway? And and why couldn't they be out and [00:57:30] learning about the types of discrimination that had happened in New Zealand? So I'm really proud to see this journey come so far that the Homosexual Law Reform Act in 1986 in some ways is being, um, let to take its full course by this piece of legislation that removes the stigma and the discrimination of those that were wrongfully convicted under that previous legislation. So I am I'm proud to be part of that. [00:58:00] I'm also, um, proud as a new MP to this house. For this to be the first piece of legislation that I have spoken on at second reading that I've directly heard submissions from from members of the public and as we've we've heard already. Some of those submissions were really moving. Uh, and it's a It's a great as a as a former public servant who only got to write papers and draw diagrams to be able to directly engage [00:58:30] with the public and understand firsthand about how laws can impact on people's lives and to be grateful of the opportunity that we have here to undo those wrongs. While this legislation can't undo the hurt that was caused, I hope and I'm sure others here do today hope that this will help, uh, to to patch up to help move forward and to create a better country for people going forwards. While [00:59:00] we are reminded when we look at how far we've come in my lifetime, from when I was a a child, seeing those protests to where we're at right now, we still have a long way to go and We have a long way to go further, and I believe that that's our duty to keep changing attitudes, to keep challenging those who choose to discriminate in order to keep that that journey moving. There were two submissions that I'll quickly [00:59:30] refer to, um, and the first has already been mentioned in terms of someone who's had employment opportunities removed from them as a direct result of having convictions under the previous legislation. So this is important that we have a practical purpose, that people should not be denied the right to a job because they're working with Children and they've failed a background check That's unacceptable. That is blatant discrimination, and this legislation [01:00:00] is definitely needed in order to put that right. Well, I also heard from a good friend who's already been mentioned tonight, which is Ted Green Smith West. Um, and he to me really represented at Select Committee, a new generation of young people in the LGBT community that aren't prepared to sit back, who want to take action, who are prepared to be politically active and want their voices heard, and that is encouraging. So I see this legislation as twofold [01:00:30] as fixing those wrongs but also providing a new environment of hope and of giving young people a country where they can be proud of who they are. And that is so important that we have those young people prepared to step up and take that. Finally, I would like to acknowledge the work of Amy Adams, who, uh, the deputy chair of that committee was passionate also about this legislation. As the former minister of Justice, she had expertise in this area [01:01:00] and knew the legislation very well. That facilitated my colleagues here today from the Justice Committee to fully understand legislation quickly and get to grips with what we had in front of us. So I acknowledge her contribution. I have no further comments. I'm proud to speak on this bill, and I commend it to the house. Andrew, Uh, thank you, Madam Speaker. It's a privilege to be speaking this afternoon. Uh, on the second reading of the criminal records, uh, expungement of convictions for historical homosexual [01:01:30] offences. I'd like to commend, uh, the current Minister of Justice, Andrew Little, uh, for for progressing, uh, the bill, uh, but also commend and congratulate the previous Minister of Justice, Amy Adams. uh, for her dedication. Uh, there's been a lot of talk over many years about expunging homosexual, uh, offences. And I don't think, uh, it wouldn't have happened without, uh, her hard work, Uh, over over the last few years, Mr Speaker. Madam Speaker other. Uh, this bill has been a long time coming in 1974 [01:02:00] a national MP by the name of, uh, Vin Young, who was the father of Jonathan Young. Uh, a friend and colleague of ours, Jonathan Young, uh, introduced a bill to permit, uh, private homosexual acts. That bill was unfortunately defeated, but was revived in the 19 eighties by Fran Wilde. And I'd like to, uh, join other colleagues in a acknowledging her tonight. The Homosexual Law Reform Act was passed in July 1986 and came into effect in August of that year. [01:02:30] The act decriminalised sexual acts between men aged 16 and over. However, convictions prior to that have remained providing a permanent scar for those men who carry them. Madam Speaker. It was an absolute privilege and honour to sit on the Justice Select Committee that, uh, considered this bill. My colleague Amy Adams has already commented on the collegial atmosphere of that bill. Uh, at times it was, I think, eight members [01:03:00] of the committee versus the officials, Uh, rather than, uh, labour versus national, uh, national MP S. Uh, but that's the way it should be on important legislation such as this. Uh, my colleague, Matt King has already commented, uh, on the very emotional testimony that was given at at that committee. Sometimes