Courts and Criminal Matters Bill

To be consistent, I will take a call on Part 4 of the Courts and Criminal Matters Bill, which is the final part in the bill. As such, it amends a further 13 statutes, and that is quite a considerable number. Although most of the amendments are minor and ensure consistency amongst all the statutes, they are also very important amendments. Although Part 4 is not controversial and one could almost say it is quite tedious—the Minister in the chair, the Attorney-General, is nodding—it is still vitally important. If these amendments are not made or are incorrect, then this legislation will be inconsistent with the other statutes. I cannot imagine what it would be like to do that work. I do not think I would have the patience, and I know that Maurice Williamson would not. But for those who do have the patience, those with an eye for detail—probably like the Minister in the chair has—then that is really, really valuable work. It is work that never really receives the full recognition that it should have. Many other amendments are really interesting and make substantial changes to improve legislation. In this case, the bill affects the collection of fines. Part 4 is more about making sure things work properly: technical amendments, to ensure consistency.

What are the amendments to other Acts? There is an amendment to the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families Act 1989. The amendment repeals the old definition of “traffic offence” and substitutes a new definition, which adds references to a number of transport Acts, and any offence under them will constitute a traffic offence. So that is a very important amendment. There is an amendment to the Customs and Excise Act 1996 to change the definition of “fine”, for reasons of consistency. There is an amendment to the Family Courts Act 1980. There is an amendment to the Personal Property Securities Act 1999. New section 167A(2) provides that a registrar of the High Court or of a District Court may enter in the register a financing change statement in certain circumstances prescribed in the amendment. Again, in order to make things work properly, it is very important that the Act be amended.

There is, of course, an amendment to the Prisoners’ and Victims’ Claims Act 2005; we are getting more into current times. That adds an Order in Council provision in the section relating to the deduction of money for legal aid and for reparation, etc. The Privacy Act 1993 is amended, and we note the requirement for the registrar to consult the Privacy Commissioner in certain instances. There are amendments to the Railways Act 2005. Who would have thought that that Act would need amendment? Again, that is why it is really important to acknowledge the work that gets done in these instances, because that matter has been picked up on. God forbid if the Railways Act was inconsistent with this legislation! There are amendments to the Sentencing Act 2002. Goodness me, that is my old favourite. That Act is amended to authorise a court to direct that an offender can be detained for up to 2 hours to complete a declaration of his or her financial capacity. That is really important, because as previous speakers, including myself, have said, when we are looking at these outstanding fines and getting them sorted, it is really important to establish whether the person has the financial capacity, the ability, to make the payments. The Social Security Act 1964 has also been amended, as has the Tax Administration Act 1994 and the Transport Act 1962.

All of those Acts have been amended, and all in all there are 12 of them. But that is quite mysterious, because it states in the bill that 13 statutes have been amended. I am counting them again, but I can find only 12. Perhaps the Minister in the chair, the Minister of Justice, will take a call and enlighten me. I will go through them. I have the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families Act 1989, the Customs and Excise Act 1996, the Family Courts Act 1980, the Immigration Act 1987, the Personal Property Securities Act 1999—that is fine—the Prisoners’ and Victims’ Claims Act 2005, the Privacy Act 1993, the Railways Act 2005, the Sentencing Act 2002, the Social Security Act 1964, the Tax Administration Act 1994, and the Transport Act 1962. That is 12 statutes. It is just one of those things, and it is annoying.

What is that other Act? I suspect that some people in this Chamber know, and I will ask them. Does the Minister know? If he knows—and I can see that little gleeful look on his face, and that he is feeling kind of proud—he will be able to jump up to take a call and enlighten the Committee about that other Act. In the absence of that information, I wonder whether perhaps we have been given misinformation. Although that would be very rare, perhaps we have. If anyone in this Chamber can enlighten us, it would be a lovely finish to this bill, which does have majority support, although not from the Greens. It would be very good to find out about that pesky missing statute. Imagine if I were to turn the page and it was just on the other side, but it is not.

💬 Hon Steve Chadwick: The Minister has nearly got it.

