Coroners (Access to Body of Dead Person) Amendment Bill

I want to take a short call on the Coroners (Access to Body of Dead Person) Amendment Bill, and, obviously, this side of the Chamber agrees with the fact that this should be taken as one debate. I think the important thing is just to say with regard to this particular bill that kotahitaka is very prevalent right across the House for this bill, so it does make perfect sense to update the coronial legislation and, particularly, section 26 of the Coroners Act to require explicitly that the coroner considers tikanga Māori and the expectations also of other ethnicities when determining who can touch, view, or remain with the tūpāpaku, or the dead body.

There was also the recommendation from the Māori Affairs Committee—well, first of all, a lot of the heavy lifting and work was done in the 51st Parliament by the Komiti Whiriwhiri Take Māori, but also to reinforce what we’re actually doing here at the moment—of the 52nd Parliament, who also noted that the bill should be passed without amendment. I think that just a point of consideration is that from the 51st Parliament, there was a full list of recommendations for this particular bill, and when we look at those recommendations, there was a consideration, first, around the code of best practice that balances cultural considerations with the public interest in finding the cause of death. The second consideration was to consider implementing a formal communication process between the first responders and coronial services with whānau that incorporates tikanga Māori and the expectations of other cultures.

There was another part around considering amending section 26 of the Coroners Act 2006 to require the coroner to also consider tikanga Māori and the expectations of other cultures when determining whether someone should be allowed to remain with the tūpāpaku, and it’s actually that particular part of this bill which was the amending of that section 26. So the other parts were considering implementing a national standard for assessing and managing tūpāpaku that supports tikanga Māori and the expectations of other cultures in Aotearoa New Zealand. There was also a recommendation to consider increasing the resources allocated to coronial services and associated agencies in implementing minimum standards in the mortuaries.

The next part was to facilitate the establishment of an appropriate place for whānau to initially receive tūpāpaku entering New Zealand international airports. Now, this particular recommendation was only acknowledged, actually. It wasn’t accepted, but it was actually acknowledged. The other one which was rejected—and I just want to have this recorded in the Hansard. There was a recommendation also that we consider a review of the practice regarding co-sleeping situations resulting in sudden unexpected death in infancy and the current decision-making process followed by the police when deciding whether to prosecute these cases. This one was actually rejected.

So, on that note, I think we have all come together in that spirit of kotahitanga to ensure that this bill can actually continue its journey through from this process to the third reading. Can I acknowledge also Andrew Little, the Minister in the chair, as well for the excellent work that he has done in shepherding this particular legislation through.

Nō reira, huri noa i Te Whare nei, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, e mihi atu ana ki a koutou katoa. Āpiti hono, tātai hono, rātou ki te hunga mate, ki te hunga mate ki a rātou. Āpiti hono, tātai hono, tātou ki te hunga ora, ki te hunga ora ki a tātou. Kia ora.

[Therefore, right around this House, greetings, greetings, greetings to you all. Let the connections be made, and the deceased remain with the deceased. Let the connections be made, and we living remain with the living. Thank you.]

Tēnā koe, Mr Chair. I do want to acknowledge the contribution from the previous speaker, Tutehounuku Korako, who chaired the Māori Affairs Committee in the 51st Parliament, which conducted the inquiry which has led to this bill. As we’re in the committee stage, this bill is a very short bill. It specifies to the coroner that there are certain matters which must be taken into account in terms of the decision to allow family members to be with their deceased loved one who is under coronial care. Section 26 outlines those matters, and we’re inserting this new clause.

What has become very clear is that we have this amendment bill to the Coroners Act, and we also have a code of practice which specifies that tikanga Māori and respect for the spiritual beliefs, customs, and those sorts of matters must be taken into account. We’re putting this now into law through this bill, and I just want to remark that I certainly hope that this will lead to a change in practice.

This is an example. I’ve just been recently dealing with a constituent who lost a loved one in tragic circumstances—a young man. It was a shock to the whānau. The issues that the whānau had to deal with, being with the district health board (DHB) and the mortuary, and then also with trying to communicate with the coroner, who was in Auckland—it was just a hellish exercise for that family. Had it not been for the fact that a support person for this whānau was previously a member of the DHB and another close associate of the whānau knew the coroner in Auckland, it would have—this family was utterly distraught. They just felt entirely shut out, and I think the lesson from their experience was that the district health boards are not conducive—they’re not very welcoming places in situations where there is a tūpāpaku. With the way that the DHB treated them, it was just a terrible experience for the family to go through, and they came to me because they were concerned. What about whānau that don’t have connections, who don’t know the DHB members and chairs, and who don’t know people high up in the coroner’s office or the coroner? They’re powerless—they’re powerless.

So I guess it was a lesson that they wanted to impart to me that things aren’t right at a practical level within the district health boards when the jurisdiction of the coroner is called upon. Things aren’t right, and their example, I think, is just a case in point. Those are the things that we want to try and eliminate through this bill, and those are the matters that I think the coroner must take into account. It will be more timely to those sorts of concerns, and I think the district health boards have a part to play in that as well.

