Family Court Proceedings Reform Bill

Part 2 of the Family Court Proceedings Reform Bill amends the Domestic Violence Act 1995. I would like to hope that the whole of the Committee can agree with this. What this part does is strengthen the Family Court’s response to domestic violence. The definition of psychological abuse will be widened to include financial and economic abuse. Although these have been recognised as psychological abuse in case law, the change will make it clear in legislation. Economic abuse includes such things as denying or limiting access to financial resources or being able to have a job. Clause 51 of the bill will amend the maximum penalty for breaching a protection order. The maximum penalty will be increased from 2 years’ to 3 years’ imprisonment. The change is one of our election promises and makes it very clear that we will not tolerate domestic violence.

Part 2 also introduces new provisions to ensure that the programmes that we provide to protected persons and for respondents are safe and respond to the needs of people using them. The changes also enable respondents, protected people, and their whānau to participate in each other’s programmes where it is safe and appropriate to do so. Our programmes for protected people need to enable their families and whānau to support them and help them to keep safe from future abuse.

The bill clarifies providers’ responsibilities to report safety concerns. If at any stage of providing a programme to the violent person the service provider becomes concerned for the protected person’s safety, they must notify the registrar. The registrar must ensure that a judge is notified of the safety concerns and also that the protected person is made aware of the concerns. The Government’s Supplementary Order Paper 349 amends clause 52A so that the registrar arranges for the protected person to be advised of any safety concerns. That is an amendment where we have taken on the recommendations of the Justice and Electoral Committee. We actually took on all of the recommendations from the select committee—from the majority of it.

The new legislation will also help make non-violence programmes more effective by ensuring that a programme is provided based on the violent person’s needs. There will be a mandatory assessment for respondents. Responsiveness is increased, as there will be more opportunity for providers to return to court to amend directions or orders where needed. This includes the ability to notify the registrar if after undertaking assessment there are safety concerns or if the provider is unable to provide a programme that meets the violent person’s needs. At the completion of a non-violence programme, providers will be required to report on whether the programme’s objectives were achieved. A new provision is included so that it is clear that a judge can respond appropriately to any concerns or issues raised by the report that can be addressed by the court.

Part 2 now clarifies that the Ministry of Justice has responsibility for the approval of providers. The legislation needs to be sufficiently flexible for the future, to ensure that appropriate providers can deliver safe—

I am sorry to interrupt the honourable Minister. The time has come for me to report progress.

House resumed.

The Chairperson reported the Housing Accords and Special Housing Areas Bill with amendment, progress on the Family Court Proceedings Reform Bill, and no progress on the Airports (Cost Recovery for Processing of International Travellers) Bill.

Report adopted.

The House adjourned at 9.56 p.m.