Penk ChrisCHRIS PENK (National—Helensville): Thank you very much Mr Chair. I apologise if I didn't quite catch my name being said by you. Thank you sir for the opportunity to continue this discussion. My question was just to the Minister of Justice about the subject of remand versus other prisoners—versus sentenced prisoners—in the fact that the legislation before us including in Part 2 talks about those who have been received into a prison to serve a sentence of imprisonment for a term of less than three years and so forth. The significance of that is that a person who is merely a remand prisoner has not in the case of remand prisoners awaiting trial been determined to have committed any crime at all. So while I acknowledge that some of the issues that I've raised in practical terms relating to the difficulties of communication and the physical importation—if that's the right word—of election material some of those arguments or those questions do apply to a prisoner whether he or she is remand or otherwise in relation to the more fundamental question of whether it's appropriate for a prisoner to be able to vote I would submit—and be interested in the Minister's response—that it makes all the difference in the world to whether a person is a remand prisoner awaiting trial or a prisoner who has indeed been sentenced to serve a sentence of imprisonment.Of course the fundamental basis for that proposition is that the New Zealand law—and indeed the criminal law of other jurisdictions with which we like to compare ourselves favourably and from which our own system has been derived—CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): Sorry to interrupt the member but it's come time for me to leave the Chair for the dinner break. The committee will resume at 7.30 p.m.Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Ruth Dyson): Members when we rose for the dinner break we were considering Part 2. Chris Penk had the call and has three minutes six seconds remaining should he wish to take it.CHRIS PENK: Thank you Madam Chair. I don't know if I surprise and/or disappoint you but I do indeed wish to take at least some of the remaining three minutes and six seconds that have been allocated to me.I won't repeat all that I was saying before the dinner break obviously but just briefly by way of recap I was just drawing to the attention of the committee the distinction between a remand prisoner and a sentenced prisoner for the purpose of Part 2 and more particularly the discussion that we've ended up in as a committee about the implication of the legislation whereby we're saying that it might be that if a person who is in prison for less than three years is able to be on the electoral roll and thereby qualify to be a candidate for office—if I've understood that point correctly and I say openly that I'm not 100 percent confident that's the case. But I think I've understood correctly that that might be the case. The Minister responded somewhat reasonably—I think genuinely wishing to point out that potentially if that is indeed a problem there would be a problem also with the fact that a remand prisoner could also be a candidate for election. But I think it's worthwhile distinguishing between remand prisoners who are awaiting trial and therefore should be presumed innocent in the absence of a trial in which to establish their guilt or otherwise and of course remand prisoners who have been found guilty at trial but not yet sentenced.The case of a prisoner on remand is somewhat like Schrödinger's box. They're in a funny way potentially both guilty and not guilty except that the law of course determines someone to be not guilty until such time as they've proven otherwise. But the case of a prisoner who has been found guilty but not yet sentenced might in another distinction be sentenced to a period of greater than three years or a period of less than three years. So the fact that the law treats those differently from sentenced prisoners in this bill is quite correct. I think it's appropriate for example that new section 86A in clause 7 of what is currently the bill talks about prisoners who are serving a sentence of imprisonment for less than three years as opposed to those who are detained for a period of less than three years at the relevant time by virtue of them being on remand. So I just wanted to bring that distinction to the attention of the House. I don't know how clearly I've articulated it but no doubt the Minister understands it. I don't have a question so much as just seeking a response and acknowledgment from him for the sake of the record about that distinction that I think is worth highlighting in terms of the ability to become an elector and therefore to become a candidate in an election should such a person choose.