SpeechDARROCH BALL (NZ First): I'm not entirely sure where to begin replying to that speech. I think that Mr Bennett would have done a much better job and I'm not sure why he didn't stand up for the second speech from the National Party being the spokesperson for corrections. It's pretty weird from this side. I don't know if there's some internal dynamics going on over there at the moment but what I do know is that over the seven minutes that Mr Brown spoke I'm not exactly sure he made it quite clear why they're opposing this bill. The first thing that he spoke about for two minutes and so did Mr Mitchell was COVID-19. He stood up and he started talking about the Order Paper. He started talking about the Order Paper and nothing about the bill—nothing about the bill itself at all.So why are they against it? Well the one thing that I have to say to Mr Mitchell and Mr Brown is that—I don't know if they recall—this issue has already gone through the Supreme Court. It has gone through the Supreme Court and it ruled in favour of this Mr Mitchell—and it ruled in favour of this Mr Mitchell. But they seem to clearly ignore that that actually even happened. They think that they are the authority on what is right or wrong in this country not the Supreme Court.What does Mr Bennett have to say about that—what does Mr Bennett have to say about that? Not only that but it's a matter of principle. Is that right Mr Bennett? Is it a matter of principle Mr Bennett? So we've got Mr Mitchell and we've got Mr Brown standing up and talking about this being a matter of principle—that prisoners when they go to prison should lose their rights and of course they should in some areas they do. They lose their right for freedom of movement right? They're standing up and they're lecturing us about this being a matter of principle being tough on crime and ensuring that any offender and any prisoner should lose the right to vote—should lose the right to vote.But what confuses me is that when this law came in this was done not by a Government bill when the National Party was in Government; this was accomplished by a member's bill when the National Party was in Government. The Minister of Corrections at that point in time I believe was Judith Collins. Now I don't know—and who was the Minister at that point of Justice Mr Bennett? Do you recall? Because no Minister who was in Cabinet since 2008 at that point during the term put this bill forward or this concept forward as a change in the law. The only way that this actually happened was by pure luck. It was plucked out of a member's ballot. So how important was it Mr Bennett? How important was it that the National Party stands by their principle about prisoners not having a vote and rights for the victims and you know all the hoopla that they've been hearing from Mr Brown and Mr Mitchell this morning but they couldn't even be bothered putting it through as a Government bill? Where's the seriousness for that? Where's the principle standing behind the principle of that Mr Bennett? No answer.Barbara Kuriger: Why does the member support this bill?DARROCH BALL: We support this bill Barbara Kuriger from the fact that we're serious about rehabilitation and reintegration. You know we got a lecture on that side of the House from Mr Mitchell about social investment. Now there's one sure-fire way of ensuring that a convicted criminal who is released into society goes back down that path is forced down that path—when they are not given the vote when they've been sentenced to prison for fewer than three years and cannot vote for the executive of the country and the community that they're going to be going back into within three years. Not only that but we're changing what the National Party put in—which was that they couldn't even be enrolled to vote. So if you want to isolate people that come out of prison if you want to isolate them even more and force them down the pathway of criminality once again one sure-fire way of doing that is not letting them vote and not enrolling them to vote. That is what the National Party is wanting us to do. Let's get one thing straight. This is not a change. This is not so much a change in legislation; it is going back to a status quo. This was the status quo for 17 years. In 1993 we had the rewrite of electoral law for MMP which was passed by the way by a National Government as part of the Electoral Act 1993. Back then prisoners could vote as long as they had not been sentenced to life in prison preventive detention or more than three years in jail. So it was the status quo for 17 years for successive Governments and all of a sudden the National Party want us to believe that they found their principles two years into their first term not as a Government but by luck as a member's bill—by luck as a member's bill.So the question really that needs to be answered from that side of the House is: why was that? If it was a matter of principle why was it not one of the first items on the Order Paper for National in 2008? Why was that? Paul Quinn was the member who was in charge of the member's bill and if it was such a great idea and he pitched it to Cabinet or to his caucus colleagues obviously they didn't think it was that important so they told him to put it in a member's bill. That's the question that Mr Bennett needs to answer when he gets up—I'm not sure he will. Dan Bidois: Say why you're supporting the bill. Come on mate; say why New Zealand First supports the billDARROCH BALL: Well you see Mr Bidois the fact is that we understand on this side of the House that if someone is sentenced—first of all if you haven't been listening this is going back to a status quo; back to a status quo. It is about reintegration and rehabilitation. People who are sentenced to prison for fewer than three years need to be able to ensure that they belong to the community that they go back into. What they want is to belong to the community they go back into and have ownership within the community. And the one way the foundation of that is ensuring that they have the ability to vote and enrol to vote and this is what this bill is doing. This is why we are supporting this bill. Not only that but this isn't a grand change in things. It's not a huge step. This is allowing a thousand or more prisoners to be able to vote and enrol. The vast majority of prisoners who are in prison still will not be able to vote because they have been sentenced for greater than three years.We believe that this is a balance. As Minister Davis said this is a balance between ensuring that we hold people to account that we do restrict the rights of those people who won't be integrated back into society any time soon but also that we ensure that rehabilitation and reintegration is of priority and falls in line with the social investment approach that they harp on about all the time—about ensuring that people don't go back and re-commit any crimes and ensuring that they do belong to the community and one way of doing that is ensuring that they vote.It's a pleasure to stand on behalf of New Zealand First and support this Electoral (Registration of Sentenced Prisoners) Amendment Bill. It strikes a good balance in moving forward and we commend this bill to the House. Thank you Mr Speaker.