Facism arrives in New Zealand

Provisions for secret courts in case that concern "national security" inserted secretly into legislation without public consultation. The Law Society is worried and we should be very afraid.

The Attorney Gneral (also minister in charge of the GCSB), Chris Findlayson said this was in an "old version"of the Bill; the Law Society says their concerns remain.

In the meantime the legislation passed last night with the help of the usual customers - but also with the help of the Maori Party who have shown themselves as complete traitors to their constituency.

Meanwhile the public remains still largely in the dark.

“All New Zealanders should be very worried” - Law Society

NZ Lawyer,

26 August, 2015

Last minute changes to new laws initially drafted in response to the Pike River Mine tragedy could impact constitutional rights, the New Zealand Law Society says.

After three days of intense debate, the Health and Safety Bill could see its third and final reading as soon as tomorrow.

The bill is a 273-page omnibus one which will overhaul New Zealand’s workplace health and safety system, replacing the Health and Safety in Employment Act 1992 and the Machinery Act 1950.

But the Law Society has written to Workplace Relations and Safety Minister Michael Woodhouse, expressing concern around the last-minute insertion to the bill of provisions for a closed material procedure for court proceedings where national security is involved, saying the provisions should not have been inserted at this late stage of the legislative process.

The provisions will allow a person to be tried and convicted of a criminal offence without seeing all the information relied on by the Crown and without the right to be present - or to have their representative present - during all the proceedings.

This is inconsistent with the fundamental right to a fair trial, the Law Society said in a release yesterday.

Law Society president Chris Moore recommended the removal of the provisions from the Bill, to await the outcome of an inquiry the Law Commission is carrying out on National Security Information in Proceedings.

“The Law Commission has already identified significant issues about the matters covered by the provisions which have been inserted in the Bill, and it does not appear that these have been taken into account.”

The processes inserted by Schedule 2A directly impact on very significant constitutional rights, he said.

“Because Schedule 2A was not in the Bill when introduced, it has not been subject to the Bill of Rights vetting process and will miss public consultation and input.”

Mr Moore felt that the Government’s advisers believed there would be relatively few circumstances where secure handling of classified information would be needed as part of any health and safety investigation or legal proceedings where national security is involved.

“However, Schedule 2A has a very wide definition of ‘classified security information’. The Law Commission – which, it is important to stress, has been actively researching this very matter – has identified some major human rights issues in this matter.”

The Law Society has also advised the Minister that Schedule 2A attempts to remove the power of the courts to review a determination that certain information is ‘classified security information’.

“New Zealanders should be very worried when the powers of our courts to review any decision made by civil servants are curtailed, as could happen here.”

The Law Society said that if the provisions are to be retained in the legislation, they should be more narrowly cast “at a minimum” and it strongly urges that the outcome of the Law Commission review be awaited.

The Bill has attracted some controversy; with opposition MPs angered by the Government’s decision to dairy, beef and sheep farms as low risk, while classifying worm farms as high risk. That has since been changed.

Law Society still concerned about 'secret courts'

Controversial health and safety legislation, which does does not classify farms as high risk, has passed in Parliament.

Marty Melville

Attorney-General Chris Finlayson says the Law Society was wrong and were commenting on an old version of the bill.

Stuff,

28 August, 2015

A row over secret courts rumbles on - with the Law Society refusing to back down on fears over new health and safety laws.

The lawyers' body raised concerns over a last-minute change which could see someone tried and convicted without seeing all the evidence, or being present during all proceedings.

Attorney-General Chris Finlayson fired back, saying the Law Society was wrong and was commenting on an old version of the bill.

*New health and safety laws contain 'secret courts' provision*Minister Chris Finlayson says he is not imposing 'secret courts'

The late additions introduce "closed material" procedures for dealing with top-secret material in court. It also allows the directors of spy agencies to declare parts of the legislation do not apply to their staff, to protect national security.

Finlayson, who is also security services minister, says defendants will always have access to evidence being used to prosecute them and he is not expanding the use of controversial secret courts.

But questions remain about provisions which allow a court to order a defendant or lawyer be excluded from proceedings, and allow the appointment of a special advocate with security clearance to view evidence on their behalf.

Now Law Society president Chris Moore has reviewed the new changes - and he says many of his organisation's original fears stand.

