Foster-Bell Paul: Parole Amendment Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFoster-Bell Paul: Parole Amendment Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 24 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1873. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]PAUL FOSTER-BELL (National): It is a pleasure to rise and take a call on the Parole Amendment Bill in this third reading debate. Can I begin by paying tribute to the Hon Amy Adams the Minister of Justice who is currently shepherding this bill through Parliament but also her predecessor Judith Collins who introduced this as justice Minister.I believe passionately in redemption rehabilitation and the power of education of drug and alcohol treatment and of literacy training in prisons to be able to transform the lives of those who have offended very gravely against society. Not everyone can be fully rehabilitated—there are those offenders—and this Government is progressing other legislation to deal with those who are not able to be treated for the offending that they do perpetrate particularly on the most vulnerable in our society. I am proud to be part of a Government that through this bill along with other pieces of legislation such as the 1000-page Judicature Modernisation Bill is reforming some issues at the heart of our justice system to make sure we do have a system that protects New Zealanders that makes New Zealand a safer place that keeps our communities safe that reduces crime but that does also deal with the issue of the people who have been incarcerated and what becomes of them when they are released back into society as inevitably the vast majority of them will be.May I congratulate Opposition members on agreeing with certainly the Law and Order Committee deliberations and the findings that came out of those hearings. In particular there were a couple of pieces that I picked up in the previous speeches that I thought I would touch on. Poto Williams said that helping offenders work through their issues in part through an extension of the time of the process that they might go through was a positive part of this bill and I could not agree more. There are occasions when an extra year to work through courses such as drug and alcohol rehabilitation—funding for which has been quadrupled by this Government—will have a positive impact on that offender’s likelihood of reoffending when released. I also agreed entirely with Kris Faafoi when he said that this balances the need to maintain rights for the victims but also a focus on the rehabilitation of the offenders.But there are a few specific instances I would like to reference in the brief time I have. I did not sit on the Law and Order Committee but I had the privilege of sitting in on one of the hearings of evidence in Auckland in which we heard very moving and sobering evidence from a very brave woman whom I am not going to name in the House who was the victim of a double murder in which both of her parents were killed by two offenders. I was impressed with the view that this particular victim of crime—of the most serious crime you can imagine—took in that she felt that one of the offenders had made significant inroads into being rehabilitated. She felt that that offender was in fact led by the other one. And when the victims themselves feel that the person who offended against them no longer poses such a risk to society it is good to see legislation giving that person an ability to have their voice heard at an appropriate time and in a convenient and sensitive manner.Similarly this particular victim felt that the other offender who was the ringleader in this particular double murder had not been rehabilitated. So it is absolutely right and proper that instead of being hauled before a Parole Board on an annual basis which is a very upsetting experience for victims of these serious crimes the board has the ability to determine that in fact no positive change has been made by that particular offender that there is still a significant risk of reoffending and therefore that offender will have a 2-year delay before they are reheard by the Parole Board.Also I look at some of the technical changes in this bill including the ability to have hearings conducted by video or phone link. This is a sensible progressive change in the modern era. Not only will it contribute—as my colleagues on this side of the House have alluded to—a $700000 reduction in costs which is a saving to the taxpayer that can be much better spent on crime prevention but also there are safety considerations for corrections officers police prison guards and those who deal with offenders in the transport. We are going to keep those staff much safer by greater use of videoconferencing. Thank you.