Crimes Legislation (Stalking and Harassment) Amendment Bill

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I present a legislative statement on the Crimes Legislation (Stalking and Harassment) Amendment Bill.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: That legislative statement is published under the authority of the House and can be found on the Parliament website.

Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: I move, That the Crimes Legislation (Stalking and Harassment) Amendment Bill be now read a first time. I nominate the Justice Committee to consider the bill.

Every New Zealander deserves to feel safe in their community. When a person is stalked, the experience permeates every aspect of their life. The behaviour can escalate to serious physical harm. We know the public is concerned about stalking. We’ve heard from advocates who tell us stalking needs to be recognised as its own offence. Today, I’m very proud to present the Crimes Legislation (Stalking and Harassment) Amendment Bill to the House.

This bill delivers on our commitment under the Quarter Four Action Plan to introduce legislation to address stalking by the end of the year. The bill creates a new offence of stalking and harassment. It repeals the existing offence of criminal harassment in the Harassment Act. We heard from advocates that the placement of the offence within the law is important as it sends a clear message about its seriousness. The new offence will therefore be inserted into the Crimes Act 1961. The seriousness of the new offence will also be reflected by its penalty—a conviction of the new offence will be punishable by up to five years’ imprisonment.

The offence has two key elements that will need to be satisfied to secure a conviction. First, the perpetrator will need to have engaged in a pattern of behaviour against the victim. The bill defines a pattern of behaviour as three specified acts within a 12-month period. Secondly, the perpetrator needs to have engaged in that pattern of behaviour knowing it was likely to cause fear or distress to the victim. The bill provides a list of the types of behaviours that may be a specified act. These include things like watching or loitering near the victim, tracking or communicating with the victim, and damaging or interfering with their property. It also includes less tangible harm like damaging or undermining the victim’s reputation or relationships.

We’ve heard that stalkers often use other people, organisations, and institutions to stalk their victims. Examples of these behaviours and the harm it can cause have also been documented in the media recently. To address this, this bill provides that specified acts may be done directly or indirectly to the victim. This makes it clear acts may be done through or to a third party with the knowledge that it will cause the victim fear or distress.

The bill also makes it clear that a specified act can be done by or through any means whatsoever. Examples of different means are given, such as the use of tracking devices, spyware, and artificial intelligence. These clarifications seek to futureproof the law by ensuring that new forms of stalking can still be captured by the law.

To protect legitimate conduct from being criminalised, a defence to the offence is included in the bill. Specifically, it provides that the defendant will not be liable for behaviour done for a lawful purpose, with a reasonable excuse, or in the public interest. This ensures that, for example, law enforcement can perform its function without the risk of prosecution.

As part of the offence, the bill establishes a police notification system. This allows the police to notify stalkers that their behaviour is causing the victim fear or distress, and that if the behaviour continues they’re liable to be charged with the offence. A police notification is not required to prosecute the offence. Receiving a notice will not be a prerequisite for filing a charge, but a notice should not be given instead of prosecution where it is clear an offence has been committed.

However, where a notice is given, a notification system will support prosecution. If a person has previously received a notification and they continue to engage in the pattern of behaviour, the bill creates a presumption that they knew their pattern of behaviour was likely to cause the victim fear or distress. This assists improving the mental element of the offence. The notification system makes it clear that there are real consequences for stalkers. It also aims to reduce the steps victims need to go through to have their harm responded to.

In addition to the new offence, the bill makes supporting amendments to four other Acts to address stalking. Amendments to the Sentencing Act 2002 aim to better recognise the unique characteristics of stalking and provide better protection for victims. The bill will add two new sentencing aggravating factors. First, it will be an aggravating factor if the offending took place where the victim had a restraining order against the offender. Secondly, it will be an aggravating factor if the offender’s behaviour towards the victim outside of the offence involved persistent or repetitive behaviour over a prolonged period. That behaviour must have caused, or be likely to have caused, fear or distress in the victim.

The bill also allows the court to make new orders when sentencing a person convicted of the new offence. Specifically, the court will be able to make restraining orders under the Harassment Act 1997 and orders under the Harmful Digital Communications Act 2015. This change provides additional protection for victims of stalking, meaning that they won’t also have to seek civil remedies alongside a criminal trial.

The bill amends the Family Violence Act 2018 to make it clear that stalking can be a form of family violence. Psychological abuse already captures intimidation and harassment, so this change provides consistency and completeness.