"The impact of these is unclear in relation to the right to a fair trial, and the other concerns we raised in our letter remain. We feel it is important to release our letter in the public interest," he said.

Moore said the Society was unaware of the initial changes - made on August 19 - when its original letter, dated August 21, was sent to Workplace Relations and Safety Minister Michael Woodhouse. "As a result our letter was written without reference to the changes," he said.

But he's now sent a new letter to Woodhouse outlining "significant concerns" both about the provisions and their last-minute insertion into law without public consultation. There has also been no vetting to ensure the changes don't breach human rights legislation, he said.

"The absence of public consultation is undesirable, particularly where the provisions inserted - as here - directly affect very significant constitutional matters such as the fundamental right to a fair trial and open justice."

He says the Government is yet to explain why the changes were made at such a late stage. Moore also says the provisions are still inconsistent with the right to a fair trial.

And he points out that the definition of "classified security information" in the bill is "very broad."

The Society recommends the new provisions be scrapped until the Law Commission completes a pending review on how classified evidence is dealt with the courts.

Labour's David Parker is also concerned about amendments, saying they are "a nonsense" and "hard to fathom."

Passed with the votes of the Maori Party. Note who the traitors are.

Health and safety reform bill passes, amid division over worker representation

Controversial health and safety legislation, which does does not classify farms as high risk, has passed in Parliament.

Stuff,

28 August, 2015

The Government claims the changes will address New Zealand's workplace safety standards, while Labour claims a watering down of the legislation will lead to additional deaths.

Five pieces of legislation which have been debated as the Health and Safety Reform Bill, completed its third and final reading in Parliament this afternoon.

The legislation passed by 63 votes to 59, with National, the Maori Party, ACT and UnitedFuture supporting the legislation, while Labour, the Green Party and NZ First opposed it.

Government has created a farce with its work and safety legislation

In the early stages of the bill, prompted following a Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Pike River Mine Tragedy, there was widespread support across Parliament.

However changes following the select committee process, and changes brought in as a result of an internal debate within National, broke the consensus.

The major dividing issue was around requirements for health and safety representatives in small businesses, with fewer than 20 employees.

Changes announced in August meant small businesses in industries not defined as "high risk" would not have a requirement to offer health and safety representation where requested.

Although agriculture is responsible for a large proportion of workplace deaths and serious injuries, dairy farming and sheep and cattle farming both escape being defined as high risk. Initially at least worm farming and minigolf were defined as high risk, while explosive laying was not.

Workplace Relations and Safety Minister Michael Woodhouse said the legislation marked a "major step in addressing New Zealand's unacceptable workplace death and injury toll", and the first significant reform in 20 years.

"It delivers a system that strikes the right balance between safe workplaces for workers and unnecessary red tape on businesses," Woodhouse said in a statement.

"Under the new law, the duty for all businesses, regardless of size and risk level, to have effective worker engagement and participation practices has been strengthened. However there will be some flexibility in how a business can choose to do this, to suit their size and need."

But Labour's Iain Lees-Galloway said stronger legislation would have saved more lives.

"Deaths that could have been prevented by a more robust piece of legislation could well occur because of weakening of the legislation," Lees-Galloway said.

"Health and safety representation is one of the most effective ways to improve health and safety in the workplace" and the Royal Commission into the Pike River Tragedy had recommended that representation should be required where employees requested it, Lees-Galloway said.

Labour claimed that the figures which defined what was high risk were set at a level to deliberately exclude farming. Lees-Galloway said that another five serious injuries in dairy farming would have seen it cross the 25 serious injuries per 1000 workers which defined a 'high risk' industry.

"I think this is a direct result of a revolt within the National Party caucus who have been deeply divided over this for some time."

The Council of Trade Unions (CTU) said the bill was a "failed opportunity" which would add to the unnecessary deaths in New Zealand workplaces.

"When the Bill was introduced, it had the support of all political parties, workers and business," CTU general counsel Jeff Sissons said.

"It was a foundation to rebuild New Zealand's broken health and safety system. Sadly, the Government lost its nerve in select committee and the bill came back bearing dozens of cuts and compromises to appease National's backers. The law will be less effective and more workers will die and be hurt as a result."