Mallard Trevor; McKee NicoleTHREE STRIKES LEGISLATION REPEAL BILLFirst ReadingDebate resumed from 16 November.SPEAKER: I call Nicole—I've lost your surname.Hon Members: McKee.SPEAKER: Sorry—after knowing your husband for 50 years I should know it better!NICOLE McKEE (ACT): Ha ha! Thank you Mr Speaker. I stand to rise on the Three Strikes Legislation Repeal Bill. I'm going to begin by saying that I'm disappointed. I'm disappointed for the victims—for the victims of serious violent and sexual violence crime. I'm also disappointed in the way that the Minister introduced this bill to the House yesterday. The Minister of Justice Kris Faafoi began his speech by attacking the ACT Party. He got stuck into us for the way that we introduced this bill and got it through. He also attacked the National Party. He had no relevance whatsoever in his speech to three strikes. All he wanted to talk about was who wrote the bill who moved the bill who took over the bill who put the bill through and why they put it through. I was waiting to hear about victims—didn't hear that. All I heard about was how it was unjust for certain criminals to have to go to jail and serve full time.I was also disappointed in the way that the Minister for the Prevention of Family and Sexual Violence conducted her speech last night in the House when she said that she had spoken to victims that she had spoken to advocates—daily I think she told us she had done this—and she indicated that victims don't want this law. She indicated that the victims knew that this law would not keep them safe. Yet the regulatory impact assessment (RIA) actually pointed out that no victims had been consulted at all and what I'd like to make a statement about is that when I left this House last night and got back to my office I had a victim in contact with me who was in tears and said that she felt completely let down by the Minister for the Prevention of Family and Sexual Violence and said that she was actually hurt and felt ignored by the Minister. What was said to me was How dare she say that we don't want this? She is not speaking for me." So that is disappointing that the victims of the three strikes regime have not been talked to or consulted with in any way.And why is this important? Well it's important because we need to bring or should be bringing to the table statistics on why we need to repeal this Act and we've seen none. But what we can give is statistics for why we have to have this Act. One percent of all offenders in New Zealand are eligible under the three strikes regime and that's because there's 40 qualifying offences which come under three strikes—not hundreds; 40. And those 40 relate to very serious violent crime or sexual violence crimes. It's not a whole stack but what we do have is 13349 people sitting on a first strike. By the time they get to the second strike we have 640 people. That's quite a big difference. When we get to the third strike we have 21 people currently sitting on their third strike. This is the worst of the worst of New Zealand's criminals. These are not petty thieves. These are people who have found that rehabilitation if they decide to take it actually doesn't work for them. And the stats show us exactly that.Let me share some stories from some three strikes offenders. The first offender to be sentenced under three strikes carried out a vicious assault where he repeatedly punched kicked and struck a victim with a piece of wood. That's strike one. After he was released from that sentence he stalked and sexually assaulted a 17-year-old girl. That's strike two. That's someone's daughter. That's someone's granddaughter. And upon release he stabbed someone in the leg. He would have received just two years and three months but thanks to three strikes he got made to carry out the full sentence of seven years. And our streets were safer for it.In another case the first strike was a robbery. The offender approached a victim sitting in a carpark and demanded his car and his phone. When he refused he forcibly dragged the victim out of the car and on to the road. Upon release he carried out a similar offence attacking a person after he refused to hand over money and their phone. And his third strike was again similar: when the victim refused to hand over money or their phone they were thrown to the ground and had their head stamped on. That offender had 105 previous convictions. And thanks to three strikes instead of getting 18 months he got the maximum of five years which many in New Zealand would say was well deserved. And when we look at stats again let's look at the person with the highest conviction rate that is currently serving under three strikes—156 convictions of which nine are for acts intended to cause injury. And the person with the fewest convictions—he has eight but six of them are for sexual assault and related offences. I come back to this being the worst of the worst that we're talking about those that cannot be rehabilitated and the Government has given them a very early Christmas present. And in doing so you've give victims a very early Christmas warning.Victims have been ignored throughout this. There's been no reports. There's been no consultation. There's been nothing in the RIA that says or points to the fact that three strikes doesn't work. We will suggest with the stats that I've just given it does. And further to that rehabilitation is not the only way out of prison for people—doing their time under three strikes is one—and where rehabilitation can be afforded to those who want it we want to help them with it. An ACT member Toni Severin has a bill in the ballot box that will address that. It's about ensuring that those who are currently serving time undergo rehabilitation programmes but those that don't want to rehabilitate need to serve the time for their crime. Where is this all going? This is going to a place where the Government is showing they're soft on crime soft on criminals. Legislation is more important to them than the victims of New Zealand society. There is no evidence to show that this regime needs to stop and in fact we'll go so far as to say it does work and it has worked because there's only 21 not 13349 people that are currently serving full time.This Government is not putting the victims at the centre of the justice system and that's very much what ACT intended to do when we put this bill through and it became an Act of law. And what we intend to carry on doing is making sure the victims not the criminals take centre stage within our justice system. I almost think Labour should change their name to the "Crim Cuddling Party". We could abbreviate it to "CCP" but I think they're actually harder on crime than what the Labour Party are! The worst of the worst in New Zealand society need to be held accountable for their crimes. If they don't rehabilitate and they're out there in society they will create more victims. It is estimated that there will be 90 less people who were eligible for the three strikes regime in prison by 2025. That means there's going to be more than 22 people each year between now and 2025 that are on the streets committing serious violent or sexual violence crimes and this Government is enabling that to happen. Victims deserve justice and the ACT Party along with the National Party will want to ensure that justice is served for those who are at the other end of violent crime.Three strikes is a success. Three strikes works. Three strikes keeps the worst of the worst where they should be: out of society and in another place where they could learn perhaps to behave better. We oppose this bill."