Mapp Wayne: Criminal Justice Reform Bill — In Committee 
Mapp Wayne: Criminal Justice Reform Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:640;Page:10558] 
Dr WAYNE MAPP (National—North Shore) 
: 
 I want to take the Committee back to 1999. The public made it perfectly clear through the Norm Withers referendum that they wanted tougher sentences. What was the response of this Government? Its response was to introduce law that allowed a rapist sentenced to 9 years in jail to be released in 3 years. The Government went up and down this country trumpeting that as its response to the referendum of 1999. Well the public saw through that sham and on this side of the House we pointed out to the Government time and time again the deficiency in its legislation. At best at that time the Government only tweaked the legislation. It did not deal with the core problem. It has taken until now 5 years later for the Government to recognise in clause 120 of this Criminal Justice Reform Bill that the two-thirds parole rule had some common sense—the very rule in fact that the Government repealed in its 2002 legislation. 
This Government is always going on about how it is tough on law and order. This Minister Mark Burton says so. But in 2002 it actually weakened the sentencing laws of this country when it substituted a two-thirds parole system—which actually the public said was not good enough—with a one-third parole system. That was a total betrayal of public trust. It is no wonder the public were disgusted with the Government on this particular issue. Frankly I am surprised that it has taken so long for the Government to return to what was at the very minimum a common-sense position. 
I want to make absolutely clear that National is committed to the policy that violent repeat offenders shall have no parole rights. The public has made it perfectly clear that people like that who represent an immense danger to society should not earn entitlements for early release and that when the judge has heard all the evidence and assessed the circumstances of the crime the criminal should serve the sentence that he or she was given by the judge. That is what the public wanted in 1999. This Government betrayed them in 2002. It has made a modest rectification in clause 120. But we are very clear on the National side of the Chamber that we have heard that concern and that—as we said in 2005 and will say for the next election—violent repeat offenders will not be eligible for parole under National. 
I ask this Government why it does not listen properly to the people of New Zealand. For that matter why does it not listen to its support partner New Zealand First? Members of New Zealand First do not believe in parole either yet I imagine they will vote for this measure today. It makes one wonder where New Zealand First’s ability to influence the Government is. People who are part of that particular class of criminal—the violent and repeat offenders—have used up their chances. The public needs proper protection from them and they ought to be serving a proper sentence. 
I want to put that very clearly on the record so that it is absolutely clear to New Zealanders where Labour stands—a weak vacillating Government—and where National stands. National is determined that the violent offenders who are such a scourge in our country will not be eligible for parole. That choice will be clearly put before the people of New Zealand in 2008. My colleagues have been speaking at length about the Sentencing Council and we put in a minority report about that. We are concerned that the Sentencing Council does—