Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Police) Link to this
I move, That the Policing (Constable's Oaths Validation) Amendment Bill be now read a second time. I take the opportunity to thank the parties represented in Parliament for their support of this legislation. The Policing (Constable's Oaths Validation) Amendment Bill is validating legislation. It will deem oaths of office taken by police employees between 1 October 2008 and 12 October 2009 to have been administered as though the persons administering those oaths had been authorised by the Commissioner of Police. It is a straightforward amendment involving the insertion of one new section into the Policing Act 2008. It is to come into force the day after it receives the Royal assent.
The background to the bill is as follows. On 1 October 2008 the Policing Act came into force. Prior to this, the constable’s oath was taken before a justice or commissioned officer; in other words, an inspector or above. A justice or commissioned officer was not required to be specifically authorised to administer the constable’s oath. Section 22 of the Policing Act instituted a new procedure for administering that oath.
Under the new Act, the oath can be administered only by the commissioner or a person authorised by the commissioner. As well, the new Policing Act requires a person administering the constable’s oath to be satisfied that each police employee taking the oath has been adequately trained to exercise the powers of a constable and is capable of exercising the powers of a constable.
Between 1 October 2008 and 12 October 2009 the constable’s oath was administered to police employees graduating from the Royal New Zealand Police College by senior police employees based at the college. Persons who were able to administer the oath under the Policing Act 1958 assumed that that ability continued under section 22. Since 12 October 2009 one recruit wing has graduated from the Police College. The constables’ oaths were administered to that wing by persons authorised under section 22 of the Act—that is, the commissioner or a person authorised by the commissioner.
So police employees graduating from the college on and from 13 October 2009 have unquestionably had constabulary powers conferred upon them. However, uncertainty about conferral of those constabulary powers continues for those police employees who purportedly took the constable’s oath between 1 October 2008 and 13 October 2009. It is important that people have confidence that officials are properly invested with statutory powers, and taxpayers should not be obliged to meet the significant expenses that would be incurred if all exercise of statutory powers taken by the affected employees were subject to challenge.
The bill will deem the oaths taken by affected constables to have been administered as if the persons administering the oaths had been approved by the commissioner. It will remove any doubt about the validity of the actions of the affected police employees and thereby promote certainty and confidence in the acts carried out by them.
The bill is consistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. The bill does not retrospectively validate any actions that could be seen as inconsistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. The bill does not legitimise unlawful actions by the police in the event that a person’s rights have been infringed by any of the affected police employees. A claim under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act would still lie. I commend this bill to the House.
Hon ANNETTE KING (Deputy Leader—Labour) Link to this
I rise to support the Minister of Police in passing through all stages the Policing (Constable’s Oaths Validation) Amendment Bill 2009 today. The Minister has clearly set out the reasons for this bill, and I am pleased that members are supporting the Minister in ensuring that it passes smoothly through the House.
The Policing Act 2008 replaced 50-year-old legislation. It was legislation that went through a very long process. There was a 2-year process of consultation, consensus, agreement, and, finally, the passage of the bill. A positioning paper put out for consultation was followed up with something like eight scoping papers that addressed many parts of the old Police Act, then a consultation document, and, finally, a draft bill. Throughout that process there was close collaboration and work between all parties in the House, and I think it was one of those bills where there was buy-in by all parties to ensure that we got legislation for the police of New Zealand that had the broad support of this Parliament. As the former Minister of Police, that was really important to me.
At the time of the passage of the bill, I thanked the parties that had been involved and worked so constructively to ensure we had good legislation. We thought everything was right in the bill, but we now find that there could be a technical error in it. Therefore, we ought to correct it as quickly as possible. As the Minister pointed out, in the past at the swearing in of a new police officer the oath was taken before a justice or commissioned officer of police. The new Act changed that process. A new process was put in place, one that I think was definitely an oversight, so the police carried on with the old requirements under the old Act. This legislation will ensure that it will validate any of those oaths that were taken in the period that the Minister has already set out.
I say to the Minister that we support her in this measure. We do not wish to delay it longer than is necessary, and I hope that the House can see the bill passed speedily. It was suggested to me that there could be some people out there who would be cheering if they thought their arrest for a particular issue during the stated period now no longer stands. We can assure them that that is not the case. The officers who were sworn in under the amended regime will be just as well sworn in after the passage of this bill. I commend this bill to the House.