1. Justice System—Three-strikes LegislationHon SIMON BRIDGES (Leader of the Opposition) to the Prime MinisterORAL QUESTIONSQUESTIONS TO MINISTERSJustice System—Three-strikes Legislation1. Hon SIMON BRIDGES (Leader of the Opposition) to the Prime Minister: Does she have confidence in her Minister of Justice and all of her Government's justice policies and decisions?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Deputy Prime Minister) on behalf of the Prime Minister: Yes and yes.Hon Simon Bridges: Was the proposed repeal of three strikes discussed at a Cabinet committee before the justice Minister announced it was his intention to take it to yesterday's full Cabinet?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: The reality is that a number of proposals to do with serious reform of our justice system have been presented to Cabinet committees. The answer to that is that a number of those proposals are going to be taken forward all the way to August and a serious—Hon Simon Bridges: So it went to Cabinet committee?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: No it is—you wait and see all right? It's not a yes; it's not a no. It's time for you to be patient.Hon Simon Bridges: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I asked I think a simple question about whether the repeal of three strikes went to a Cabinet committee before full Cabinet consideration and I just want an answer.SPEAKER: I thought I heard an answer—the question was more than just addressed.Hon Simon Bridges: Does she agree with the justice Minister that New Zealand First Ministers were around the Cabinet table when Cabinet made the decision to authorise me to develop a package that has a number of aspects in it including looking at the three strikes law. [It was] a Cabinet decision."?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Yes.Hon Simon Bridges: When the Justice Minister announced a proposed repeal of the three-strikes law did he breach clause 5.16 of the Cabinet Manual which states "Ministers are responsible for ensuring that consultation is undertaken in accordance with any coalition or support agreements entered into between political parties"?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: No.Hon Simon Bridges: So did Andrew Little follow good consultation processes or as he put it "In order to get a proposal ready to go to Cabinet you go through a variety of hoops" and New Zealand First Ministers simply changed their minds on the repeal of three strikes?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Can I just say that Minister Little is a reforming Minister—probably the most reformist Minister we've had in decades. And because he has been putting all these ideas out for the public there's no reason for him to swing from any of his statements at all. It looks like—and it is—an open Government.Hon Simon Bridges: So is the position quite clear then from the Prime Minister's perspective that this went through good Cabinet processes and consultation with support parties and they simply changed their mind?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: The reality is in this Government when people have heard all the facts they do sometimes change their mind—what does that member do?Hon Simon Bridges: Why was a Cabinet paper of proposed criminal justice reforms including a repeal of three strikes pulled from yesterday's Cabinet?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Can I just say that it was pulled because the visionary Minister of Justice decided that he wanted it pulled and we agreed with him.SPEAKER: And the Prime Minister being the "we"?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Yeah—me and her.Hon Simon Bridges: What then was decided when the Minister of Justice and the Deputy Prime Minister met yesterday morning to discuss the three-strikes repeal law?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: On behalf of the Prime Minister I can't answer that question for very obvious reasons. I simply wasn't there and therefore I am not at liberty like some members of Parliament to take a wild guess.Hon Simon Bridges: Was Andrew Little correct when he told Radio New Zealand this morning regarding the three-strikes repeal law "It's still going to be considered. We are doing a comprehensive reform package for criminal justice reform and all elements will be on the table."?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Can I say on behalf of the Prime Minister that it is the mark of wise government that you consider every possibility and every possibility's merits. That's what sound judicial reform looks like. It's not coming along with a bigoted neo-liberal view of the world and seeking to implant that upon everybody whether they want it or not.Hon Simon Bridges: So is the Government's position that the three-strikes repeal legislation is still on ultimately the table?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: The Prime Minister made it very clear on Morning Report to which the member was part of the audience what the Government's position is and it is that this is a matter that's off the table for now. But—Hon Members: Oh!Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: —hang on—this is a Government in for the long term and I can quite envisage that downstream as serious reforms do begin to work and we don't have the prisons being a moral and fiscal failure which was Bill English's view that we will look eventually at all aspects of reform.Hon Simon Bridges: Is the Prime Minister's position that the three-strikes repeal law is not off the table for all time?