Ryall Tony: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Ryall Tony: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:614;Page:10662] 
9.  
Hon TONY RYALL (National—Bay of Plenty) 
 to the  
Minister of Justice 
: Is it Government policy that offenders with 80 or more previous convictions are able to receive bail; if so why? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL (Associate Minister of Justice) 
 on behalf of the 
 Minister of Justice 
: Government policy on bail was laid out in the Bail Act of 2000. That Act implemented significant reforms to bail law including introducing a presumption against bail for serious repeat offenders. However decisions on bail in specific cases are a matter for the court. 
Hon Tony Ryall 
: Given the Minister’s assurances at the time of the passing of the Bail Act that it would ensure public security as the ultimate goal what changes will the Government consider given a situation whereby a man with 88 convictions for quite serious offences can get bail breach those bail conditions and then be granted bail yet again? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: The point I made in an earlier answer is that in that particular case section 12 of the Bail Act was invoked and the onus of proof was reversed. The court made the decision on the bail application. Bail was opposed by the police. 
Ron Mark 
: Does the Minister recall saying on 1 March 1998: “Professional criminals with multiple convictions and a track record of offending on bail need to know that immediate imprisonment will be the automatic response if they commit further crimes. Taking hard-core criminals out of circulation is the only effective way of reducing the soaring crime rate.”; and if he does not does he remember saying it was time the Minister of the day got serious about the review of bail laws to produce a system with better safeguards for the community; if so what will the Minister do now to tighten up the bail laws? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: Yes and that is why the Bail Act was amended in the year 2000. 
Dr Muriel Newman 
: In light of that answer what does the Minister of Justice say in response to present and former police who agree with detective Don Finlayson that the judicial system is kicking them in the teeth and who stated: “I left and others are leaving because we are wasting our time.”? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: I understand why the police would feel that way about this particular case because on that particular occasion the police opposed bail as they did on other occasions. However at the end of the day even with the reverse onus of proof it is up to the court to make decisions on bail applications. 
Hon Tony Ryall 
: Given that the Bail Act was previously amended because Parliament decided that judges were not being tough enough on bail given that in this case judges believed they had the power to grant bail even though people had originally breached their bail conditions and that was the reason they were before the judge is it not time that Parliament again amended the law to tighten it up and give a much clearer message to judges that a person with 88 previous convictions does not get bail? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: Each individual case is decided on its own facts. Not all of the convictions were serious criminal convictions not all of those convictions happened after the 1999 election and not all those bail decisions happened after the 1999 general election either. There is no point playing politics with this appalling tragedy. [ 
Interruption 
] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: There was too much interjection during that answer. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. You are probably likely to rule that in that case the Minister addressed the question. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Most certainly. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: Well I ask you to consider this. It was a simple question that asked whether Parliament should have another look at these laws. No answer was given to that. A lecture was given to the House about how the current law works. We all know it is insufficient and that was why the question was asked in the first place. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That last point was not part of a point of order. The Minister did address the question. 
Ron Mark 
: I seek the leave of the House to table a report in which Mr Goff states that Parliament needs to change the law to instruct the courts to lock these crooks up. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is objection.