Ryall Tony: Prisoners' and Victims' Claims Bill — First Reading 
Ryall Tony: Prisoners' and Victims' Claims Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:622;Page:17989] 
Hon TONY RYALL (National—Bay Of Plenty) 
: 
 That was a speech made by the Minister of Justice—maybe for just a few days more—who was done like a dinner on  
Morning Report 
 this morning by the Leader of the Opposition. Dr Brash exposed Phil Goff for what he actually is—a Minister who is prepared to mislead the public about the effect of this bill so much that a reporter exposed him. It is a shame that the Minister refuses to listen to what I am saying. That Minister was done like a dinner on  
Morning Report 
 by Don Brash. He was exposed as the worst sort of politician we have in this Parliament. He is one who is prepared to go on radio and mislead the public. Sean Plunket who is no friend of the National Party exposed Mr Goff for misleading every New Zealander who was listening to that programme. Mr Goff was exposed as trying to sound credible in promoting the indefensible. 
Morning Report 
 showed one of two things this morning: either Minister Goff does not know what is in his bill or he is prepared to mislead the public because he is ashamed of what is in his bill. I will say why the Minister made the mistake of saying April 2004 when talking about the referral motion: because in fact it was in April 2004 that he found out compensation would be paid to prisoners. In April this year Mr Goff found out that compensation would be paid to prisoners. Do members know what Mr “Get Tough” Goff did? He did nothing. What he did was to continue with his bill that would have legalised some sexual activity between 12-year-olds. Mr Goff carried on with his bill to decriminalise some sexual activity between 12-year-olds when he could have been blocking stopping and wiping payments to criminals. He thought that was more important than stopping payments to criminals. 
This Government has got itself completely tied up in knots over prisoners’ rights. The answer to this is very simple and very clear and it has been enunciated by Dr Don Brash the Leader of the Opposition. He said “No money.” Dr Brash said this morning as he was wiping the floor with Phil Goff: “This is a Government that says there is no money for tax cuts but there is money for prisoner compensation.” That is what this Government says. There is no money for hard-working New Zealanders as a reward for effort but there is money for prisoner compensation. This legislation has a gaping hole— 
Jill Pettis 
: What’s all the fuss about a date when you can get up and tell porkies like that? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: I want to tell Jill Pettis because I am sure Chester Burrows will tell the people in Wanganui that under this legislation offenders will still get the money. Every single one of those offenders who got a payment under the last set of payments by the Government will still get the cash. Let me give an example of where that happens. 
If no victims are identified the money goes to the offender. I want to talk about two men from Remuera in Auckland. They lived in an exclusive part of Auckland and their children went to private schools but when they lost money they resorted to trafficking pure methamphetamine or P—amongst the most destructive and addictive drugs in this country. Using their status as businessmen as a disguise they smuggled up to $14 million worth of methamphetamine in and out of the country for an international drug syndicate. Who were their victims? No victim was promoted during the court case. These vile characters were sentenced to jail for what the judge said was some of the most serious offending known to New Zealand and there were no identifiable victims. Well of course there were victims. The people who used the evil that these guys peddled on the streets of New Zealand were the victims but not one victim was identified in the court case. If those two men the Remuera drug dealers do get a compensation payment they can keep every dollar. Any drug dealer who gets a compensation payment will keep every dollar because there is no identifiable victim. What does Mr Goff say to that? Nothing because if there are no identifiable victims the crim gets to keep the money. If the judge does not approve the victim’s claim the money goes to the offender. 
Under this plan judges will be put in the unenviable position of having to decide how the compensation should be split amongst the number of victims. They will be forced to put a value on pain and suffering and make a decision between victims. This bill pits victims against each other. 
Here is the third outrage of why the offender still gets the cash. If there is anything left over it is handed to the offender. This bill does not block stop wipe payments to prisoners. It allows them to keep the cash. Dr Brash on  
Morning Report 
 this morning when he humiliated the Minister of Justice— 
Rodney Hide 
: It wasn’t hard. 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: As Rodney Hide says it was not very hard. I presume that Mr Goff was busy worrying about the demise of some of his proposals to decriminalise the sexual activity of 12-year-olds but what Mr Goff one of the worst sorts of liberals we can see in this Government would not admit is that this measure will re-traumatise victims. The victims will have to prove that they deserve compensation. The victim’s application is to be shown to the offender. The rape victim will talk about the pain and suffering she has suffered over the years and write it down and Phil Goff will show it to the rapist. 
Hon Dover Samuels 
: What did you do about it when you were in Government? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: I will say to Mr Samuels what I will do about it. I will stop payments to rapists and to murderers. I will stop these compensation payments under a Government led by Dr Don Brash. Let us face it: the rapists are to read the comments of the victims. The victims will get legal aid but so will the offenders. 
I want to debunk one of the big myths from Phil Goff. He says that international obligations mean we have to pay this compensation. We have looked at the international obligations. There is not one international obligation that says we have to pay criminals compensation and in fact there is a reservation to the international covenant that says that payments can be made only at the discretion of the Attorney-General. It is clear: payments can be made only at the discretion of the Attorney-General. That is why Margaret Wilson paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to the Mangaroa prisoners. Mr Goff should confront the fact that the only reason these payments are subject to the human rights legislation is the Baigent case. When the police shockingly raided the home of the late Mrs Baigent whom I knew and in that raid on her property took away her dignity the court decided that she should get compensation. That is where this started. It was a court decision relating to the late Mrs Baigent. There is no international obligation whatsoever and the Government has been told that. The Minister will not admit it but the Government has been told that. I am sure that when the Official Information Act requests for all of the advice to the Government come out people will see clearly that there is no international obligation that we pay criminals compensation. In fact the international obligations say it is totally at the discretion of the Attorney-General—in this case the high priestess of PC Margaret Wilson. 
This bill is an appalling fraud being committed on ordinary New Zealanders by Phil Goff. The crims can still get the cash.