it was very challenging to sit there and listen to it and hear the stories. Uh, and the experiences that some of these men have gone through, uh, in the past and in more recent years. Uh, I'm conscious that this bill [01:03:30] will never make up for the hurt that those men suffered over many decades. And it won't erase the black stain on this nation's history. I I It is, however, the right thing to do. And I hope it brings some sense of closure for those men and their families. Every member of this Parliament should be proud to see this Bill passage. Thank you. [01:04:00] I call David Seymour. Uh, thank you, madam Speaker and I rise on behalf of the act party to take a very short call. Uh, in support of the criminal records expungement of convictions for historical homosexual offences. Bill uh, I can only join with other members in saying that this is a wonderful occasion to see members from five different parties coming together unanimously [01:04:30] to say that these historical convictions are wrong, they were hurtful and they should be gone. Indeed, it's part of our tradition that we have worked on throughout our history as a nation to gradually expand the sphere of human rights so that people have the right to be who they want to be and act as they wish to act, so long as they are harming [01:05:00] nobody else. The men who were affected by these convictions did not hurt anybody else and what they did, but they were nonetheless victimised by the state Under the laws made by this parliament. It's an important time for us to remember, as lawmakers here in this house, that the power of the state that we are charged with restraining can do real harm [01:05:30] to the lives of innocent individuals. If we get it wrong, that is why we should always exercise restraint in law making. We should always reserve a special place for the rights of the individual when we make laws. And we should always look up to the very basic principle that my choice is what I'm what I choose to do. And if I'm causing no harm, it shouldn't bother you. Your [01:06:00] choice is who you choose to be. And if you're causing no harm, then you're right with me. That is a principle on which to make laws, Madam Speaker. And I am so proud to stand here with five other parties supporting this bill through its second reading because it's the right thing to do. And it signals the continued growth of our modern, sophisticated, liberal and tolerant nation. New Zealand. Thank you, madam [01:06:30] Chair. I'm sorry, I call Priyanka. Rarin. Thank you, Madam Speaker. It is an absolute honour to stand and take a call on the second reading of the criminal Records Expungement of Convictions for Historical Homosexual Offences Act. Um, it was also, um, an incredible privilege. As, uh, colleagues of the Justice Select Committee have said, uh, before me today it [01:07:00] was an absolute privilege to be part of the select committee that considered this bill that heard the submissions to this bill and received advice on it as well. Um, many people I speak to, um talk about the fact that at times things are rather adversarial in this house. And again, as other members have pointed out, um, you know, I wish they could have actually seen us in action at the Justice Select Committee, because that's absolutely how it should be. And it was such a pleasure [01:07:30] to work with members from across the house on this bill and refining this bill. Um, as has been said already this afternoon, this is, um, a piece of legislation that will introduce a scheme to wipe convictions For those, um, who have, you know, to wipe the convictions of historical homosexual offences. It is a progression of change, and it's one that as a new MP, I'm incredibly [01:08:00] proud to be part of, um, it it it follows on from the homosexual law reform bill back in 1986 that was passed by the fourth Labour government since then. This particular, um, you know the previous piece of legislation that actually criminalised homosexual men has ceased to have any meaning. It ceases to have any meaning for us legally today. But Of course, we've heard from those who have suffered for many years as a result [01:08:30] of those convictions, Um, it also follows on from the passing of the marriage definition of marriage amendment Act 2013 that allowed same sex couples to marry legally. And, of course, the apology that was given by the former minister of Justice, the honourable Amy Adams. And at this point, I too, want to acknowledge the work that she has put into the bill. Um, and of course, also our current Justice Minister, Um, the Honourable Andrew Little [01:09:00] for carrying on with this piece of work as well. So this bill, this this piece of legislation goes to the heart of the hurt and stigma that so many have experienced over the years. Young men we've heard who have been arrested and convicted for just being who they are, um, people, men who have lived in constant fear of law enforcement, the health, including the mental health implications of this fear [01:09:30] and the convictions as well. All for just being who they are. And this is really what this piece of legislation does. It celebrates, and it allows us to celebrate who we are. by lifting that stigma and that hurt. So how does this bill work? We've actually heard about, um, the fact that men with convictions for historical homosexual