O'Rourke Denis: Prisoners’ and Victims’ Claims (2012 Expiry and Application Dates) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
O'Rourke Denis: Prisoners’ and Victims’ Claims (2012 Expiry and Application Dates) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Sitting date: 02 May 2012. Volume:679;Page:1898. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
DENIS O’ROURKE (NZ First) 
: 
 I will be taking only a very brief call on the Prisoners’ and Victims’ Claims (2012 Expiry and Application Dates) Amendment Bill on behalf of New Zealand First. I note that the restrictions on the awarding of compensation expire on 1 July 2012 and that this bill simply defers that expiry date to 30 June 2013. To that extent New Zealand First will have no objection to the passage of this bill and will support it proceeding. Indeed as Lianne Dalziel said we really have very little choice about the matter at this stage in the circumstances.  
So New Zealand First will await with interest the substantive legislation to be brought forward by the Government which it says will make the existing victims’ claims process permanent. Of course the devil will be in the detail and we will look at the substantive legislation in detail when it comes through. I do wonder as a new member why there has been such a significant delay by the Government in carrying out this review. Is it because the Government is not really so interested in it or is it just a low priority for the Government? However I have listened to the speeches by the Government members which indicate the opposite and I hope that is the case.  
New Zealand First will be happy to await the review and the new legislation and to debate it then as though it was a completely new proposal. We will not be affected by the legislation that will expire or by all the arguments that were made for and against that legislation. Consequently New Zealand First reserves it position on the substantive bill when it comes through and we will be happy to consider the Government’s position.  
New Zealand First is not soft on crime and we will make sure that that is the case in the way that we look at this legislation. At the same time I personally have some sympathy for the Green position. I too would like to investigate the possible alternatives to imprisonment for some of the people—but not the more serious criminals—we have in prison at the present time. I do think that in the 21st century we ought to have a greater menu of sentences for people who commit crime and hopefully those sentences are much more oriented towards rehabilitation and the avoidance of more crime in the future.  
Like the Green Party New Zealand First will not be supporting any grandstanding on this issue. We hope that we will not hear charges as to who is soft on crime and who is strong on crime. That kind of mindless nonsense needs to be left in the past. As I said this is the 21st century and being soft or strong on crime is not the issue. The issue is about reducing crime and doing that requires an approach much more advanced and much more sophisticated than just throwing more and more people in prison and making provisions that are inappropriate.  
So New Zealand First will want to make sure that this substantive legislation when it comes through is appropriate in restricting claims by prisoners because there is a case for restricting that. On the other hand prisoners can also be victims and their rights must also be protected. So there is a balance to be had there. That is I think where the debate should be centred and that is the way New Zealand First will be looking at it.  
What I do not want to hear is what I have just heard from the Opposition benches which is some mindless idiotic comment which will make no positive contribution to the debate whatsoever. So we will listen to good arguments and not those— 
Hon Chester Borrows 
: It’s not the Opposition here. 
DENIS O’ROURKE 
: —from the Government then. We will not listen to arguments from those people who are putting that sort of idea forward. That will not sway us and I suggest will not sway the members of the public either.  
We will be taking an objective approach to this. We will listen to both sides and we will look for that balance which I spoke of in the substantive legislation. For the time being we will support this bill which simply defers the date to 2013.