10. Question No. 10—JusticeHon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson) to the Minister of JusticeQuestion No. 10—Justice10. Hon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson) to the Minister of Justice: Does he stand by all his policies and priorities?Hon ANDREW LITTLE (Minister of Justice): I stand by all the policies and priorities of the Government.Hon Dr Nick Smith: Why is the Government rushing his legislation to extend voting rights for prisoners during a national emergency when the Government stated at the beginning of lockdown—and I quote—All parliamentary business before select committees that is not COVID-related will be suspended."?Hon ANDREW LITTLE: The bill to which the member refers is in the hands of the Justice Committee. It is not a matter over which I have any control; it is a bill that is in the control of the select committee.Hon Dr Nick Smith: How can the Minister say he has no control of the bill before the select committee when for the other two bills before the Justice Committee one on sexual violence and one on first responders the Minister has written to the Business Committee seeking an extension of time; and is it the Government's priorities that prisoners' rights are ahead of those of victims of sexual violence or first responders?Hon Chris Hipkins: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. There has to be a factual inaccuracy in the assertion made in that question. Ministers do not write to the Business Committee seeking extensions for bills; select committees write to the Business Committee seeking extensions.Hon Dr Nick Smith: Speaking to the point of order the Standing Orders of the House are that the member in charge of the bill can advise the Business Committee as to whether they approve the extension. In the case of the sexual violence legislation before the Justice Committee the Minister has—SPEAKER: All right OK—I get the member's point. Unfortunately the way he expressed his question didn't quite get there. I am going to give him another shot at getting the question accurate.Hon Dr Nick Smith: Why has the Minister written to the Business Committee approving an extension of time for other justice bills like the sexual violence legislation but not the prisoner voting legislation when the prisoner voting legislation is on fast track and when the rights of rape victims should come ahead of the rights of prisoners?SPEAKER: OK I'll let the member answer the question and I will just get it in order by saying "indicating support for" rather than "approving".Hon ANDREW LITTLE: Again any correspondence I've had with the Business Committee is in relation to a request by the chair of the select committee and is not a matter over which I assert any control.Hon Dr Nick Smith: Does the Minister agree with Professor Andrew Geddis of Otago University that his bill in clause 8—and I quote—"gives prisoners more electoral rights than other citizens."; if so is it Government policy that convicted criminals have greater rights than victims—Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. For the second time this member's asked two questions not one and he's about to do it again.SPEAKER: Well I accept that the member has very long phrases that make up his questions but he's so far in order. I'll ask Dr Nick Smith to start again.Hon Dr Nick Smith: Thank you Mr Speaker. Does the Minister agree with Professor Andrew Geddis of Otago University that his bill in clause 8 "gives prisoners more electoral rights than other citizens."; if so is it Government policy that convicted criminals have greater rights than victims of crime or law-abiding citizens?Hon ANDREW LITTLE: In answer to the second part of the question no.Hon Dr Nick Smith: Can the Minister confirm that he has written to the Justice Committee stating that officials will not be able to provide full answers to the committee's questions or a comprehensive departmental report on the bill and if so why would we continue to rush such legislation?SPEAKER: No well that is out of order.Hon Dr Nick Smith: Can the Minister assure the House that the Justice Committee will have access to a comprehensive report from his ministry and that the ministry will be able to answer all of the committee's questions thoroughly?Hon ANDREW LITTLE: As far as I know that is exactly what ministry officials are providing to that committee.Hon Dr Nick Smith: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The answer that the Minister has just given contradicts the letter that he has written to the select committee.SPEAKER: Dr Smith you are the most senior member of the House—well the one with the most experience anyway.Rt Hon Winston Peters: No he's not.SPEAKER: No he's not that either? All right OK—he's the father of the House let's put it that way. [Interruption] The member has a question; if he wants to ask it he'll just zip it up. Dr Smith—the member has been here for a long time and he should know what assertions he can and can't make by way of point of order and the fact that he disagrees with an answer is certainly not a reason for a point of order. If we had that we'd have one of those on just about every supplementary answer in the House.Hon Gerry Brownlee: I appreciate your ruling and just seek advice: if the substance of that question was prefaced with "has" would that put it in order because it seems to me we're getting into some pretty pedantic sort of space? We're in unusual times. The Opposition has agreed to truncated versions of Parliament because it's the right thing to do at the moment but on the basis that the business-as-usual sort of stuff would be pushed off until a later time—and probably facilitated at that later time. But in this case clearly there is a hell-bent desire by someone to get this piece of legislation through. It's not unreasonable to question whether or not that is actually being driven by the Minister and a question "Has he written"—would that stand as opposed to the question that was asked by Dr Smith?SPEAKER: Well I didn't rule out the question in that particular case that was asked. What I said was that I wasn't saying that the member has to be happy with the answer and taking a point of order to say that he disagrees with the answer—it didn't matter really what the question was because the question was ruled in. To say that the member was unhappy with the answer is not the case. If there is an allegation that the Minister was inaccurate and deliberately so the member knows how that should be taken up. If the member has other evidence that he thinks contradicts it and would cause the Minister to correct his answer then he could be kind enough either to pass it to the Minister or to table it in the House and that way it would put more pressure on the Minister to correct his answer if in fact it was inaccurate.Hon Dr Nick Smith: Thank you Mr Speaker. I seek leave of the House to table the Minister of Justice's letter to the Justice Committee saying that justice officials would not be able to provide complete answers or the normal standard of departmental report.SPEAKER: Is there any objection to that? There is.Hon Chris Hipkins: Thank you Mr Speaker. Can the Minister confirm that the bill does little more than reverse a law change passed by the previous Government with the narrowest of margins in the House?Hon ANDREW LITTLE: That is precisely what the bill does and it is a bill that has also been the subject of questions and submissions made to that committee in the last two years under different types of legislation that could've touched on that question. The issues that are in the bill are not new to the current makeup of the Justice Committee.Hon Dr Nick Smith: Can the Minister confirm that clause 8 of the bill before the select committee that Professor Andrew Geddis has not only pointed out is new but confers on prisoners rights that victims and other citizens do not have has never been on the law books of New Zealand before—clause 8?Hon ANDREW LITTLE: I understand that the committee has received submissions and indeed advice from officials to that effect. That has never been the intention of the Government but it is in the hands of that committee to make a change to make sure that the provision of that clause is consistent with the rights that every other citizen has and I eagerly await the unanimous recommendations of that committee to that effect.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Is it not a fact with respect to that last question that until 2011 that was the extant situation on the law supported by Holyoake Marshall Muldoon and dare I say it Jim Bolger and others and then all of a sudden it changed? So Professor Geddis is profoundly wrong.SPEAKER: Order! Order! This member has responsibility neither for Professor Geddis or history."