Ryall Tony: Crimes Amendment Bill (No 6) — In Committee Third Reading 
Ryall Tony: Crimes Amendment Bill (No 6) — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:609;Page:7095] 
Hon TONY RYALL (NZ National—Bay of Plenty) 
: 
 In speaking to the third reading of the Crimes Amendment Bill (No 6) and the associated amendments I want to say that on listening to the speech of the Minister of Justice I think it is clear that he has lost interest in the justice portfolio. He has very big responsibilities in foreign affairs which is his passion and it is clear that he has lost interest in the justice portfolio. I will tell members the reason for saying that. When he was Opposition justice spokesperson on the introduction of this bill in 1999 he railed against the Government for taking so long to bring this piece of legislation to Parliament. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: 40 years! 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: Oh 40 years! It is so pathetic. It would be sad if it were not so pathetic. He railed against the previous Government for not bringing this bill forward earlier. In one of Phil Goff’s vein-popping speeches where his forehead goes p-pump p-pump p-pump and he goes all red he said: “This Government should realise this is a priority I’ve said to this Government time and time again that this is a priority and it should be doing something about it and I know why it should be doing something about it—because everyone says it should.” That is what Phil Goff said but it has taken him 4 years even to have this bill passed. He stood up in the House—it is the “Maharey principle”; it is one of the things one says when one is in Opposition and does not say when one is in Government—and said that this bill was priority legislation that would be fast-tracked by Labour. I remember that because I was sitting in that chair there when he gave one of his vein-popping speeches about how he would act. Mr Goff has lost interest in the justice portfolio. It takes him so long to do anything. 
I heard his comments about the Court of Appeal—as though we should be embarrassed that the Court of Appeal thinks Parliament is taking a view on criminal offending! If he wants to quote the Court of Appeal I will table the opinions of District Court judge after District Court judge and High Court judge after High Court judge who have criticised his pathetic sentencing and parole legislation. High Court judge after High Court judge has criticised his bill. He can give whatever vein-popping speeches he wants to give; the fact is he is embarrassed about how long it has taken him to get this bill here. This is the guy who stood up in Parliament in 1999 and criticised the Government for taking too long. He is so embarrassed about it that he interjected that we had had 40 years to do something and had not done anything. I am not even 40 and the fact is this Minister—[ 
Interruption 
] I know I have got that gravitas that may make members think I am older. 
The fact is this Minister has been pathetic. It takes him so long to do anything. What about this legislation? In January 2000 Phil Goff said that he would pass legislation to remove sex discrimination in the law with regard to women dealing with children. Six months later he said he would have it passed by Christmas 2000. Then in January 2001 he said he would have it passed by Christmas 2001. Then in election year he said he would have it passed by Christmas 2002. When Mr Peter Dunne raises the issue what does Mr Goff say? He says: “We’ve had a meeting with Mr Peter Dunne and we agree and we’re going to pass that legislation by Christmas.” So we have had four Christmases and he still has not passed the legislation. He takes far too long to do anything. 
The fact is the Minister has lost interest in the justice portfolio and this bill shows that. The Minister has made no substantive amendments to what was proposed when I introduced this bill 4 years ago. 
Stephen Franks 
: Except killing home invasion. 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: I have to say just while we are talking about that sentencing bill that I understand that the Minister’s officials advised him that amendments should be made to the Act but Mr Goff is too embarrassed to bring them to the House. My understanding is that he said he could not do that and he wanted to give it a while to settle down. So let us get real about how long it takes Mr Goff to do anything. It takes him far too long. There is urgent stuff that needs to be done. It has taken him 4 years to bring to this point a bill the serious content of which he has hardly changed; he has hardly changed any of the matters in it that are important. I remember his comrade Mr Swain standing up in front of the computer security industry at a meeting in Auckland in 1999 and saying that this was vitally important legislation as well. He agreed with Mr Goff that it should be passed as a matter of priority. Well if it takes the Government 4 years to pass as a matter of priority a bill that it has hardly changed then that is an embarrassment. 
For goodness’ sake the Government should work more intensely with the Opposition parties and we will tidy up foolish proposals that this Government brings in as bills. We will fix them up and we will get them passed. And they are foolish. This Government has passed a law that someone sentenced to prison for 9 years can qualify for parole in 3 years. An offender sentenced to 9 years’ imprisonment for serious sexual offending for rape can be out in 3 years. That is what this Government is doing to the justice system in New Zealand. 
This is a Government that time and time again says it is going to get tough on crims. What is the record? The propensity to imprison is dropping because the sentencing law requires the judges to use sentencing as the very last possible option. The judges are to give crims everything else but they are not to send them to jail. They can be very serious offenders but the judges should not send them to jail. That is what this Government is doing. That is what it supports. 
This Government has overseen the complete collapse of the credibility of the home detention scheme. An Associate Minister of Justice stood up and praised his department for being robust in running home detention but these are the very same people who recommended that a wife-basher go on home detention in the home of the woman he bashed. The department said that she agreed to it. Well of course she is going to agree; for her it is a case of whether she is bashed again now or bashed later. That is what this Government does. It has overseen wife-bashers being detained in the homes of the very women they bashed. We have a woman Prime Minister. She lets that happen. She lets her Ministers stand up and say that is robust. That is not the sort of legislation or approach that we on this side of the House want to see. 
This Government is not taking seriously crime in this country. We have violent crime at record levels on the basis of per head of population and on a total basis. The Minister should be embarrassed by that. There is record crime in this country. We have more car burglary than we have had for years and it is getting worse. We have more serious sexual crimes than we have had before and it is getting worse. Auckland is now one of the most crime-ridden cities in the Pacific. People are leaving Auckland because they are worried about the level of crime there. What does this Government propose? Nothing absolutely nothing! The Commissioner of Police said he needed 170 extra police in Auckland. How many did he get? He got 50 over 4 years. That is not the sort of approach we need to law and order in this country. Crime is going up. This Government has no respect for the victims.