So I certainly hope that by this bill, we can see some practical changes at the coalface which are impacting on whānau, and that is definitely what we intend to do by this bill. I commend it, and I certainly hope that we can get those practices happening right from the legislation all the way through to the operational side, where families come in to interface with these organisations. Nō reira, kia ora tātou katoa.

Thank you, Mr Chairman. I just wanted to take a brief call, first of all, to thank members for their continued support and both Mr Korako and Mr Tirikatene for their contributions to this bill. As they have eloquently acknowledged, this is part of the journey that this House and this country is on to make sure that the legislation that we have that deals with the interface between our public services and all citizens of the country is sensitive to the varying cultural needs that people have.

This recognises the right of families when they are dealing with the tragic circumstances of losing a loved member that, where there are cultural requirements for close proximity to the body—to the tūpāpaku—funeral directors and others involved in that process must respect those cultural requirements. It is encouraging to see also that the various professional bodies involved in those processes will support the legislation by preparing practice notes and the like, and by giving good guidance and advice to it.

So, in my brief call, I just wanted to acknowledge that this is a bill that I think is small in size but its significance is very far-reaching in a practical sense, in a spiritual sense, and in what this nation represents towards all its people. So I thank the House for the ongoing support for this legislation.

It is a privilege to stand and give a brief contribution on this part of the Coroners (Access to Body of Dead Person) Amendment Bill in the committee of the whole House. I want to acknowledge Metiria Turei, because it was Metiria Turei from the Green Party, the former co-leader, who actually brought this petition to the Māori Affairs Committee that I was on at the time in the last sitting period. At that time, because I had not personally experienced issues over tūpāpaku, my loved ones, and the issues around that with the mortuaries and the coroners, it didn’t really resonate with me until we delved more into the issues facing whānau. As I sat and listened to the contribution from our chair, Rino Tirikatene, around the issues that some of the families who have approached him have had around access to their tūpāpaku, their loved one, it dawned on me the importance of what I thought was only a small thing, which has blossomed into one of the most significant issues for whānau: accessing their loved ones in the morgues and the mortuaries.

I want to thank the Hon Andrew Little for shepherding this through; taking this right through this part of the legislative process. I do look forward to its Royal assent after the third reading. I think it does clearly outline and pays respect to cultural beliefs and the way that Māori—I can only speak for Māori—care and look after our loved ones. We treat them almost like they were still alive and with us all the way into their grave, and I’ve experienced it a few times in my whānau. I think that this is going to help other whānau who don’t have access to the right people, as Rino Tirikatene spelt out in his speech, or people that aren’t—how would you put it?—confident in going forth and asking, or those that get really upset and do cause some trouble around trying to get access, because that’s emotional. Emotions run high; I get that.

So I do want to thank Metiria Turei for bringing this to our notice and for the petition that she put forward to the Māori Affairs Committee. As I have said when I started my contribution when I stood up, my korero will be quite short, because both my colleagues Nuk Korako and the chair of the Māori Affairs Committee, Rino Tirikatene, have covered the key areas of this particular bill, so I won’t go on any further. I just want to say thank you to the members of the Māori Affairs Committees of the 51st and 52nd Parliaments for working on this bill and getting it to this stage and for everybody supporting this bill across the House, because it is so very, very important. Sometimes pieces of legislation like this—yes, it’s only a few pages, but the impact is far and wide for a number of our families. So it is without any further ado, I just want to say thank you again, and I do commend this bill to the House. Thank you.

Kia ora to the Minister of Justice, seated beside you, Mr Chair; I acknowledge you both in addressing the committee today on the Coroners (Access to Body of Dead Person) Amendment Bill. It’s said that there are two certain things in life: taxes and death. This bill is to ensure that it is a least taxing experience for those with a recently deceased person or member of their family/whānau.

May I just turn to the time line in the passage of this bill. It’s noted that the Māori Affairs Committee initiated an inquiry into whānau access and management of tūpāpaku, the deceased’s body, during the period of 2 March 2016 through to 26 July 2017. I was elected as a member of Parliament and didn’t join the Māori Affairs Committee until the end of last year, so I’ve come in this rather belatedly with the discussions that have been before the select committee. On 14 August last year, the inquiry report was presented to the House, so things had been very much traversed as a foregone conclusion by the time that I did join those discussions, noting that on 10 April 2018 this bill was referred to the Māori Affairs Committee and I was part of those discussions, with eight submissions heard and two of those orally presented.

I’m just going to turn to the detail outlined here in the bill and just state that the Coroners Act of 2006 is what this bill is seeking to amend, particularly section 26 in terms of those matters as has been submitted or proposed under clause 4 of the bill to be factored in as considerations to be balanced against all of those other, I believe, eight considerations. But the context of this coronial framework is around a certain type of death, and those deaths are specific to sudden or unexplained deaths or deaths in special circumstances. So that is the ambit or the reach that the coroner must factor and take into account in whether or not a post-mortem or an autopsy is to occur.

