Ryall Tony: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Ryall Tony: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:643;Page:13281] 
5.  
Hon TONY RYALL (National—Bay of Plenty) 
 to the  
Minister of Justice 
: What reduction in remand numbers was projected from recent changes to bail laws “designed to assist the remand population by ensuring that the focus is on community safety when custodial remand decisions are made”? 
Hon ANNETTE KING (Minister of Justice) 
: 
 A modest reduction in the prison population over time has been projected—10 beds by September 2009 and 40 beds by 2011. 
Hon Tony Ryall 
: Why is community safety being sacrificed when an Auckland man facing three rape charges with even more rape charges likely to be laid has been bailed not once but twice under Labour’s new bail laws? 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: Bail decisions are made by judges. It is quite obvious from the numbers of prison beds that are being freed up by this very modest move that community safety is not being sacrificed. The member thought the answer was going be to a very large number; in fact it is a very small number because the changes to the bail law still have to take account of a very important range of factors and judges will make decisions on the evidence before them. 
Hon Tony Ryall 
: Why would the Government make it easier to get bail when this man faces multiple rape charges including driving his third victim to a cemetery where he allegedly raped her then demanded she change a flat tyre on his car before he raped her again; how can this man not be a real and significant risk to public safety? 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: Bail decisions are made by judges. They decide whether a person is a significant risk to the community. Members of Parliament do not direct judges as to whether they should give bail. I believe that judges make decisions based on the evidence they have before them and long may that happen—that Parliament does not direct them on individual cases. 
Hon Peter Dunne 
: Does the Minister have any information about forward projections for coming years of the number of remand prisoners; if so can she give the House any information about how those prisoners might be accommodated given the existing high pressure on prison resources and also the figures that she has quoted in the House this afternoon? 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: It is predicted that the growth in the number of remand prisoners will continue at quite a rapid rate. Obviously what we want to do is to ensure that those who should be remanded in prison are in prison and that those who can be on bail are appropriately remanded within the community. What the National Party is attempting to do is to say that it would put everybody in prison in which case we would not have bail laws. We have bail laws so that judges can make those decisions and so that people who are able to be in the community are remanded in the community. There is one fundamental rule here: people are still innocent until proven guilty. 
Hon Tony Ryall 
: Why should anyone who is released on bail under the Minister’s new laws think that there will be any consequences of breaching his or her bail when accused double murderer Chris Kahui has today been granted bail for the fourth time after breaching his bail conditions three times previously? 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: This is a very good example of a judge making a decision. The judge today— 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: This is your new law! 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: Well let me just quote what the judge said regarding the changes to the bail laws. The same judge who made the bail decision on Mr Kahuitoday said that it “does not seem to me to put the test any higher than was under the previous legislation but rather to emphasise the need for a proper inference to be drawn from proved facts as opposed to the Court engaging in speculation or guesswork about the possibility of a risk.” The same judge decided today that Mr Kahui would be granted bail. He said that the investigations had shown that the breaches were of a minor nature and the fact that Mr Kahui was in solitary confinement for his own safety for 23 hours a day was a relevant and powerful factor in favour of bail being granted. 
Hon Tony Ryall 
: So does she agree that the judge got it right in that case? 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: It is not for me or Mr Ryall to decide whether— 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I agree. That is not an appropriate question. 
Hon Peter Dunne 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I have been following this question with some interest. I draw to your attention both Standing Order 111 and Speaker’s ruling 28/6 which relate to matters that are sub judice. I would have thought that a line was close to being crossed here. Standing Order 111 states: “matters awaiting or under adjudication in any court of record may not be referred to … in any question … if it appears to the Speaker that there is a real and substantial danger of prejudice to the trial of the case.” That might be arguable in this particular instance but I think it might be helpful Madam Speaker if you were to give the House some guidance on the application of the sub judice law when it comes to questions of this type being pursued because they do occur from time to time and there are clear implications for the rights of defendants in these cases. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I think that that is an interesting idea from Mr Dunne but the reality is that this is a question about bail. Each case has related to matters of bail and in each case the issue around bail has been determined. There is no attempt on Mr Ryall’s part to make a comment about the substance of the crimes these people are accused of committing. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I understand your point. The Standing Orders and Speakers’ rulings I think do make it clear that members should not make reference to matters that are before the court. However members may discuss the law in general which was the point being made about bail. In this line of questioning however there was reference to one particular case that is in fact before the court so I ask members to please not cross that line. 
Hon Tony Ryall 
: Does the Minister support the law under which the judge made this decision? 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: Yes I do. I do support the law under which the judge’s decision was made for the simple reason— 
Hon Tony Ryall 
: That’s right; get it on the record. 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: —get it on the record yes—that obviously it is the Government’s Bail Act amendment law. But it is a law that is sensible and a range of factors must be taken into account. It means that 10 fewer people will be in prison than are there now so there will hardly be a big increase in the number on remand. 
Hon Tony Ryall 
: Those are Ministry of Justice figures. 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: I say to that member that I could go to any newspaper from the 1990s pull out stories of people who were given bail and say— 
Hon Members 
: And you did. 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: No I certainly did not; I do not think I had a spokesperson role in that. But Mr Ryall would today be saying that that law was too soft I presume.