Calder Cam: Sentencing and Parole Reform Bill — In Committee 
Calder Cam: Sentencing and Parole Reform Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:663;Page:10908] 
Dr CAM CALDER (National) 
: 
 The Sentencing and Parole Reform Bill is just part of this Government’s review of law and order issues after years of supervised neglect by the late unlamented Labour administration whose languor lassitude and legislative listlessness and flaccidity mired our country in a miasma of torpor and despond. We are addressing the issues. This principled pragmatic National-led Government is listening to New Zealanders and finding solutions to their concerns. 
We have here in front of us the Sentencing and Parole Reform Bill. This bill has two main purposes. The first is to deny parole to repeat serious violent offenders and to offenders who are guilty of committing the worst murders. What could be arguable about that? The second purpose is to impose maximum terms of imprisonment on persistent repeat offenders who continue to commit serious violent crimes. I put it to you that that is an entirely reasonable sanction to place upon violent repeat offenders. This bill is specifically focused on those offenders who show no regard for others. They show no regard for their victims no regard for their families or their community and are repeatedly convicted for serious and violent offending. All of those offences have a maximum penalty of at least 7 years in prison. The bill ensures also that victims of repeat offenders and their families do not have to experience the additional stress of attending regular parole hearings or worry that an offender may be released on parole. 
So how will this bill work? It creates a three-stage regime that will improve public safety by imprisoning the worst repeat violent and sexual offenders for longer periods and under increasingly strict regimes if they continue to offend. At stage one offenders who are convicted of a serious violent offence will be sentenced as normal but will be warned both verbally and in writing that they are on the first rung of the regime and of what will happen if they are convicted of another serious violent offence in the future. Now critics of that have said that offenders do not consider the consequences of their actions when they commit crimes so longer sentences are not an effective deterrent. However the road to a third strike is a long one which involves clear warnings delivered by a judge about the consequences of various serious offending and considerable time in prison where it is hoped they will reflect on their actions. 
So at stage two offenders who are convicted for the second time of a serious violent offence and who have previously received a warning will be sentenced as normal but will be required to serve without parole any sentence of imprisonment imposed by the court. That is eminently reasonable. They will also be warned both verbally and in writing of the consequences of a further conviction for a serious violent offence. So in no way can those offenders be in any doubt of the consequences of their actions. 
At stage three an offender who is convicted for a third time of a serious violent offence and has previously received a final warning at stage two must receive the maximum prison sentence for that offence and serve that sentence in full without parole. However this bill recognises that in some very rare cases the circumstances of the offender and the offence will be such that a sentence served without parole would be manifestly unjust. The bill takes that into account and makes provision for the court where it is satisfied that a no-parole order would be manifestly unjust to not make such an order at stage three when imposing the maximum term for a serious violent offence. I commend this bill to the House.