Evidence indicates that stalkers with access to firearms are more likely to escalate to violence. To address this risk, the bill amends the Arms Act 1983. That amendment provides that a person convicted of a new offence within the last 10 years will be disqualified from holding a firearms licence.

Finally, the bill makes changes to the Evidence Act 2006 to prevent a defendant charged with the new offence from personally cross-examining the alleged victim. This amendment aims to reduce the risk of witness intimidation, reflecting the particular nature of stalking cases.

I’m proud to bring this bill to the House today, which brings real consequences for stalkers and better responses for victims of stalking. I want to thank the tireless work of the advocates in this space for their continued efforts. I want to acknowledge the more than 18,800 people who signed the Coalition for the Safety of Women and Children’s petition to make stalking illegal. We hear you. We’re now sending off for a full select committee process where we’re happy to discuss the finer details. I’m sure people will have many things to say about that and we’re very keen to hear those comments.

We’re delivering on our commitment to ensure that there are 20,000 fewer victims of serious violent crime by 2029, and this bill brings us one step closer to this commitment. I hope that we will enjoy widespread support across the House for this important legislation. I commend this bill to the House.

The question is that the motion be agreed to.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. It’s a pleasure to take a call on the Crimes Legislation (Stalking and Harassment) Amendment Bill. At the beginning of this year, the honourable Minister responsible for this bill stated quite clearly on the public record that stalking legislation was in fact not a priority for this Government. He explained quite clearly that there was a busy work programme ahead of the justice portfolio, and stalking legislation quite simply was not a high priority on that busy workload.

Something changed his mind, something made him change to make this legislation a priority. Maybe it was the nearly 20,000 signatures delivered to him on the steps of Parliament by all of those women and advocates who worked so hard to bring those signatures together. Maybe it was a member’s bill that proposed to do what this bill does but a bit more, which had the potential for being drawn from the ballot. Or maybe he just had a change of heart. Let’s hope it was the third one.

Labour supports this bill because we think it does good work in this space, but we do have some reservations, and I’ll go into detail about what those reservations are. I will ask people who are strong advocates in the sector to submit and put their voices forward to the select committee so that all those views can be taken into consideration when we receive submissions on this bill.

Before I go into that detail, I’d like to acknowledge three people. There are lots of others I could acknowledge, but I would like to firstly acknowledge Leonie Morris, who is the chair of the Coalition for the Safety of Women and Children. It is Leonie I met and I worked closely with in the drafting of my member’s bill. She is a strong advocate for women’s safety and has worked tirelessly in the sector and continues to do so, and she has a wealth of knowledge in how to better support victims in New Zealand.

I’d like to also acknowledge Awatea Mita from the Aotearoa Free from Stalking campaign. They drove a strong campaign that has largely driven and put pressure upon this Government to bring this bill to the House before the end of the year, and I acknowledge the hard work that has gone in to do that.

I’d also like to acknowledge the work of Layba Zubair and the Anti-Violence Action community organisation, who have worked as a group. One of the benefits, I would say, of being in Opposition is the ability to engage with the front-facing people who do this hard work in our community and understand the nature of issues by engaging with them and understanding the specific circumstances of repeat stalking which happens in New Zealand.

Stalking is a shocking and far more prevalent practice than most people understand it to be. It can take many shapes and forms. It can be online, it can be in person, it can be following, it can be repeated unwanted gifts, it can be physical violence. It can be cameras unknown in your home or in your car, it can be tracking through GPS. You can think of many, many, many ways you can try to make someone’s life a misery by stalking them. It varies. It can be someone who’s had a relationship already, or it can be someone who’s never met them but only seen them online. Either way, it is a power play to dominate and intimidate someone and to make their life a misery.

One of the points I’d like to highlight in this short speech is that this bill has been called tone-deaf by the sector. It has been called a watered-down protection, and the key reason is that this very bill repeals the harassment law and introduces a new stalking law, and that is what has caused real dismay from the very women who campaigned so strongly and brought together those petitions. The Crimes Legislation (Stalking and Harassment) Amendment Bill would make it illegal to carry out three stalking actions in a year, but, very importantly, it would also allow the repeal of the related offence of criminal harassment, which is defined as two acts of serious harassment in a year.

Making it legal for stalkers to harass their victims twice a year in certain ways is absolutely counterproductive and uncalled for, possibly even unprecedented internationally, and the sector has called upon the Minister and stated that they are angry at this “bait-and-switch move.” Stalking actions are harmful, and the harassment law is wound into this as well.

