Worth Richard: Parole (Extended Supervision) and Sentencing Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Worth Richard: Parole (Extended Supervision) and Sentencing Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:618;Page:14157] 
RICHARD WORTH (National—Epsom) 
: 
 At this point National is supporting the Parole (Extended Supervision) and Sentencing Amendment Bill with substantial reservation. I say substantial reservation because the whole patchwork nature of this parole legislation calls for a comprehensive and careful review. National has instanced in earlier speeches tonight its real concern about the situation whereby a person charged with the rape of a child and sentenced to 9 years’ jail can under the current penal policy of this Government be eligible for parole after a period of 3 years. 
I am glad that Minister Barker is with us tonight in Committee because there is one issue that troubles National members greatly. In the haste to pass this legislation changes have been made in relation to electronic monitoring that may be particularly significant. I would like to draw the Minister’s attention to new section 15A inserted by clause 6A which deals with electronic monitoring. New section 15A(1) states: “A condition referred to in section 15(3)(f) that requires an offender to submit to electronic monitoring may be imposed only on an offender who … (c) is or will be on parole and electronic monitoring of the offender is necessary in order to provide the supervision required to ensure that the offender does not pose an undue risk to the community or any person or class of persons;”. 
The issue that I am seeking that the Minister respond to after consultation with his officials is whether this change will have a wider application—given that it is an amendment to the Parole Act—to persons other than in the scope of this intended bill which is to provide a new extended supervision regime that will actively manage high-risk child sex offenders. Electronic bracelets may be all very well but people can commit significant society-harming offences whilst wearing electronic bracelets and certainly members of this Committee who represent the Opposition parties would be extremely concerned if by sleight of hand an unintended consequence of this legislation is to open the floodgates to permit an even greater access to parole. 
It will be obvious from what has been said to this point that National members have real concern about the parole regime. At this point we are supporting this legislation solely on the basis that there is clear merit in introducing a new extended supervision regime that will actively manage high-risk child sex offenders. In this part of the legislation which is subject to Committee comment it is relevant to note that the Attorney-General whose views on the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act are often of concern to members of this House has found that the provisions of this bill are inconsistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. 
 I must say that I quite warm to the comments made by an earlier speaker who said that we should not be so much focused on legislation such as the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act but that we should be seeking to craft a “New Zealand Bill of Responsibilities”. The point he made which is a very fair point is that the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act is substantially concerned with the position of offenders. It is right to say that it is a hallmark of this Government that the legislation that has been passed to date regarding the penal sector is very much about the rights of offenders and not as I suggest it should be about the rights of victims.