The Minister in the chair, the Minister of Justice, is scribbling frantically; I think he has found it. I would have a lot of respect for him if he could find it.

💬 Hon Member: His officials know.

The officials know. They might be able to give him the word. Poor old Simon Power has not had a good run lately. He is leaving, and we will all miss him. I think it would boost his morale if he stood up and told us what that missing statute is.

I do not want to be frivolous; I think I have said enough tonight. I am really happy that this is a bill—unlike many other bills in this House—that we in Labour are supporting. I look forward to its progress through the House. Thank you very much, and I do hope the Minister in the chair can enlighten the Committee about the missing statute.

While the Minister in the chair, the Minister of Justice, is frantically looking for the missing Act that was mentioned by Lynne Pillay—we are very keen for him to enlighten all of us on what that missing Act is—I will speak to Part 4 of the Courts and Criminal Matters Bill. It amends a whole number of pieces of legislation, including the missing one, which Lynne Pillay will beaver away on as well while I talk. One of the members will find it. There is a prize for the winner—the person who finds it. Ms Pillay has obviously gone through and listed the amendments to other Acts, so I will not—[Interruption] I would rather not do it again. I am sure the Committee really does not want me to do that.

I repeat that the Courts and Criminal Matters Bill is an omnibus bill and Labour supports it. Part 4 illustrates the extent of the reach of these changes and the number of different Acts that are affected by this bill. Primarily, the principal Act in each case is amended by different definitions and interpretations. I will illustrate that for people so that they get a sense of it, as I am sure members would like me to do.

The amendment to the Customs and Excise Act 1996 is a change to the definition of “fine”. The bill adds paragraph (e) to the definition, which states: “any amount payable under section 138A(1) of the Sentencing Act 2002.” Likewise, there are amendments to some of the other Acts, including the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families Act 1989. The Act is amended by clause 79, “Interpretation”, which repeals the definition of “traffic offence” and substitutes the following definition: “ ‘traffic offence’ means—(a) any offence against the Transport Act 1962, the Road User Charges Act 1977, the Transport (Vehicle and Driver Registration and Licensing) Act 1986, the Land Transport Act 1998, or the Land Transport Management Act 2003 or against any regulation, rule, or bylaw made under any of those Acts: (b) any offence against any regulation, rule, or bylaw made under any other Act if the offence relates to the use of motor vehicles or parking places or transport stations”.

The reason why this multitude of Acts has to be changed under Part 4 is to deal with all of the situations where people can incur fines. There are also some other changes, like the changes being made to the Privacy Act, for example, which I spoke about at some length when I was speaking on Part 3.

The Railways Act—that is interesting—is being amended in relation to the issuing of infringement notices. I will not go through all of the wording there, because it is quite a long change, but the bill puts in a whole new section 100. It talks about the content of infringement notices and reminder notices and about what is meant to be in those things. We also have amendments to the Tax Administration Act, which is quite interesting. Those amendments relate to the disclosure of certain information in relation to fine defaulters. The definition of “fine defaulter” is amended.

Again, these are all very much consequential changes. They are, if you like, tidy-ups to ensure that these various Acts will be able to deal with the substantive changes in the Courts and Criminal Matters Bill, which, as we have said earlier—and we agree with members opposite—has a very good purpose. It is to address a general concern about the number of overdue fines, the dissatisfaction of victims when offenders do not comply with reparation orders, and the frustration of creditors and debtors who use the court’s civil debt enforcement process.

I think in the course of the discussion tonight on the various parts, including Part 4, we have seen some real efforts to try to balance protections and so on—such as people’s rights under the Privacy Act—with the responsibility to pay fines. Certainly most of us in this Chamber believe it is important that when fines are given for various offences, people do pay those fines. A failure to do so not only builds up a huge amount of debt, which leads to problems for individuals and their families, but also undermines the legislation.

The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 244 in the name of the Hon Georgina te Heuheu to the proposed amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 202 in her name to Part 4 be agreed to.

Amendments to the amendments agreed to.

The question was put that the amendments as amended set out on Supplementary Order Paper 202 in the name of the Hon Georgina te Heuheu to Part 4 be agreed to.

Amendments as amended agreed to.