Beaumont Carol: Electoral (Disqualification of Sentenced Prisoners) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Beaumont Carol: Electoral (Disqualification of Sentenced Prisoners) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:668;Page:15202] 
CAROL BEAUMONT (Labour) 
: 
 I have not previously had anything to do with the Electoral (Disqualification of Sentenced Prisoners) Amendment Bill but I feel the need to stand and speak on it because it causes me concern in three main areas. Firstly there are issues around participation in our democratic process. Secondly there are real issues about why we have such high rates of imprisonment. This is just another bill designed to thump chests and pretend to be hard on crime when in fact this Government is doing nothing at all to address the real issue: the causes of crime which include poverty and lack of opportunity. The third reason is that the bill is another shambolic and shoddy piece of work. We will deal with another piece of legislation tonight Tau Henare’s Employment Relations (Workers’ Secret Ballot for Strikes) Amendment Bill which is equally shambolic and shoddy legislation. It was poorly drafted; it actually had to have the real reasons for it and its drafting dealt with in multiple ways. Like that bill this is a shoddy and poorly drafted bill. 
This bill is supposedly about being tough on criminals and dealing with serious offenders but for those listening to this debate let me reinforce what some of my colleagues have said—that is that people now serving a sentence of imprisonment for a term of 3 years or more are already disqualified from registration as electors. People who have been convicted of and sentenced for serious crimes are already disqualified. I think the hype around this bill has fudged that point. 
There is no explanation of the harm that this bill is designed to remedy and no compelling reasons have been given for why this change is wanted or needed. It certainly will not make New Zealand safer. It will not reduce crime or recidivism. In fact that is what I really find offensive. National members love to look like they are tough on crime. The reality is that violent crime has been rising under National. Under this National Government violent crime has been rising. This bill will not do anything to stop it. It will not be a deterrent to crime. In fact no effort has been made by this Government to address the causes of crime or to look at what leads to people undertaking criminal offences. 
Poverty and unemployment are both on the rise in this country and there is a link between poverty unemployment and crime. There is lack of opportunity for too many New Zealanders—New Zealanders who already feel disengaged from the community they live in people who themselves have been victims of crime as children and people who have suffered from poor parenting. What is the Government doing about those sorts of things—the real causes of crime? It is doing nothing at all. That is the reality. The Government likes to put through legislation where it can say it has been tough on criminals. It is three strikes and they are out. It will stop those criminals voting. It says it is being tough on crime. I say to the Government that it should do something about the causes of crime. 
New Zealand’s rate of imprisonment is absolutely disgraceful. The rate of imprisonment in this country is disgraceful; we are at the top end of the OECD on rates of imprisonment. It is costing the taxpayer millions and millions of dollars that would be better spent on investing in people’s education upskilling them and working to find jobs. That is one of the reasons why I feel compelled to speak on this bill. 
I say also that this bill is likely to lead to mass disenfranchisement of many people who go to prison because they are unlikely to re-enrol on release. Anybody who works in our lower-income communities—as many of us do—will know that many many New Zealanders are not on the electoral roll now. This bill will just add to that number. That is of concern to me because I believe that all New Zealanders should have the right to vote and should vote and take part as a civic duty in the governing of their country. 
We made the decision years ago that people serving sentences of more than 3 years should lose the right to vote. We are happy with that provision; it applies to serious offenders. But this bill covers anybody who is sentenced to imprisonment. It has a whole lot of negative consequences. There was not a proven problem and submitters to this bill were overwhelmingly opposed to it. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 174 in the name of Paul Quinn to add new clause 6 be agreed to. 
Amendment agreed to.