Dialogue: Many want 'stains' of conviction wiped

Making the punishment fit the crime at the time is the aim of the Clean Slate Bill, writes its promoter, NANDOR TANCZOS*.

I've been hearing from a lot of criminals lately.

Like the 58-year-old Aucklander who got caught in a pub fight 40 years ago when he had been trying to stop it from the sidelines.

He landed himself a £10 fine and despite his "excellent white-collar job," he still sees his conviction as a stain on his good character.

Then there is the Auckland pilot who was caught shoplifting at the age of 17. He was convicted and discharged but his police record still hurts.

"It hasn't been easy with this conviction over my head," he wrote. "I know what I did was wrong and I am sorry for that but I feel I have paid my debt to society.

"How long must I keep paying for it? One day I dream of flying internationally. Won't it be double jeopardy if I can't because of my conviction?"

Like many people with a minor conviction, he is unsure of exactly what he now can or can't do because of his record.

Along with many other people, they have written to me after hearing about my Clean Slate Bill to say that they strongly support it because it will spell the end of years of shame for them or people they know.

And there are hundreds of thousands of New Zealanders who are in this situation, particularly those who are Maori and poor.

The Clean Slate Bill effectively allows for minor convictions - those which received a sentence of less than six months in prison or a fine of less than $2000 - to be wiped from their records after seven years of no reoffending.

Many people have just assumed that something like this already existed.

I got a letter from a 29-year-old secondary school teacher who was convicted for drunk driving - on a motorscooter at the age of 16.

He only found out what the consequences were when he wanted to apply for a work visa for Canada recently and was told he didn't have a show.

Think of the upwards of a thousand New Zealanders who carry the burden of convictions from the 1981 Springbok tour.

However much we agree with what they did, however much we might think the Government of the day was wrong, they are still paying the price after all these years.

One of our top sportswomen, Erin Baker, is among those carrying convictions from the 1981 tour. When she wanted to visit the United States before she became famous, she was not allowed in.

Unsurprisingly, she says, her convictions are no longer a problem. But most of us do not have the advantage of being a world-famous athlete.

I've also heard from John Whitty, the national director of the Prisoners Aid and Rehabilitation Society.

He estimates that a quarter of adult males have a criminal conviction.

Probably most fall into the category my bill covers.

"It's a hidden problem that goes unacknowledged," says Mr Whitty.

"Offending is most common in young people and we think it's unfair that as a person gets past the rebellious stage and the irresponsible age, they are burdened ... for the rest of their lives."

He says people with minor convictions not only suffer shame. They also suffer from guilt every time they think of not recording the fact.

"When you come to fill in a form, do you put that you had a conviction for shoplifting at 18?

"Or obstructing the police, which is a very common conviction for young people?

"Perhaps their friends get into trouble with the police in the street, and they step in [to offer advice]. They're quite likely to end up with a charge like that."

Having a conviction is a significant block to getting a job.

As Mr Whitty points out: "If you have two people going for a job and one has a conviction, the other one's likely to get it.

"And as poorer people and Maori are more likely to have convictions than richer people and Pakeha, [this] bill can be seen as a closing the gaps type of measure.

"It's going to help people whose offending may have been partly the result of the poverty of their upbringing.

"It will help them in their efforts to improve their circumstances."

The bill works by removing the obligation to declare information about "wiped" convictions and restricting who can have access to such information rather than by actually deleting the information from the record.

This ensures that the police are still able to bring information before a court when crimes of the same nature are involved, and allows a number of exceptions to be made.

For example, information on arson or attempted arson convictions would still be available when individuals are applying for firefighting work.

And any convictions must be declared when applying for certain other kinds of work - including working with children.

It is also important to note that the bill does not apply to any sexual offences.

There have been cases in the past which have attracted appallingly minor sentences - including fines for rape.

The bill is scheduled to come up for debate in Parliament today.

The Government has said it will support it going to a select committee, at which point we will have a chance to iron out the details.

But from the support I've had, it looks as if New Zealanders are convinced that the punishment should fit the crime, at the time.

* Nandor Tanczos is a Green Party MP.