SpeechDr ELIZABETH KEREKERE (Green): Kia ora. I stand on behalf of my colleague Golriz Ghahraman in support of the Three Strikes Legislation Repeal Bill. It repeals the Sentencing and Parole Reform Act 2010 that created what we know as the three-strikes law.The Greens strongly oppose three strikes on the basis that it leads to punitive rather than restorative justice and rehabilitation. We've been attempting to get this repealed for some time and we add our thanks to the Minister of Justice the Justice Committee and all of the submitters who took the time in this process.The impact of this straightforward repeal is that an offender will be subject to normal sentencing rules where the sentence is proportional to the crime committed—what I think the general public would expect of a justice system. We echo the disappointment though of many submitters that the bill states that anyone who received a harsher sentence because of this law will not be eligible for early release resentencing or any compensation because of the altering that is going to occur. We believe that people who have been made subject to a third strike should have their sentence reconsidered by a judge. Unfortunately the Supplementary Order Paper on this in Golriz Ghahraman's name was not ruled in scope of the bill.We agree with JustSpeak who wrote in their submission that three strikes focuses on punishment not justice". It is remarkable how three strikes directly breaches the separation of powers that Westminster systems like us would normally uphold: that while we as Parliament make the laws we leave it to the courts to interpret and apply them in individual cases—in other words to use their discretion based on their years of education knowledge and experience. A shout-out to all the lawyers in the House who have been in this position who know exactly how this works and how they have been constrained by this law. Because three strikes is rigid and fixed it has removed that discretion for all the people involved in this process—that's from the probation officers the mental health advisers cultural advisers and all manner of people who contribute to this to the defence and prosecution lawyers and then of course to the judges themselves. It ignores the circumstances of the offence the circumstance of the offender the victim's views the purpose of sentencing that goes into trying to keep the community safe and what accountability or deterrence might look like in a given case. It ignores what rehabilitation and successful reintegration of that person safely back into the community might look like. Most importantly three strikes has resulted in disproportionate and excessive sentences being handed down. In addition to the negative impacts eloquently outlined by the chair of the Justice Committee Ginny Andersen the Prison Education Project noted in its submission that "The arbitrary nature of the legislation prevents the court from taking into account factors such as age cultural background and mental or physical health issues. Meaning that members of vulnerable populations such as our youth mentally ill or Pasifika populations are more likely to be disproportionately affected".Three strikes originated in California in the early 1990s without any kind of academic or policy foundation. It is yet another example that transplanting something from the other side of the world does not usually work in this country and it often exacerbates the inequalities already faced by marginalised and vulnerable parts of our population. But before it was adopted here multiple issues had already arisen in America because of this legislation. Quoting again from the JustSpeak submission three-strikes legislation was identified as "an extreme example of populist pre-emption of criminal justice policy making". That was in 1996 14 years before the Government of the day thought "That sounds great. Let's bring it here."Since 2010 evidence has been collected in this country including by the Ministry of Justice that has reiterated that three strikes does not work. It does nothing to deter offending and exists mostly to perpetuate tough on crime rhetoric. Building on that research shows that prisons don't really work that well either. The Greens would support investigating alternatives to that through restorative processes and iwi- and Māori-led responses. In conclusion I quote my colleague Golriz Ghahraman: "We know that three strikes has disproportionately impacted Māori Pasifika and other communities of colour as well as those with mental health and addiction issues and brain injuries. Fixing the justice system doesn't stop at three strikes. Labour must now show courage in moving toward a system that addresses the causes of offending including mental health care addiction treatment housing and livable income support while introducing a new pathway away from prisons." Nō reira I commend this bill to the House."