Brown SimeonSIMEON BROWN (National—Pakuranga): Thank you Madam Speaker. This has to be the wokest on crime Government that we have ever seen in passing legislation like this repealing a piece of legislation which puts victims at the heart of our criminal justice system and sending a very clear message that they will be putting criminals at the heart of our criminal justice system. This is a dangerous piece of legislation and will leave our communities less safe and New Zealanders less safe under this Government.I am incredibly concerned by what this Government is doing. They're repealing a piece of legislation which has a very clear principle: if you commit a serious violent offence in New Zealand you will suffer the consequences of that decision; if you do one of the crimes listed in this piece of legislation you will do the time in prison. This bill goes against that principle which sends a very clear message to criminals and those who commit serious crimes that this Government is on their side and not on the side of the people who are the victims. We've heard members talk about the crime rate and those who commit crimes and the disproportionate number of Māori in our prisons. But what about the disproportionate number of Māori who are victims of crime? I haven't heard one member on the other side say anything about those victims in these situations. I want to read out some of the list of offences which are qualifying offences under the three strikes legislation. This is not stealing a Mars bar from the dairy. These are incredibly serious crimes: sexual violation attempted sexual violation sexual connection with consent induced by threat sexual connection with dependent family member under 18 years of age sexual connection with a child attempted sexual connection with a child indecent act on a child sexual connection with a young person indecent assault attempted exploitative sexual connection with a person with significant impairment murder attempted murder conspiracy to murder manslaughter wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm wounding with intent to injure injuring with intent to cause grievous bodily harm using a firearm against law enforcement officer—using a firearm against our police officers and they're going to stand on the side of the law which says we don't think that should be covered by the three strikes legislation—aggravated robbery kidnapping. They're going to be standing on the side of kidnappers rather than on the side of victims. I find it absolutely abhorrent that this Government is repealing a piece of legislation which protects the victims of crime. And what about this one: infecting with disease? At a time of COVID-19 they're saying well actually we're going to put that down a line. Also commissioning of crime with firearm aggravated injury aggravated wounding discharging firearm or doing dangerous act with intent to do grievous bodily harm. That is only some of this list of very serious violent offences which are covered by this piece of legislation. And as I said the important principle is: if you commit a serious violent offence in New Zealand you should suffer the consequences of that and if you do it a second time there'll be more consequences and if you do it a third time you will have to serve the full sentence in prison. That is about public safety. I want to read out something about one of these third strike offences. Shane Pierre Harrison: previous convictions 80—80 previous convictions including manslaughter wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm torture multiple assaults and firearm offences indecent assault against a police officer murder and reckless discharge of a firearm. Those are the offences committed by someone who was never going to be rehabilitated and the evidence is very clear. If someone and this is the evidence from Corrections is on a second or third offence there is an 85 percent chance of that person recommitting crime again in New Zealand—an 85 percent chance of another victim of an incredibly serious crime being committed. That's why this important piece of legislation has a very simple principle: if you commit a serious violent offence in New Zealand you will suffer the consequences of that decision. What I'd like to also touch on is the fact that this piece of legislation actually works. It's been in place now for over 10 years. And the reality is whilst there have been 13349 first strike offences there have only been 640 second strike offences and even fewer there have only been 21 third strike offences. That evidence points to the fact that it works. It has a deterrent effect on those who commit these serious crimes but it also importantly protects the public by locking them up behind bars and keeping New Zealanders safe so there are not more victims of crime being put through the injustice of the criminal acts that these people perpetrate. The next point I'd like to talk about is the fact that this Government didn't even talk to one single victim of crime before bringing this legislation to Parliament. They didn't even talk to one single victim of crime. I find that absolutely abhorrent. The Minister of Justice couldn't even get on the phone and talk to any victims association or victims organisation or a victim of crime before actually putting this legislation to Parliament. That is something which I think sends a very clear message about the priorities of this Government. It's criminals first and it's victims—well they're an afterthought. Maybe they can make a submission to the select committee; we might listen but then we eventually ignore them through that process. That is an absolute shame. The next point I want to make is that the Government has not ruled out this legislation being retrospective—yes the letter of the law in front of us it's not retrospective. It means that the bill currently as it stands—it means that some of these people who have had third strike offences can go and apply to have themselves resentenced. But the Minister of Justice has made it clear in his press conference last week I'm open to the submissions which come through the select committee." They are leaving the door open to this potentially being retrospective and that undermines the principle that if you commit a crime you suffer the consequences of the law as it stands at the time you commit the crime. Well they should be keeping that door firmly shut rather than having it just a little bit open to allow the select committee to potentially make some changes and then bring something very different back to this House. I want the Minister of Justice to completely rule that part out. The next point is judicial interference. The Government is saying the judges want this. Well the judges should be putting in place that law as it stands. They shouldn't be telling Parliament what the law should be when it comes to sentencing. Parliament sets the sentencing laws in New Zealand. Parliament sets the sentencing policy for the judiciary. The judiciary's job is to apply that law not to try and get around it. This is incredibly concerning. When I read the regulatory impact statement I learnt that there are judges that are holding back on sentencing some people in expectation of this law coming into effect. I find it absolutely outrageous that there are judges who are holding back on sentencing because they're waiting for this piece of legislation. This Government has sent a very clear message throughout the criminal justice system: we want to see the prison population drop. They've sent their message very clearly and it is being put into effect throughout the criminal justice system. I find that incredibly incredibly worrying. But I would like to make one point one last point. The Government is not repealing one part of the three strikes legislation which was passed and that was the part which said that a judge could impose a life sentence in a case where there was extreme circumstances—and that's only ever been used once and we know who that person is the Christchurch killer who has been put on a life sentence under that. They voted against that. They voted against that part of the legislation coming into Parliament but they're not repealing it. And I say "Good on you for not repealing it." because actually sometimes you need to have very tough penalties and sometimes as we've seen that has worked and that is important. So as I started this Government is the wokest on crime Government I've ever seen. They're soft on crime. And this piece of legislation puts victims of crime behind the criminals. The criminals are being put first and the victims last—they're an afterthought. That's unacceptable. We will oppose it and we will reinstate this legislation when we get back into Government."