Section 3 of the Coroners Act itself details the purpose of the Act. I think it’s important that we do reflect and turn to what the purpose is about, because it details there that, in so far as preventing deaths or promoting justice through the investigation and identification of the causes and circumstances of, as I said, sudden or unexplained deaths, section 3(2) outlines how to achieve that purpose. That’s where there is first mention, under paragraph (b), of a recognition for both the cultural and spiritual needs of the family alongside public good factors. So there is mention within the Coroners Act around the significance of cultural and spiritual needs. I’m going to address other sections within the Coroners Act before I do get to clause 4, because it is relevant.

Clause 4 is making the amendment by way of this bill to section 26, specifically with an amendment to insert section 26(2)(ea), and that reference is specifically to take into account where a coroner must, before authorising whether or not a person who under section 25 would be permissible to either view, touch, or remain with or near the body, the tūpāpaku—it is about whether or not it is deemed the significance of “(ea) the ethnic origins, social attitudes or customs, or spiritual beliefs of the person”—and it’s further detailed there that that particular relationship to the deceased person is balanced up and taken into account alongside all of those other factors. So it doesn’t give specific priority; it’s a balancing act as that being one of the interests in whether or not, alongside all of those other interests, it takes priority.

I’m just going to quickly turn to what I’ll address in the third reading before the House: that the other factors specific to cultural spiritual significance are section 32(f) and section 37(2)(c). This bill is specific not to tikanga Māori practices but to spiritual and cultural beliefs. Thank you, Mr Chair.

Tēnā koe e Te Māngai o Te Whare. Ata mārie tātou katoa i tēnei Whare Pāremata.

[Good morning to all of us in Parliament House.]

I wanted to take a short call in this before the final reading of the Coroners (Access to Body of Dead Person) Amendment Bill, firstly, to absolutely congratulate Minister Little for picking up this particular part of the recommendations of the Māori Affairs Committee and showing a confirmed and committed way forward to how we can start putting in place the recommendations that came from the Māori Affairs Committee through the inquiry into the management of tūpāpaku. Now, I wanted to acknowledge the previous members of that select committee when former co-leader Metiria Turei raised the issue of the stress that whānau go through in one of the most stressful times that any person can imagine in their lives, at a time of grief and shock.

When Metiria Turei proposed this inquiry to the select committee, it was absolutely clear that every single member of the select committee could relate to the issue of the difficulties and the challenges that arise for, actually, any family but particularly those just wanting to manage and deal with their tūpāpaku in a way that upholds their tikanga and their culture.

Every single person on that select committee, and I think that included—I was just talking to Tutehounuku Korako—Pita Paraone, Marama Fox, myself, Nuk Korako, Jo Hayes. Chester Borrows—we all were keen on getting this inquiry through, but he was particularly keen, coming from his police background, and he acknowledged where processes could be done better in dealings with whānau so as not to add hurt to grief. We were all very clear; we all acknowledged instances—Pita Paraone, I think I said his name. Every single member was very enthusiastic. I was very proud to be able to pick this up and hold the torch for Metiria Turei once I became a member of that Māori Affairs Committee. What the Minister Andrew Little has done here is pick up one of the specific recommendations, one of the most—well, they’re all important, let me be clear, but one of the recommendations to start with that will make a very significant difference, if we think about what we heard in the select committee, is that there will be a requirement of the coroner, when determining whether a person should be allowed to remain with the tūpāpaku, to also consider tikanga Māori and the expectations of other cultures.

I was reminded of visiting, I think it’s called, Papatoetoe crematorium and cemetery in South Auckland some years ago, when I learnt about the leading ways that that crematorium has worked out how to make things more respectful across a broad range of cultures, and I look forward to coroners and all agencies involved increasing their learning to be able to uphold this amendment to section 26 of the Coroners Act 2006. Taking cultural considerations into account will absolutely require an openness and eagerness to learn, to be informed, and to form relationships across leadership in the community and agencies. That will hold us in good stead throughout what I hope will be ongoing follow-up of putting some of those other recommendations from that inquiry into place. There were others around improving cultural considerations at the time of death, but also the capacity of the coronial system was something we heard a lot about.

So I’m just really pleased to stand and make a grateful and appreciative contribution in this, the committee stage, acknowledging everyone for the work that has brought us to this place and particularly acknowledging clause 4, amending section 26 of the Coroners Act to insert that importance of upholding tikanga values across cultures, and what we know from evidence is that that will actually make it easier for agencies and whānau alike. So this is a win-win situation. I commend this to committee. Kia ora.

Clauses 1 to 4 agreed to.

Bill to be reported without amendment.

House resumed.

The Chairperson reported the Reserve Bank of New Zealand (Monetary Policy) Amendment Bill with amendment, the Conservation (Infringement System) Bill with amendment, the Earthquake Commission Amendment Bill with amendment, the Crown Minerals Amendment Bill with amendment, and the Coroners (Access to Body of Dead Person) Amendment Bill without amendment.

Report adopted.