offences can apply for those offences for those convictions to be expunged. Basically, what we're saying [01:10:00] here today is that it never should have happened. And with this piece of legislation, it will be as though it didn't for, um, you know, purposes of applying for a job. Um, and and, um from the from from the legal point of view, it won't completely be deleted from records, because this is a record of of something that's happened and really something that we're not proud of a collective shame. In fact, um, I'll touch on one aspect of, um, submissions [01:10:30] that were considered by the select committee that members haven't actually alluded to so far. And that's the fact that some submitters and I think it was The Human Rights Commission was one of them that suggested that it be an automatic expungement that was considered by the committee. But, uh, the advice that we received was that that automatic expungement wouldn't actually capture everyone who was affected by the convictions and that proactive applications was a better way to go to [01:11:00] ensure that a wider group of people or more people who were who were affected by this could actually apply to have them expunged. We worked incredibly hard to ensure that it went a lot further than the clean slate act as well. Such that it wasn't just that, um, it it, you know, it wouldn't be recorded, but that it actually, uh would the effect would be that it ceases ceases to exist, in essence, from a legal point of view. Um, as was mentioned before, this [01:11:30] does apply to New Zealand law. Um order, order. The member's time has expired. Thank you. And I commend it to the house. I called Tim. Thank you, Madam Speaker. Look, it's a privilege to rise as our last speaker on this bill. And I certainly endorse those comments we've heard previously today and and commend this bill. It is well past time, and it is actually fantastic to see that this is now happening To be able to [01:12:00] expunge these historical convictions, I can just imagine would be such a weight off the shoulders of those people that have had this hanging over their heads unfairly for far too many years. It, I believe, enables us as a country to actually celebrate our diversity. So much better to celebrate the the the uniqueness that we have as New Zealanders to recognise that people are different and something like this should not be considered a criminal act. [01:12:30] So again, I would just like to acknowledge that the hard work of the select committee and pushing this through they've done a fantastic job and hearing some of the stories we've heard earlier today just reiterates the need for this piece of legislation and also just echoing David Seymour's comments earlier. It is a nice recognition to see every party speaking in support of this bill and acknowledging that indeed it is certainly time to address these [01:13:00] concerns and to move forward as a much more open and inclusive society. So, on that behalf, Madam Speaker, I would like to commend this bill to the house I call Raymond Hall. Thank you, Madam Speaker. First of all, I'd like to thank the Minister of Justice, the honourable Andrew Little, for making, uh, this bill one of the government's priorities. Uh, the purpose of this bill is to reduce stigma uh, prejudice and, uh, other negative effects [01:13:30] arising from a conviction. Uh, for a historical homosexual offences. Uh, offence. Uh, the bill is the first of its type in New Zealand law, which indicates the extraordinary nature of historical homosexual offences. These offences were targeted at a specific group in the community and criminalised sexual activity between homosexual men. [01:14:00] This bill demonstrates the government's contribution and commitment to right the wrongs of the past. For those who were convicted of offences prior to the Homosexual Law Reform Act 1986. As the Honourable Grant Robinson stated earlier, uh, it is important to acknowledge that the illegality of homos homosexuality prior to the 1986 [01:14:30] legislation ruined lives. The shame, the stigma and the hurt caused was unbearable for many. On that note, I should congratulate the then Minister of Justice, the honourable Amy Adams, for putting up the bill last year, and I acknowledge her contribution at the Select Committee we had We [01:15:00] had worked very closely at the Justice Select Committee and I enjoyed her knowledge and commitments, uh, to help make the bill what it is now. It is very fitting in my capacity as a chair of the Justice Committee to thank the honourable Amy Adams for her contributions at the committee and wish her good luck and enjoy her new role as spokesperson for finance for, uh, the opposition [01:15:30] party. Uh, I'd like also to thank Matt King and Andrew Flo, who have also moved on to take up other roles in other select committees following the leadership change of the National Party and the subsequent reshuffle. This is the second reading of this bill. I should acknowledge the submitters. Uh, we have received the submissions from 37 submitters. Those [01:16:00] submissions were very helpful, especially concerning the bill's relationship with other piece, uh, pieces of legislation such as vulnerable Children's act. And I'll come to those issues at committee of the whole house. Uh, stage. It is important to acknowledge that the illegality of