The member’s time has expired.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. The Greens confirm that we will be supporting this bill to select committee. I want to mihi to the mahi of countless survivors, advocates, and whānau members for their tireless work over successive Governments to ensure stalking and harassment is taken seriously. Their collaboration, dedication, and determination is the reason we are here today.

To members across both sides of the House: we are putting our differences aside to focus on our shared vision to prevent all forms of violence, particularly harassment and stalking, which are not inevitable. Our mokopuna deserve our commitment to creating a world where everyone can live free from violence. We are committed to honouring the experiences and the dignity of survivors, and will use all the tools available to us so that the bill we pass is fit for purpose, reflects their experiences, and will make the world safer.

New Zealand’s justice system does not sufficiently address stalking. This bill aims to close that gap and better protect victims of stalking. My colleagues have covered the amendments proposed in the bill.

The Greens recognise that this bill takes a punitive approach. An essential action to protect victims of stalking and harassment is to focus on prevention and rehabilitation to address the root causes for the harmful behaviour. We have an across-Government strategy Te Aorerekura, which is a bold action plan to eliminate family and sexual violence in Aotearoa New Zealand. I mihi to the Hon Marama Davidson and Jan Logie for shepherding this action plan into fruition. Prevention and rehabilitation includes robust mental health support, ensuring accessible services to address harmful behaviours early, education on healthy relationships and consent in schools, and adequately funding our front-line community one-stop support services.

We know the work of the experts and survivors like Aotearoa Free from Stalking and the Coalition for the Safety of Women and Children has been vital to bringing this bill to the House. On the Parliament steps earlier this year, Aotearoa Free from Stalking handed a petition with over 21,000 signatures, which shows how much support this move has.

To achieve our goals to protect victims of stalking and harassment, we have to listen to people with lived experience. There are three main concerns that have been brought to our attention by survivors and experts. Firstly, there are concerns about the requirement of the 12-month time frame and three specific actions to meet the threshold for stalking. Leonie Morris from the Coalition for the Safety of Women and Children said, “Making it legal for stalkers to harass their victims twice [in] a year in [a] certain way is counter-productive and uncalled for, and possibly unprecedented internationally,”. Secondly, many victims who have struggled to have their stalking taken seriously have raised concerns about police training. We need police to be properly equipped to recognise and respond to stalking. Thirdly, the third main concern is the lack of mandatory consideration of stalker rehabilitation, like non-violence programmes.

These concerns, among others, show why it is so important that we have a select committee process: we need to hear directly from survivors and sector experts. Let’s uplift their voices and make sure this bill addresses their needs and honours the mana of their experiences. Stalking is terrifying and horrific, and it can happen to anyone. We can create a future where everyone in Aotearoa can live free from violence with dignity and peace. To the survivors and allies: we’ve got you.

Madam Speaker, thank you. It’s an absolute privilege to stand here today, not only on behalf of ACT but as the Minister for the Prevention of Family and Sexual Violence, and I feel humbled to be able to speak to this today. You’ll have to excuse me; this is kind of personal for me.

Stalking doesn’t just affect the main victim. It affects their family, it affects their children, living in fear on a daily basis, not knowing what is going to meet them at the gate in the morning. When you see the light disappear from somebody’s eyes, their whole life just destroyed by a person who thinks that it’s OK to do that to them, when you sit in a hospital and you watch a woman who cannot even say their name because they’ve lost the ability to speak, I know we’re doing the right thing by bringing this bill to the House.

I’m sorry for the tears, but they’re not tears of weakness. They’re tears of years of women screaming for help, of children not knowing how to help their parent, taking on that responsibility of trying to step in between the perpetrator and the victim and becoming a victim themselves, all because police do not have the tools to be able to stop this from happening.

I look forward to the day when we don’t hear on the other end of the phone “They’re not breaking any rules.”, when a person can stand at the top of a driveway and stare daggers down at a person who is absolutely petrified but there is nothing the police can do, because they haven’t stepped on to your property, but they can stand at the top of your driveway and put the living fear of God into you.

I look forward to the day when we can actually say we’re not going to tolerate this any more. I look forward to the day when children are not seeing the fear in their parents’ eyes. I look forward to the day when we are backing the victims, and that is what we are doing today. Today, we are going to say that it is not OK to torment or to put fear and distress upon somebody to the point where they can no longer live a life without fear and without violence.

