Ross Jami-Lee: Crimes Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
Ross Jami-Lee: Crimes Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
[Volume:672;Page:18536] 
JAMI-LEE ROSS (National—Botany) 
: 
 It is pleasing to hear that the Opposition is supporting this Crimes Amendment Bill (No 2) because it is a very good bill and it is very timely given many of the cases from around the country that we see in the media. It is also good to hear an Opposition supporting a bill. Although I am relatively new in this Chamber it seems to me that the Opposition often opposes many of the good things this Government does so I am pleased to hear that it is now supporting this bill. 
I doubt whether many people around the country would think this is a poor bill. Many people would see this as a very good bill because it is about protecting the most vulnerable people in our society. It is about protecting children and vulnerable adults and doing what we can as a Parliament to help those people. I have often heard the saying that a society is judged by how it treats animals. I think that what is more important is that a society should be judged by how it treats children and vulnerable people. This Government is sending a message that it is wrong to treat children or vulnerable people poorly. It is sending a message that if a person is cruel to a child that offence should be punishable by a long prison sentence. It is sending a message to people who do not protect children and who do not provide what they need to be safe in their homes and society that those are things that should be frowned upon. This Government is creating a new offence relating to a failure to protect children and vulnerable adults. Those people need support and help. They need this legislation so that penalties are in place if a person does not provide the necessary protections that are important for those people. 
The bill also doubles the maximum penalty for cruelty to a child. It is saying that 5 years as a maximum penalty is not enough. A maximum penalty of 10 years is far better. The 5-year penalty has been doubled because it was insufficient. Any person out there who is cruel to a child must be frowned upon by society and punished severely and 5 years as a maximum penalty simply was not enough. 
The amended offence of sexual grooming is a timely matter. Many people would have seen a bit of coverage recently about Facebook and certain things that have taken place there. I for one find what has been happening appalling. I realise that a lot of investigation is going on at the moment but should a case like that be seen to be happening around the place many people around the country should be saying that it is appalling and needs to be dealt with. The amended offence of sexual grooming makes it easier to catch those people and to punish them. It makes it easier to point out that they are doing the wrong thing and that they need to be stopped. 
Finally I will talk about the claim of right defence and the changes taking place there. I heard the contribution from the member Keith Locke when he essentially defended the Waihopai spy base issue that happened a couple of years ago. I think that anyone who believes that what those people were doing at Waihopai was a good thing is probably in a similar camp to Hone Harawira when he thought that Osama bin Laden was an honourable man. We have to say that those types of beliefs are wrong. Anyone who thinks that those people at Waihopai were there to do the right thing has a few screws loose. Anyone who cannot accept that those people knew full well that they were causing million-dollar damage to Government infrastructure and who thinks that that was a good thing needs to reconsider his or her position. I am proud to be part of a Government that is changing the law on behalf of the taxpayers of this country to make the law tighter so that people who cause wilful damage to Government property are unable to do that and get away with it. 
This is a good bill. I am glad the Opposition has decided to support something. Let us vote.