SpeechDAN BIDOIS (National—Northcote): It's a pleasure to rise and take a call on the second reading of the Electoral (Registration of Sentenced Prisoners) Amendment Bill. I've had the privilege of sitting on the Justice Committee for this bill in the middle of lockdown and I must say I found myself often at times listening to submissions wondering why we're here at this time in the middle of lockdown when I've got constituents messaging me about losing their jobs and their businesses closing and here we are talking about the right to vote for prisoners. I think that says a lot about the priorities of this Government. National has had a longstanding opposition to this law and we heard that from a select committee submission. I can't remember the name but he gave a really good long-term view of the issue with prisoners' voting rights over the course of the last few decades and yes we have had some longstanding opposition to this topic. To rationalise it—and the member that just spoke Chlöe Swarbrick wanted to see what the rationalisation was for National's position—it's pretty simple. If you do a crime you should do the time that is associated with it and that time means that you should have certain rights and obligations removed from your livelihood: the right to free movement the right to association and the right to vote. I listened to that member's speech and I heard not once recognition of the victims of those that have been impacted by those prisoners that are serving in our prisons today. We heard from submissions of those victims—people who have suffered extreme cases of sexual violence—and they were disgusted that we were discussing a law that was giving these people more rights at a time where those victims are still hurting today. I remember vividly in lockdown listening to a lady who had suffered extreme sexual violence. It was decades ago and she's still suffering the consequences of that prisoner's actions. So yes this side of the House does rationalise that in the case of people committing crimes we should take away certain rights and obligations that free members of society should have and they should do the time associated with that. Now not only did we have with the substance of this bill but we also had an issue with the process. As this House will be aware we had a shortened select committee process for this bill in the middle of lockdown when most of my community in Northcote were worried about other things to do with their livelihoods to do with jobs and to do with incomes. It was not acceptable for there to be a shortened select committee process for this law. But don't take my word for it; take the word of the submitters many of whom were also acknowledging the fact that this was a shortened select committee process and were not happy with the fact that that was the case. We heard from people like former prisoners. We quizzed them and we said Well are you happy?"—are the submitters happy that this is a shortened select committee process in the middle of lockdown—and they said no. So here we are discussing a law that has had undue process by the democratic process in this House and select committee submitters said that. So what else can we talk about today? Well I've heard a lot about the impact on Māori. We had submissions—quite well-written submissions—about the disproportionate impact that this has on Māori. I acknowledge the disproportionate amount of Māori in our prisons. Several of my extended whānau have served in prison. But this law is not the solution that's needed to that challenge. Let me give by way of example other alternatives that already exist today that could be considered as a way to remedy that and that is around skills training and education. We already in our prisons have a deficit of skills of our prisoners. That is why our prisons offer things like release to work or skills training to give these—SPEAKER: Order! I think we're getting a bit of a general treatise about prison reform and I'd now like the member to come back to this bill. I'll say at the same time that the repetition that I've been hearing from the different speeches has become tedious. DAN BIDOIS: Thank you Mr Speaker. So what I've been saying is that with what already exists under the law can we work on educating prisoners on the importance of voting because that is what it's going to take for prisoners to come out and integrate into our society. We already do it with other programmes relating to skills so why don't we do it with this? So that is what I mean Mr Speaker and that was raised by one of the submitters in the select committee. National opposes this bill. We oppose it because we believe that if you do the crime you should do the time and there's this sense of not acknowledging that victims are also a part of this. Where was the victim's voice in the design and presentation of this law that we are debating today? This process has been terrible. The fact that we were in lockdown when members of Parliament had far more important issues facing constituents and here we were talking about a law that serves no other purpose—from my side of the House—than to shore up base votes for the Labour Party. We heard that 1900 people will be allowed to vote at the next election—Chlöe Swarbrick: 0.05 percent. DAN BIDOIS: —and Chlöe Swarbrick you're arguing that we extend that to all prisoners. Chlöe Swarbrick: Yes. DAN BIDOIS: So if we take your advice then it's actually a massive impact. So you've just contradicted yourself there. As I said the process for this law has been terrible at a time when jobs are being lost when incomes are being halved and when businesses have been closing I cannot believe we're discussing this law. We oppose this bill."