I would like to thank the Hon Paul Goldsmith for bringing in this bill today. I know it has been quite a full-on year, with a lot of legislation that has to be passed, and I am grateful that this has been given priority. This will make an absolute difference to so many people in this country and will go a long way towards breaking that cycle of harm, which is what Te Aorerekura is all about. I will shout out to Marama Davidson for starting the conversation that needed to be started, and I am honoured to carry that conversation on now, because it is too important for this not to continue. We need to focus on the women and children who have for far too long been put in the background, in the “too hard basket”.

The effects that stalking has are massive. I cannot state enough how big this is. It will create an absolute opportunity for women, children, and some men to get freedom—freedom from being under the thumb of a possessive person who thinks that it is OK to be in that person’s space without permission and that it is OK to create that form of fear.

It is not OK, and we, as a House, are standing here united today to say that we are all on the same page and it will not be tolerated any more. We will not allow this to happen any more, and we will give the police the tools that they need to stop this from happening.

Thank you, Minister.

I stand equally privileged and humbled to be able to speak on the Crimes Legislation (Stalking and Harassment) Amendment Bill. I would firstly like to start my contribution by acknowledging the member the Hon Karen Chhour for not only her strength and conviction; her honesty and her ability to bring the humanity on important issues. I am grateful that she shared her experiences and her passion on this topic.

This is an important piece of legislation because we talk a lot about the need to rectify violence and to reduce the level of violent crime but in doing this we have to empower our victims. We have to allow our victims to know that there is something that can be done. We have to allow our victims to understand that what is being done is wrong and that they can be in a place of strength, they can be supported, they can be encouraged, and they can be protected.

I have been in the position where I have dealt with victims who offenders have encroached just to the line and not over and the helplessness as a police officer to stand there and go “There isn’t anything we can do. We can move you and we can hide you, but we can’t actually empower you.”, and exactly what this bill does is create that level of empowerment. More so—commending Minister Goldsmith—it is a piece of legislation that clearly creates the tools and the equipment and the opportunities to deal with this proactively, so that we can intervene early, we can intervene strongly, and we can let the offenders know that this is the line they have crossed and actually make sure that when they cross it again, something really tangible happens.

New Zealand First strongly supports the principle of protecting New Zealanders from harm. We have committed to the advocacy of law and order. We are advocating strongly for legislation that listens to the public concerns. Most importantly, we want to see less victims. We want to see the opportunity that people are held accountable and cannot create more victims in their journey through their drunkenness of empowerment over the fact that they can hurt people and create that level of control over them. It is with great pleasure that New Zealand First commends this bill to the House.

Tēnā koe e te Pīka. Tēnā tātou e te Whare. Firstly, I just want to acknowledge the speakers prior to me, and truth when it lands—particularly when there’s that real palpable emotion and story—is important, among all the other emotions that rage in the House, particularly here tonight. This particular take [matter], I think, is a serious and good one, and, then, in saying that, our party supports the intention and looks forward to what we end up coming up with in the select committee process. I just want to open up with that statement, thank you.

I just want to mihi, obviously, and recognise the inspiration behind the bill. And the whānau of the young woman will be recognising the second anniversary of their daughter’s passing. I won’t say their name, but I want to acknowledge that, and that is so significant to what it is that we’re considering. I won’t speak to that for too long, except to recognise that in my kōrero. Yet to the whānau, I acknowledge the loss and recognise that this is something that will likely remain unhealed.

Part of my discussion tonight is I worked for many years teaching self-defence to women across the motu. That was one of my—well, it’s not a passion, because that makes it kind of—it was a duty to do so. Many a story are there of trauma and violence but also, can I say, victory too. Now, I’m telling their stories—this isn’t my story—but I just to acknowledge that that’s what comes back to mind in this particular speech this evening.

What does alarm me is the rates and the frequency in which young women fall victim to the predatory behaviour and stalking practices over their lifetime. Many of the young women in this House and our young daughters—we think about them when we are talking about this particular issue, and we should think about them. We should think about what it takes to protect them. This bill lends itself to that idea, but I’m always a fan of “teach your girls to defend themselves”. Teach your girls. Show them. Show them. Demonstrate to them, at every moment that you can, that you are entitled to and that you have a right to defend and protect yourself.

