Bridges Simon: Sentencing (Offender Levy) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Bridges Simon: Sentencing (Offender Levy) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:658;Page:7054] 
SIMON BRIDGES (National—Tauranga) 
: 
 It is good to take a call on the worthy Sentencing (Offender Levy) Amendment Bill which is a plank in the Government’s justice programme. I start by agreeing with something that one of the Labour members said: we have to be careful not to raise unrealistic expectations around this bill. I quite agree; we should not say and I do not think anyone would say that this bill is going to save the world. But in my view it is certainly a good practical step towards rebalancing the justice system putting victims back closer to the centre of that system and helping in real and practical ways with the financial and emotional costs of crime. 
Crime is very expensive for victims; I will me give members a real example. The Tauranga District Court is the jury court for the Western and much of the Eastern Bay of Plenty. People have to come from as far afield as Whakatane Opotiki and Te Kaha for sentencing and the like following a conviction at a jury trial. They are coming a long way. People from Te Kaha are coming a good 2½ hours maybe slightly more so that is a 5 to 6-hour round trip. And they are not coming in a Lexus or a European car as some might who travel that distance; as victims of crime they are unfortunately more often than not from the bottom rather than the top of society. On top of having to worry about the effects of the crime the sentencing coming up perhaps a disputed facts hearing and the issues that they will have to confront at that hearing they are also worrying about the petrol costs and how they will pay to get there. This bill as I say is a practical step that gets around that. It will make sure that although victims will still have to worry about some things—human things that we will never be able to do away with—they will have help with their petrol costs and perhaps after sentencing with their counselling costs and so on. That is a very good thing indeed. 
Finally to put a human face on this I refer to one submission. I will not name the submitter but it was someone who came to the Justice and Electoral Committee and gave a heartfelt submission in relation to a family member who had been killed by the act of a career criminal a P addict on parole and on the witness protection programme. As I say her submission was heartfelt. She had experienced a system she said that favoured the offender and one that in her view had little regard for victims’ rights. Nothing could compensate for the death of her family member. Her loss was indescribable and although the wounds might heal eventually she said that the scars would run deep and would always be felt. She was in favour of this bill. In her conclusion she said she had a vision that one day victims of crime would be truly recognised and that regardless of their assets or income they would not be left financially disadvantaged by a crime that was forced upon them. She saw the $50 offender levy as a positive first step in achieving that vision. I respectfully agree entirely with her; I think this bill is a practical step to rebalancing the justice system and giving victims a better place in our society.