5. Youth Justice—Pre-charge WarningsHon AMY ADAMS (National—Selwyn) to the Minister of JusticeYouth Justice—Pre-charge Warnings5. Hon AMY ADAMS (National—Selwyn) to the Minister of Justice: Does he stand by all of his Government's Justice policies?Hon DAVID PARKER (Attorney-General) on behalf of the Minister of Justice: Yes.Hon Amy Adams: Does he continue to stand by his Government's policy that detention only should be used for young people as a last resort?Hon DAVID PARKER: Yes.Hon Amy Adams: Does he also stand by the Prime Minister's statement that every child who is caught by police should be arrested charged and convicted?Hon DAVID PARKER: That is a misrepresentation of what was said.Hon Amy Adams: Well how does he reconcile the Prime Minister's statement which would see the end of pre-charge warnings for young first-time offenders with his answers to the previous questions and his stated desire to reduce the prison population by 30 percent?Hon DAVID PARKER: The answers were given in the context of questions about why the Government was reviewing the Better Public Services (BPS) targets for reoffending and reducing crime and of course we're reviewing those Public Service targets and the Government's failure to meet them. For example National's target was to reduce violent crime by 20 percent between 2012 and 2018. Instead it went up by 3 percent—a complete failure.Hon Amy Adams: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I did listen very carefully to that question and I can't see how the wider context that the question might've touched on answers in any way the question I have put which puts a very direct statement made by the Prime Minister yesterday and asks the Minister how it's reconciled. He went off on a completely different tangent about BPS targets that I didn't go anywhere near.SPEAKER: Yes and one of the problems with how it can be reconciled is that people can have very wide opinions about reconciliation. I think probably in the first few words of the answer the Minister did address the question although I do accept that it didn't help us much.Hon Amy Adams: Was the Prime Minister wrong then to describe in the House yesterday that the policy of this Government is that every young person apprehended by police should be arrested charged and convicted.Hon DAVID PARKER: That again is a misrepresentation of the Deputy Prime Minister's comments on behalf of the Prime Minister—Hon Amy Adams: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. It wasn't the Deputy Prime Minister's comments. The Deputy Prime Minister was answering on behalf of the Prime Minister. That makes them the Prime Minister's comments under Speaker's ruling 175/7.SPEAKER: And that's exactly what the Minister acting for the Minister of Justice just said. He said The Deputy Prime Minister … on behalf of the Prime Minister."—that's exactly what he said. The member should listen for a little bit longer before she stands up. Any further supplementaries?Hon DAVID PARKER: Mr Speaker I hadn't finished my answer before the point of order was taken. The reason these misrepresentations are important is that the effect of failing to meet these targets that the prior Government set for themselves means that they left a Budget hole of a billion dollars in the corrections portfolio because they predicted low prison numbers growth when in actual fact they have grown hugely and the cost of those additional prison beds has not been funded by the previous Government's Budget.Hon Steven Joyce: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Listening to the answer from the Minister I'm just wondering whether the ruling that you made late last year about critiquing the previous Government in an answer to a question—does that still stand or not? Because at that time you were very clear that we couldn't refer back to the previous Government. The Minister was responsible from the time only that they'd taken up the warrant and could comment only from the time they'd taken up the warrant. We had quite a discussion about it you'll recall and I'm just wondering whether that's now changed. [Interruption] SPEAKER: No I'm happy to deal with it and say that this whole series of questions as it started yesterday from the Leader of the Opposition went to the question of the previous Government's targets and whether they should be kept to. It was the responses to that that were the basis of the member's questions. I think it is fair to take it in the whole context.Hon Steven Joyce: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker—a fresh point of order then if I could. I've looked at the primary of this particular question and it makes no reference to the previous Government's Better Public Services statements and it actually talks about the Government's justice policies in relation to—SPEAKER: And if that was the case especially when the member asking supplementaries quoted yesterday's statement by the Deputy Prime Minister acting for the Prime Minister then it must take it back to yesterday's question. What is relevant is not only what's in the primary but it can be widened out by the supplementary and the Hon Amy Adams certainly did. [Interruption] No. The point of order has been dealt with. If there's a fresh point of order Amy Adams you may have one.Hon Amy Adams: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I don't mean to trifle with you but I am struggling to understand because I want to get this right. I understand entirely your ruling that the supplementary question can widen the scope of the primary and yet I was very careful in my supplementary to only refer to a very specific comment where the view was expressed by the Prime Minister that young people should be treated in a very specific way. It wasn't in relation to BPS targets; it wasn't even about targets. So I just want you to clarify that ruling and that while the supplementary extended it when it only talked about a very specific comment that was made how that brought into play everything else that had been discussed as part of a different question.SPEAKER: Sure. And very briefly it was the context in which the comments that the member quoted was made. The comments were made in relation to BPS targets and that was the point that members were making and debates around that. I think it's not unreasonable when someone quotes specific wording from a ministerial answer that the context of that answer be allowed to be referred to by the person who has to respond to the quote that the member used."