In these instances, though, it is a near impossible situation. While this bill will make it illegal to carry out three stalking actions in a year, it would also repeal the related offence. The speakers, I think, from Labour made that exact same comment, and that is still a concern. I think we need to think about that more carefully. In a sense, it makes it legal for stalkers to harass their victims twice a year. It won’t be just twice a year; it’ll be countless times, because they’re not going to ring up and go, “OK, it’s happening.”

Many, many of these reports and concerns go unreported. They go untold, and much of that is simply because you get tired of telling the same story and nobody believes you, or not enough people, and nobody moves to do something about it for you. That’s just another point for us in this discussion. [Bell rung] Damn that goes so quickly!

The New Zealand Women’s Refuge has recorded the prevalence of stalking amongst their clients, many of our whānau—nearly 75 percent were stalked by their partners—and a study conducted in 2004, which is only 20 years ago, found that stalking was a precursor to physical violence.

With a little time left, I just want to say we support the bill, we look forward to going to select committee, and I look forward to having much, much more to say about it. Kia ora tātou.

Thank you, Madam Speaker—and welcome, Mr Speaker. Look, I won’t spend a lot of time. Colleagues across the House have covered off the substantive parts of the bill and have, essentially, outlined what’s great about this House, and that is that the tone of the place can be one which is of unanimous support for a very important issue. You only had to listen to Minister Karen Chhour’s speech to recognise how deeply many people feel about this issue.

I also acknowledge that the tone of the House, in about 20 minutes, may well change. I’d just like to reflect on that and hope that, as this particular bill goes through the House and comes to the Justice Committee, we will have a very thorough and robust discussion about it, that we can all think about how we’ve come together on a particular issue where we’re all trying to make an issue better for many people in this country.

With that, I will commend the bill to the House, and I look forward to its passage through the Justice Committee in due course.

Kia ora, Mr Speaker. This is a tough topic, and it’s great that it appears that across the House we have some consensus that this is a matter which we need to progress and look at. I just do want to recognise the work that Ginny Andersen did in this space. The Minister of Justice said that this was not a priority until Ginny Andersen said, “Well, it’s my priority.” The Minister of Justice has responded to that by putting this bill in, and it just goes to show that, you know, Opposition might be tough, but we can have a really positive effect. That’s great.

I do want to also recognise a difficult fact, and that is that this bill is here in part because of some really tragic circumstances that the media has portrayed. I want to recognise Farzana Yaqubi, the young woman who was murdered in Auckland after a series of stalking incidents, which, it’s recognised, the police didn’t respond too well to and weren’t appropriately recognised, and that this bill will address, will give powers and recognise the behaviours that led to that tragedy. There’ll be powers there to address that and make sure it doesn’t happen again, as it should.

As this goes to select committee, the job of select committee is to draw a line. The criminal law does draw lines, and this is actually quite challenging, because the lines are in some sense arbitrary in something like this, between behaviours which are nasty but not illegal and not criminal, and behaviours which cross that line and become criminal. I hope that people will submit on this, because that is a really tough question which requires input from our communities as to what behaviours we consider are so reprehensible that they can lead to a criminal offence which could result in five years in prison. On the other hand, we’re not always kind to each other. We should strive to be, but we’re not, and sometimes we’ve got to let that go. That’s a really important question.

The other question that’s going to crop up here, and it’s one that I think the select committee should turn its mind to, is essentially one of intentionality. As drafted, as I read it, the question is what the offender—the stalker, if you like—intends, that the behaviours must be intended to have kind of an intimidatory effect. Now, I’m not sure if that’s actually the right test. I don’t know, but I want to investigate whether we should flip that around and say, well, shouldn’t we be asking the question “Is the person who is the subject of that behaviour actually intimidated, and is the behaviour one which would be reasonably expected to be intimidating, invasive, and concerning?” That may be the better test.

Now, for criminal law, that’s quite hard, right? In most circumstances, you require—the concept of mens rea in criminal law is you intend to cause the harm. There may be behaviours which for whatever reason the perpetrator might think are permissible and shouldn’t cause that kind of degree of anxiety, harm, and trauma, but they do, and that’s quite challenging for the law to address.

This won’t be an easy bill for the select committee, and we need to listen carefully and strike that balance between good process and clear rules and really recognising the real harm that it causes to victims. It’s a challenge, and I won’t say I’m looking forward to it, but I’m prepared for it. Kia ora.

