Faafoi Kris: Prisoners’ and Victims’ Claims (2012 Expiry and Application Dates) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Faafoi Kris: Prisoners’ and Victims’ Claims (2012 Expiry and Application Dates) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 21 June 2012. Volume:681;Page:3252. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
KRIS FAAFOI (Labour—Mana) 
: 
 Thank you very much for the opportunity to speak to the Prisoners’ and Victims’ (2012 Expiry and Application Dates) Amendment Bill. The substantive legislation will expire in 9 days’ time and that is why we are here extending for 1 more year the sunset clause that is in the Prisoners’ and Victims’ Claims Act 2005. 
It is interesting to see that the members on the opposite side of the House this afternoon are taking very short calls because earlier in the first reading of this bill the member for Hamilton West someone who I have a lot of personal respect for— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: What? 
KRIS FAAFOI 
: —well a fair degree of personal respect— 
Tim Macindoe 
: Stick with the original line Kris. 
KRIS FAAFOI 
: —ha ha—was beaming about this bill. He actually said it was part of the Government’s “arsenal of initiatives”. An “arsenal of initiatives” Tim Macindoe said this bill was but today the praise around this bill is a tad shorter. 
We will be supporting this legislation because as I said it is a pure extension of the bill that Mr Goff introduced back in 2005. When we introduced and passed that bill in this House there was a perceived need following the court ruling that Charles Chauvel mentioned earlier on and a concern around compensation being given to prisoners and then the lack of that compensation being passed on to their victims. 
At the time of its introduction the Hon Phil Goff who is sitting to the right of me said—[ 
Interruption 
] Oh sorry; to the right of me! At the time of the substantive legislation being passed Mr Goff said that most people believe it is wrong that offenders should be compensated for wrongful treatment and in turn are not required to pay restitution to the victims they have harmed. That statement was made in the context at the time given the court case that I mentioned earlier and also a feeling amongst the community that there was a sense of unease around what was happening. But as Mr Chauvel also pointed out earlier and also in his first reading speech it was a response to a perceived need at the time. 
For those who might be watching or listening at home on their crystal sets I say for the benefit of those people this bill essentially extends the sunset clause— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: The member’s a pale imitation of John Banks. 
KRIS FAAFOI 
: A pale imitation of John Banks—that is some praise. This bill essentially extends for 1 year the sunset clause of the substantive legislation which as I said earlier expires on 1 July in order for this Government to address this area of law—to address this area of law I repeat. 
The Act has two main functions. The first one is that it restricts the circumstances where the courts can award prisoners compensation for any breach of their rights while they are locked up. A court must consider other remedies before it looks at awarding monetary compensation for those inmates and also investigate whether a prisoner has extinguished all other complaints procedures before it goes to award the monetary compensation that might be available to them. In essence there needs to be an exceptional case before a prisoner can be awarded any monetary compensation for any abuse of their human rights. 
Secondly the Act also sets out a process where if a prisoner were to receive any compensation in one of those rare cases for a rights breach their victim can claim against it if they are owed any money. That is why it is called the victims’ claims process in the Act. That compensation money is paid into a trust account after lawyers are paid of course and victims have 6 months in which to lay a claim against the moneys that are in that trust account. So that is the function of this legislation and for that reason we will be supporting the bill that is before the House. 
But that is not what this story is about because the functions of this bill are 7 years old. I would just like to echo the comments of the Green Party member David Clendon as to why we actually are in this House again extending the sunset clause within this bill. It is because although the Government has talked tough on law and order and this bill is part of its arsenal of initiatives or an initiative of an arsenal—well I do not think it is an initiatives arsenal basically—the Government has failed to address this issue which it said it was going to tackle back in 2008. So for the second time within this Government’s term we are back here extending the sunset clause within this bill. 
If you can give me the chance just to have a look at this it is almost the same date that we are back in this House extending this sunset clause. The Government has been rushing the process this time and 2 years ago when we extended it previously it was rushing the process as well. That bill on 22 June 2010 received its third reading. On 22 June 2010 that bill was in the Committee of the whole House and on 22 June 2010 the predecessor to this bill received its second reading. Again this Government has been caught out rushing through a temporary measure to extend this legislation which was passed under the previous Labour Government because this Government could not get its act together and come up with a decent alternative which it had promised to the people of New Zealand. 
This is a Government that said it took victims’ rights seriously but it has twice had to extend the sunset clause within this legislation which Mr Goff passed back in 2005. The legislation was experimental as Charles Chauvel said and that is why the sunset clause was built into it. But for a Government that says it is taking law and order seriously and is right behind victims it is finding itself for the second time—almost 2 years to the day—in a rush to try to make sure that it can get this sunset clause extended so that it does not look embarrassed because there is no mechanism for victims to try to get any compensation from prisoners. I think that speaks volumes as to what kind of commitment this Government has to victims’ rights when it has talked tough but has not walked the walk in this Parliament. As I have said nearly 2 years ago we were doing exactly the same thing. 
The story that this Government wants out in the paper tomorrow is that this bill passed and the Government is getting tough on crime as part of its arsenal of initiatives. But the true story is that it has had 3½ nearly 4 years to sort this out and it has not done a single thing. 
There is I understand an alternative piece of legislation on the Order Paper but where has it progressed? Where has it progressed? This Government again is buying itself another year in this House today—another year to sort itself out. It cannot get itself organised enough to get legislation through this House to make sure it can walk the walk on its talk on the election campaign. Two years ago we were doing exactly the same thing. 
Another part of our argument as to why this Government has not walked the walk is that there needed to be a review of this legislation to see whether it was being effective and 3 years ago when it came into office that was one of the options that it looked at but there was no review. There was no review and we have also got no legislation before us. In terms of a rolling maul on its arsenal of initiatives— 
Andrew Little 
: 120-point plan. 
KRIS FAAFOI 
: —and its 120-point plan as Mr Little says to crack down on crime and its war on P and whatever other mottos that this Government has around crime and law and order this Government is not necessarily walking the walk when it talks the talk. 
Lianne Dalziel spoke earlier about what the regulatory impact statement said. I think it speaks volumes as to just how rushed this process has been. Let me quote from it. Where are we exactly—there is a lot to consider in this. The regulatory impact statement says: “The Prisoners’ and Victims’ Claims (Redirecting Prisoner Compensation) Amendment Bill was introduced … to give effect to the redirection policy but did not receive a first reading. There is now insufficient time to progress it through its Parliamentary stages before the sunset clauses take effect on 1 July 2012.” which is in 9 days’ time. That is the first piece of information to show you how slack this Government has been. The regulatory impact statement continues: “Due to this the Ministry of Justice was asked to urgently consider alternative options to maintain the existing provisions of the PVC Act until the redirection policy can be given effect ... The RIS was prepared within a very short timeframe and accordingly”— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch) 
: I am sorry to interrupt the honourable member. His time has expired.