Power Simon: Criminal Justice Reform Bill — In Committee 
Power Simon: Criminal Justice Reform Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:640;Page:10203] 
SIMON POWER (National—Rangitikei) 
: 
 What a chaotic mess the Criminal Justice Reform Bill is in. We arrived in the Chamber this evening to debate Part 1 of the bill and we find there are no fewer than four Supplementary Order Papers in the name of the Minister of Justice. On a relatively straightforward bill I have to say that just goes to show what a mess the bill is in. More to the point now that the Minister Mark Burton has joined us he may be able to answer the crucial question that is on the minds of the nine lawyers on this side of the Chamber who are looking forward to debating this bill for most of tonight and tomorrow. If this were the private sector the cost would be about $10000 an hour! [ 
Interruption 
] Oh plus Chris. The question for the Minister is: why was Supplementary Order Paper 99 in his name tabled this evening when that Supplementary Order Paper is dated Wednesday 21 March 2007 and most if not all of the matters on it were agreed to by the Justice and Electoral Committee during the hearing of submissions and consideration of the bill? So the first question to the Minister is about why a Supplementary Order Paper dated March has been tabled. 
The second thing to note about the bill is how much trouble the Government is in with regard to the amendments to the Prisoners’ and Victims’ Claims Act; a subpart of Part 2 that the select committee in its wisdom deleted from the bill meaning that the sunset clause on that particular piece of offensive legislation is removed. We look forward to debating that matter later tonight. There are further amendments including one from myself to divide this bill into two parts dealing with the Sentencing Council and matters relating to parole bail and the like. There is the fine Supplementary Order Paper 126 in the name of Christopher Finlayson dealing with the Sentencing Council and there are other matters for us to deal with. Substantial Supplementary Order Papers are proposed. This is a substantial bill and it is in a mess. It will take hours of Committee time to resolve the votes alone on the Supplementary Order Papers that have been put before the Committee tonight. 
Turning to Part 1 in the first instance relating to the Sentencing Council I say that National has been opposed to this part since the first reading of this bill. We are gravely concerned as Mr Finlayson’s Supplementary Order Paper indicates about the way that this council is to be put together. We are concerned about the independence of the judiciary being undermined. We are concerned about the appointment process and about those matters relating to how one gets to be on the Sentencing Council. We are worried about political influence over sentencing in the long term. But most important National members are worried that this particular part is designed to become the “district health board” of the justice sector. 
 The Sentencing Council is designed to remove responsibility for sentencing matters from the Minister of Justice and the Minister of Corrections and to place it in the hands of an independent body that can take all the political heat and all the political blame when something goes wrong in a sentencing matter—as it does under this Government pretty regularly. National says that if members are elected to run the justice system they should take responsibility for the decisions that the justice sector makes by way of legislation. Members should not pass that responsibility off to a Sentencing Council that is designed to act as a buffer between the Minister and sentencing and criminal matters of the day. I say to members of the other parties in this House that they should not be fooled by what their parties have been told. This is a serious departure from judicial independence in this country. Part 1 creates a quango designed to take the political heat off the Government of the day on sentencing matters. 
I urge caution on the part of the members of other parties who will support this legislation. This matter will come up during the election cycle and people will ask about how this bill dealt with a matter of such a sensitive nature.