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: With the greatest respect I answered that question with great clarity—with great clarity—and I do hate repeating myself.Hon Simon Bridges: So Andrew Little was incorrect on Radio New Zealand this morning when he said of the three-strikes repeal law "It's still going to be considered."?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: I didn't hear the transcript about which that member speaks—Hon Paula Bennett: But you're part of the audience.Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: No I said he was not me. Again you've got a listening problem haven't you?SPEAKER: Order! Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: But mind you it's only one of your minor problems at the moment.Hon Simon Bridges: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I've asked the Prime Minister a straight question about reported comments by the justice Minister and he's saying he didn't hear them. That's simply not addressing what I've asked him in a specific quote.SPEAKER: The member's point of order would have had some merit if the answer had not been diverted by the person sitting on his right. I am ruling that the question was addressed. I might have been more supportive but Ms Bennett interjected and Mr Peters responded to that and it meant that the answer was possibly not as good as the member might have wanted.Hon Gerry Brownlee: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Does that ruling preclude the question being asked again and your taking a different approach to the answer to the question?SPEAKER: It doesn't preclude the question being asked again and if it's heard without that sort of interjection then there'll be a higher standard for the reply.Hon Simon Bridges: Is the three-strikes repeal law still going to be considered as the justice Minister has said this morning?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: It is the benchmark of wise government that all laws are constantly reviewed as to their veracity as to their validity and as to their soundness. In that sense of course that law will be looked at.Hon Simon Bridges: Does she agree the three-strikes law is the "high-water mark of policy stupidity"?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Can I just say on behalf of the Prime Minister that every member of this Parliament's entitled to their view. It's the hallmark of a democracy and a party and a coalition that are capable of listening to different views.Hon Simon Bridges: Why is the Government having another advisory panel and summit on criminal justice rather than having Cabinet consider options and get on with what's required in this area?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Because on behalf of the Prime Minister we've seen a massive increase in our numbers in prison. We faced building a mega-prison to accommodate between 2000 and 3000 people if we had not prepared to reform our laws to ensure they work. We're in danger of duplicating the American experience of massive incarceration per population. This is a reforming Government that knows we can do far better for the victims the taxpayers and indeed the country.Hon Simon Bridges: In light of that answer why then isn't the Government repealing the three-strikes legislation that the Minister of Justice thinks is such stupid law?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: On behalf of the Prime Minister this is no way to act as a Crown prosecutor—SPEAKER: Order!Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: —bearing in mind he never ever held a warrant and is misclaiming that all the time. He never held a warrant. He never held a warrant because of some Crown prosecutor—SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! The question will be asked again.Hon Simon Bridges: In light of the previous answer why then is the Government not seeking or moving to repeal the three-strikes legislation?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: It was made very clear by the Prime Minister and others that at this time it's not a priority. That was very clearly set out. Hon Simon Bridges: Which Cabinet process was better: the one around the three-strikes repeal proposal or the decision to ban offshore oil and gas exploration?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Apart from that being way off the mark of the primary question I'll answer it. The reality is both of those decisions were typical of this Government. They were mine—[Interruption] Yes that's right. [Interruption]SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! The member will resume his seat. When I call for order—Mr Bennett Mr Bridges—and most of his colleagues heard it and obeyed it those members will as well. I'll remind people that not being orderly when called to order is grossly disorderly.Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: As I said this—Hon Gerry Brownlee: We don't need to hear more answer—it's all right you've answered it.Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: I want to complete it. No no the completed answer is this is typical of this Government which has seen a serious rise in the Government's polling position has seen a massive restoration out of a Victoria University study in the confidence in the Government. For the first time we're above 50 percent—in fact we're above 60 percent. Now I don't want to take all the credit for that or the Prime Minister as the Prime Minister; it's down to my colleagues."