Smith NickHon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson): There is nothing as cancerous to the political process as politicians saying one thing in Opposition and doing exactly the opposite in Government as is done in this bill. I want to call out both the Green Party and the Labour Party and particularly Minister Kelvin Davis on the bill in his name around the issue of shared bunking because when I was in Government there was a constant chorus from Mr Kelvin Davis that double-bunking was a great evil. I actually searched on the parliamentary Hansard and I have found 36 quotes from Kelvin Davis extolling the virtues of single cells in our corrections system. In fact the Green Party in their policy specifically said that they would ban double-bunking. Let's come to the bill. It replaces the existing law in clause 66 of the Corrections Regulations. The existing law says that as far as practicable prisoners will be accommodated in single cells and then it sets down the exceptional circumstances in which they might have double cells. That was the law that National operated for nine years and it was heavily criticised by members opposite. So what does the Minister's bill do? Let me read it. Now rather than saying that in all practicable circumstances it shall be a single cell it says that a prisoner may be accommodated in in a shared cell unless the prison manager is satisfied" that there is some special reason. What sort of double standard is that? How can the Green Party look voters in the eye and say "Trust us." make over—and I've got the number—24 press releases criticising double-bunking and then roll down to the Parliament and vote for a bill that changes from a law that puts the presumption in favour of single cells to giving corrections open slather for double-bunking? The leader of the Green Party has just walked in and I would love to hear his explanation as to the damage his party is doing to its reputation as a party that people can trust. Its manifesto its policy to the electorate said that it would oppose double-bunking but it is now voting for a bill that changes the presumption in the law to do the exact opposite. But what is even more extraordinary is actually the Minister of Corrections. I've checked his number of press releases. He should have a look because it was on the Labour Party website. There are actually 22 press releases in the name of Kelvin Davis indicating his opposition to double-bunking. How can he have the audacity to come to this Parliament and sponsor a bill that does exactly the opposite of what he says? I think this issue is very practical. What more practical issue could you have than whether you share a cell or whether you do not? I ask Mr Kelvin Davis and I ask the Green Party: what's changed that you have broken your word to New Zealanders? I also note—Hon Kelvin Davis: More beds available—more beds available. Hon Dr NICK SMITH: Oh I seek leave for Mr Kelvin Davis to be able provide an explanation as to this reversal of policy. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Leave has been sought. Is there any objection? There is objection. Hon Dr NICK SMITH: So the Minister interjects offers to give an explanation as to this giant backward flip on one of the core issues in corrections policy and his own Labour colleague objects to him providing that answer. So I simply challenge the next Labour member to get to their feet and answer the question as to why they have done a super backward flip on the issue of double-bunking an issue that they railed against for nine years and are now changing the law on in exactly the opposite direction. Here's my new challenge for the Green Party: your policy specifically says—and we share the values—that we need to put far more emphasis on the rehabilitation of our prisoners. We're with you on that and what the original bill had provision for is requiring a rehabilitation plan for every prisoner. Now what happens to Governments when they get into office? I've been there: officials come along and say "Now Minister don't put it in the law. Trust us. We'll have a rehabilitation plan for every prisoner." and I see every previous and current Minister having a little chuckle. Why don't we put in the law a requirement on corrections for every one of our 10000 prisoners to have a rehabilitation plan? Wouldn't that be what we would want to do if we were serious about the issue of reducing reoffending rates and ensuring that corrections does what it says in providing for that rehabilitation? National will be reintroducing the original amendments to the law that were in this bill to provide for rehabilitation and it will be a test of the Green Party again—just like on double-bunking—as to whether it is a party that will again break its word in this important area of corrections policy. Here's the problem: in almost every area of endeavour whether it's climate change whether it's housing whether it's road safety or whether it's justice there is this almighty gulf between the promise and the performance of this Government. This bill is a damning indictment on both the Green Party and the Labour Party in that on the most contentious issue in the area of corrections—on double-bunking—they are doing exactly the opposite of what they said they would do. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The next is a split call."