Hide Rodney: Sentencing and Parole Reform Bill — In Committee 
Hide Rodney: Sentencing and Parole Reform Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:663;Page:10936] 
Hon RODNEY HIDE (Minister of Local Government) 
: 
 This is a very important debate and the Sentencing and Parole Reform Bill is a very serious bill about parole. Some of the points that the Opposition raised I can agree with; we have a problem in New Zealand and we need to think about the causes of crime and the sorts of lives that young people are leading that destine them to a tragic life of crime. We will not deal with that problem by just ever-tougher sentencing. I think we all acknowledge that. But I think members also acknowledge that when people do commit a violent crime they need to be punished for that crime. Again I think there is agreement across the House about that. 
We also know that there has been ongoing and grave concern among the public—and it is easy to understand why—about some very nasty criminals who commit a heinous crime against people are released commit another heinous crime against a totally innocent person are put away come out then commit another heinous crime. The victims and their families are asking why those people keep being let loose on law-abiding New Zealanders. On this side of the House—in the ACT Party and the National Party—we actually agree with them and we say: “Quite.” 
We also want to send a message to criminal offenders that repeat criminal offending will not be tolerated. That is the whole point of warning first offenders that they are on their first strike. Telling them that they are on their first strike sends a powerful message because what are they going to do? They will go away to serve their time they will be eligible for parole and they will be thinking about it. Are they going to come out commit a crime again and get a second strike? Well if they are vaguely rational I do not think they will want a second strike because when they get a second strike there will be no parole. And if they get a second strike they are in danger of getting a third strike. Members should understand that this is not about the young guy who absentmindedly steals a candy bar; this is about people who commit violent crimes against other people. And it is not the first time; it is the second time and the third time. 
What this side of the House is saying is let us send a message. Offenders will be told that they are on their first strike and they will be given a warning. Does it not make sense that young people then will think not to offend again because the punishment will escalate? There are sad people— 
Hon Lianne Dalziel 
: You believe this? 
Hon RODNEY HIDE 
: Well Lianne Dalziel does not believe this but I can understand that because I have got to know Lianne Dalziel and her attitude to justice. And while I admire her attitude to justice in many respects I have to say that Lianne Dalziel is out to lunch—that is all I can say. Listening to her contribution shocked me. I wonder where she has been living to understand the criminal— 
Hon Paula Bennett 
: Christchurch! 
Hon RODNEY HIDE 
: Christchurch! The second thing is that if people commit a second offence they will get a second strike and no parole because as the Minister of Corrections pointed out parole is not a right. It is not a right. People who commit a third offence should be locked up and should be put away because they are a menace to society. Lianne Dalziel knows that some of the people who are locked up now are not going to come out and we seem to be coping. 
The No. 1 responsibility of Parliament and of any Government is to keep the people safe and that is why this side of the House is supporting this legislation. I am sorry that someone of the stature of Lianne Dalziel has come to this House to oppose this bill and has quoted spurious arguments from California and odd statements about “implicit assumptions”. What does an implicit assumption prove? It simply proves that it is an implicit assumption. It is nothing to do with the facts and nothing to do with logic.