Pillay Lynne: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Pillay Lynne: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:649;Page:17762] 
6.  
LYNNE PILLAY (Labour—Waitakere) 
 to the  
Minister of Justice 
: What reports has she received on the establishment of the Sentencing Council and the creation of sentencing guidelines? 
Hon ANNETTE KING (Minister of Justice) 
: 
 I have seen the Law Commission’s report that noted there were substantial inconsistencies throughout the country in the level of sentencing imposed on offenders for the same offence and that the work of the sentencing establishment unit in drafting guidelines has confirmed that conclusion. I have also seen a report that notes that National will abolish the Sentencing Council which indicates that rather than looking to improve the fairness of the system for both victims and offenders National is happy to leave in place a system that treats similar offenders in quite different ways depending upon the particular court and judge dealing with the case. That is not fair to victims of crime. 
Lynne Pillay 
: Has she seen any other reports relating to the Sentencing Council? 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: I have seen comments made by Simon Power of the National Party that National would get rid of this level of bureaucracy—the whole five non-judicial members of that council. No doubt that would be enough to pay for a tax cut of a fraction of a cent for all taxpayers. In fact the National Party’s policy would cut out the public from having any input into sentencing levels at all because one of the requirements of the Sentencing Council is to consult the public before any guidelines are brought to Parliament. I know that the National Party does not want the public to have a say in anything; things have to be done secretly behind closed doors. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: Why does she disagree with former Minister the Hon Phil Goff who said: “The principles and considerations spelled out in the Sentencing Act 2002 provide the guidelines to encourage consistency and transparency in sentencing’’ and there was no need for a Sentencing Council; and why does she not also agree with the National Party that spending nearly $6 million to second-guess what Parliament decides and what the people who vote for members of Parliament decide is a good thing? 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: I am aware the member made up at least half of that. The member is probably not aware— 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. If the member is saying that I am making things up she should explain which bit of Mr Goff’s 2002 comment is not correct. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: Madam Speaker— 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Please be seated. If we just let the Minister finish her answer we might be able to resolve the issue that Mr Brownlee wanted to be addressed. But does the Hon Phil Goff wish to add something? 
Hon Phil Goff 
: What the member supposedly quoted from cannot possibly be right. In 2002 there was no suggestion of a Sentencing Council so I could not have been commenting on it. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: The Minister clearly misunderstood what I said. I spoke about the Sentencing Act which is mentioned in Cabinet papers in 2005. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: That’s true. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: Now he agrees; he thinks it is a load of rubbish too. So why does the Minister not listen to Phil Goff and Simon Power and do something— 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Please be seated. My original instincts were right. If we just hear the answer to the question then that would be useful. 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: That member has just displayed that he does not know what the Sentencing Council is or what it is meant to do. He talked about the Sentencing Act; he talked about something that was not in place. I suggest that maybe he should go off and read the  
Law Journal UK 
 because he does not believe anything that happens in New Zealand. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: Too hard. 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: Of course it is too hard for him. But if he did read it he would find it says that what New Zealand is doing in terms of the sentencing guidelines and the Sentencing Council is the way ahead and is worth taking account of.