I want to join others across the House in supporting this first reading of the Crimes Legislation (Stalking and Harassment) Amendment Bill, and just reflect on Farzana Yaqubi, a beautiful Auckland University of Technology law student aged 21 who was brutally murdered on Royal Road, Massey, right in the heart of the Upper Harbour electorate, on 19 December 2022. Every time I drive down the North-Western Motorway, I see her parents’ house and I think of them every time. They will be having a very sad time again, marking her second anniversary next Thursday.

As has been canvassed, her ex-boyfriend brutally murdered her in daylight and was jailed for 17 years. The Independent Police Conduct Authority report that was released this year was damning, and it was damning of the fact that the police had inadequate risk assessment and didn’t have the right tools to deal with the repeated stalking complaints that Farzana had made right up until about two weeks before her premature death. I’m looking forward to working through this bill, hearing submissions, and I commend it to the House. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Before I start, I’d like to take a moment to acknowledge colleagues who have provided some commentary of personal experience, who have taken the opportunity to thank people who have done huge amounts of work in this area, or have taken the opportunity to commemorate and remember and share memories of people who have suffered through this insidious act of violence, which we are terming as “stalking and harassment”, and all of the pervasive ways in which it affects people in our society. I acknowledge the fact we find ourselves here tonight at this hour of night, looking toward a process which can do something positive and set a new path and a new direction for people that experience these things.

Stalking, as we’ve heard, can end in really tragic circumstances, but before that, as tragic as that is, it can do things that simply erode people’s freedoms and limit their social, educational, and professional opportunities. For a lot of people involved in those situations, and many of us will know of people or have been in those situations, the gaslighting, the uncertainty, and the stripping of one’s individual ability to be able to tell the difference between whether what’s happening is real or not or is serious or not is one of the most cruel things I think you can do to someone. That significant psychological harm shouldn’t be overlooked as well.

We know that evidence shows that 75 percent of Women’s Refuge clients experience stalking pre-separation, and 65 percent of those Women’s Refuge clients also experience stalking post-separation. I think that that’s a statistic or a piece of information that really homes in on the fact that even people who take steps to do something to improve their situation can find themselves in no less of a perilous situation. Therefore, it’s only right that this House provides them with some tools and with some legislative framework and some legislative means to protect themselves.

The Labour Party welcomes the introduction of this bill, and we do regard it as a long-awaited step towards addressing something that’s incredibly, incredibly important. Unlike New Zealand, most comparable jurisdictions, including the UK, including Australia and the US, do have specific stalking offences, which obviously enables them to enact effective prosecutions and protections, and that is something that we should do also.

I do want to acknowledge, though—and I think it is fair to acknowledge it—that it is only now, after sustained public pressure and clear evidence from those victim advocates that my colleagues have highlighted earlier on in this debate, that the Government has chosen to advance this bill. Whilst we are pleased that they have, and whilst we support the bill and we welcome this step, we do want to acknowledge that it would have been good if it had been prioritised. It is a choice to prioritise, and it would have been good if it had been prioritised and not simply discarded as something that would have been a “nice-to-have” if it weren’t for such a busy programme earlier on in the year.

There have been several people who have commented since it was known that this bill was going to be introduced. As my colleague the Hon Dr Duncan Webb has said, it won’t be a straightforward process; it’ll be a really technical process. Because it will involve some subjective interpretations, it will involve some discussion and some decision making around drawing lines, and around making decisions and what constitutes behaviours that will be caught up in this process.

I do, along with my colleagues, really encourage people to make those submissions—those people with lived experience, those people with expertise—because that can only enhance the process and make for a good bill in the end. Thank you.

I too rise in support of the Crimes Legislation (Stalking and Harassment) Amendment Bill at its first reading, and I would like to start by acknowledging the Hon Ginny Andersen for the effort that she made in placing this subject in the members’ ballot. Unbeknownst to many people, I too was working on a bill around the same time, and I’m glad of the fact that our justice Minister has made it a priority before the end of the year, in reverence for the memory of Farzana Yaqubi and for all those thousands of people that signed that petition. Thank you—thank you to you all.

I’d like to say, if I may, in the language of the Middle East: Farzana Yaqubi, Allah yerhamik, Allah yerhim nafsik al bari’, which means: may God rest your soul, your innocent, pure soul. We failed you by not having a law in respect of stalking in place, but may your memory live on, and we will do this for you and for many others. Ya Farzana, Allah yerhamik.

Motion agreed to.

Bill read a first time.

The question is, That the Crimes Legislation (Stalking and Harassment) Amendment Bill be considered by the Justice Committee.

Motion agreed to.

Bill referred to the Justice Committee.