Barnett Tim: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Barnett Tim: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:606;Page:3688] 
4. MARTIN GALLAGHER (NZ Labour—Hamilton West) 
 on behalf of  
TIM BARNETT (NZ Labour—Christchurch Central) 
 to the  
Minister of Justice 
: Has he received any reports on feedback from victims on the operation of the new Parole Act 2002? 
Hon PHIL GOFF (Minister of Justice) 
: 
 I have seen very positive reports on how the new law is operating for victims. The family of Kylie Smith murdered at Owaka by Paul Bailey for example said that their experience of the Parole Board under the new law was much better than their treatment under the old. Kylie’s mother said that the new Parole Board was attentive sympathetic and ready to listen to what people had to say. I believe that that is a strong endorsement of how the new board is operating.  
Martin Gallagher 
: Has this view that the Minister has just stated from individual victims been backed up by groups representing victims?  
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: Yes it has interestingly by one of the groups more critical of the legislation—the Sensible Sentencing Trust which has strongly backed up the comments of the victim I just referred to. Having observed the Parole Board the trust’s spokesperson Garth McVicar said that the trust was very impressed and that the situation was a totally different picture from what went on before it. He said: “Communication with victims’ families is much better and they feel as if their rights are being considered by the board.” 
Hon Tony Ryall 
: What does the Minister say to a family after the Parole Board paroled the killer of their brother to live next door to the sister of the victim; to the South Island victim who discovered her serious sex offender was walking in her streets without notification; to the families of the victims of William Duane Bell whom the Department of Corrections left unsupervised for 5 weeks before the murders at the Returned Services Association rooms; and to the person who was bashed by a violent offender sentenced to 3 years in jail but let out by that Minister’s Government after only 5 months? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: Each of the cases that the member has referred to has been addressed. I will take one of them because that is all that time will allow. We of course investigated very closely the case of the family living in the member’s electorate who discovered that the person found guilty of the manslaughter of their brother and son was supposedly living in the street next to them and they had not been notified. The family say that they lodged a notification form. Regrettably that was never received by the Department of Corrections. No explanation has been found for that but the Acting Minister of Corrections personally flew to Kawerau to explain the situation to the family and to apologise for the mistake that has been made. The family very much appreciated that effort on the part of the Minister. 
Stephen Franks 
: If he is so proud of the parole system why does he refuse to find out or tell us how many offences are committed on parole and hides the details of offending by individual criminals on parole including the Tukuafu burglary clan and so many other vicious criminals I have directly questioned the Minister about? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: I refer to the specific example used by the member the Tukuafu family. I am very pleased to report that the two principal offenders of that family received 13 and 12 years’ imprisonment respectively. Those are probably the longest sentences ever given for burglary in this country which is in line with the tendency of the courts today to be much tougher on it. With regard to the statistics the member asked for his colleague Dr Muriel Newman has put down several questions to which I have replied fully. For example I indicated that of those people convicted of murder who have been released on parole in the last 4 years none has reoffended and none has been reimprisoned. 
Marc Alexander 
: Can the Minister give us an assurance that if any provisions of the Parole Act are inconsistent with the aims objectives and practice of the Victims’ Rights Act it will be the Parole Act that he will undertake to revisit and amend? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: All legislation is under review to ensure that it does what it is intended to do. We will be watching very closely the outcomes of both the Sentencing Act and the Parole Act to see that they are consistent with the new Victims’ Rights Act. So far all three Acts have delivered good results but if shortcomings are found either in the legislation or in practice under the legislation they will be addressed. 
Ron Mark 
: With reference to the insinuation that the Minister will be considering a review of the new Sentencing Act will the Minister take on board the views of some families of victims who consider that under his stewardship people like William Bell got a sentence of 11 years non-parole for the murder of Mr Absolum 11 years non-parole for the murder of Mr Wayne Johnson 11 years non-parole for the murder of Mary Hobson and for brutally bashing and leaving Susan Couch for dead—Well that was thrown out as a freebie? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: To the contrary William Bell received a life sentence. That sentence will remain for the whole of his natural life. A non-parole period of 33 years is the longest-ever non-parole period given in the history of this country. I happen to agree with the comments of the Crown prosecutor Simon Moore who suggested that this man will probably never be released.