hoo uh, homosexuality prior to the 1986 legislation, uh, ruined lives. And that's not [01:16:30] only happening in New Zealand, that's kind of a worldwide issue. Many would remember the gay perch campaign in Canada. Uh, the gay perch campaign. Um, the gay pi was a campaign, uh, in Canada, um, to remove homosexuals from military and public service from 19 sixties to [01:17:00] 1996. This was a systematic government policy, and a device was developed to detect uh, homosexuality known as the fruit machine. The device was supposed to be able to identify gay men who were referred to as fruits. The Canadian police collected files on over 9000 suspected gay [01:17:30] men, and as a result, a significant number of workers did lose their job. Uh, discrimination aside, the test was faulty and had no scientific merits. Now I cited the Canadian experience to show it is not easy for us to come to the point of where we are now. So I should acknowledge all those people who had involved in making the 1986 New Zealand [01:18:00] legislation a possibility. Thanks to that piece of legislation, no longer no longer would men having consensual sex with each other be liable to prosecution and to a term of imprisonment. The campaign to reform the law moved beyond the gay community to wider issues of human rights and discrimination. Back to this bill, the bill provides [01:18:30] for a statutory scheme that allows a convicted person or a representative on behalf of the convicted person if they are deceased, to apply to have a conviction. Expunge the secretary for justice uh decides whether the application meets the test for expungement, which is the contact would not constitute an offence. Under today's law, Clause eight set out the test for expungement. The test [01:19:00] again is that the contact constituting the offence then would no longer constitute an offence. Now, under the laws of New Zealand, the test was framed, framed in such a way to ensure that any contact which is considered still to be a criminal would not be expunged. The bill entitles the convicted [01:19:30] person to declare that they have no such conviction for any purpose. Uh, and then New Zealand, the law. The conviction will not appear on a criminal history check or record if the application for expungement is granted in terms of the criminal records or checks. Uh, there are two types of such kind of, uh, records. One is AC MC Uh uh case management system. The other one is catch a criminal and traffic conviction History [01:20:00] report for the purpose of this bill, what I can say is, uh, for those whose conviction been successfully successfully expanded the conviction would not appear on the individual's catch report. The bill identifies those who are eligible to have the convictions expunged. To be eligible to apply, a person must have been convicted of one of the specific offences under the Crimes Act 1961 [01:20:30] or equivalent UH offences under the Crimes Act 19 08, The New Zealand Law Society and Rainbow Wellington do not support excluding uh offences prior to 19 08. Uh, they claim that not that not extending the scope of the scheme to offences prior to the Crimes Act 19 08, seems to be arbitrary and there is no clear rationale behind such kind of a policy initiative. [01:21:00] The committee did consider whether the scope of the scheme should be extended to predecessor offences contained in legislation prior to 19 08. This would eventually include pieces of legislation of the 1800 the relevant UK legislation so far as it uh, it was part of the Law of New Zealand. In practise, the secretary may receive a few applications for offending over this time period [01:21:30] because the convicted persons would be deceased and potential representatives of the convicted persons are unlikely to have knowledge to have knowledge of the convictions. Several submitters raise the lack of compensation as an issue. UH, some submitters are also claim the lack of compensation could be seen as a potential breach of the Georgia Carter principle. Now, Georgia Carter is the name of the city in Indonesia, [01:22:00] I believe where the principle was established, uh, I'll come to that point at the committee of the whole House stage. But, uh, in terms of some issues raised by the honourable Grant, Robertson and other speakers who who spoke earlier, uh, we do acknowledge the importance of conversation. However, conversation goes beyond the purpose of the scheme, which is to prevent further negative effects from the stigma of a conversation. There is no [01:22:30] general principle that a person who is convicted of a repealed offence is entitled to compensation on the repeal of that offence. But I do note the contribution from previous speakers, and I do believe we should keep the conversation open, and I look forward to further debate at the committee of the whole house. Thank you. The question is that the motion be agreed to those of that opinion will say I to the contrary. No, the eyes have it. [01:23:00] Criminal records Ex Expansion of convictions for historical homosexual offences Bill second reading. The bill is set down for committee stage. Next Sitting day call on government order of the day number three.
This page features computer generated text of the source audio. It may contain errors or omissions, so always listen back to the original media to confirm content.
Tags