Bennett DavidHon DAVID BENNETT (National—Hamilton East): Thank you Mr Speaker. We acknowledge those victims in Christchurch and their families and the wider community that have been impacted by the tragic events that happened earlier this year and the result that that had with the Prime Minister making it very clear that the name of the individual was not to be mentioned again and that New Zealanders should do all we can to ensure that that person does not get the notoriety and the presence that that person has seen being acknowledged in the media in New Zealand and around the world in the last week. That is a great failure on the Minister and his department but especially on the Minister: the gross incompetence to enable that to happen against the wishes of the Prime Minister and the people of New Zealand.This is a high-profile prisoner unknown to New Zealand before but there is no excuse in this case. The Minister has a duty of care to the New Zealand public to protect our people and our citizens from this prisoner. The Minister had a responsibility to act in certain ways and that did not happen in this case. The Minister demonstrated that he had no expectations for his department. He did not monitor his department and the ultimate failings that we have seen are the result of his incompetence. What's worse the Minister didn't own up when this became public and is now hiding behind law changes 0800 numbers and reviews.SPEAKER: Order! The member will resume his seat. The member will stay at this time—and the ministerial statement is one of the most formal times—well within the Standing Orders.Hon DAVID BENNETT: It is clear that the laws were enough. Letters were stopped. The Minister his department and academics have all said that the laws are sufficient. They did not need changing. What has happened in this case is that the Minister has created a culture of leniency to prisoners. He has created a prisoner-first culture that has meant that the department has not exercised its role in the appropriate manner. He has tried to have incentives for prisoners to behave. He seeks in his latest strategy to continue that process and the system has broken down as a result. The second thing that has happened in this case is the Minister was not vigilant with his department he did not set a plan he did not require them to meet any objectives and he did not monitor them on an ongoing basis to ensure that it happened. All this led to this prisoner being able to get the notoriety and publicity that the prisoner has always sought.This is not the end of the matter. There are more questions to be answered by this prisoner: what further communications went out? The other letters that went out—who did they go to? The Minister had admitted that there are other letters and yet would not be able to identify to who and when they went. The Minister should have that information. With a prisoner of this high level all interactions will be recorded within the department and we need the Minister to come out with the rest of the information around this prisoner—his phone calls other letters and to who they may have been—because there could be further incitement and continuation of this notoriety that this prisoner has achieved.There is no problem with the law. There is no need for legislative change. What we needed was a Minister to stand up for the people of New Zealand to do his job and to make sure that his department was vigilant in this case. He had the responsibility to act. He has let down his Prime Minister he has let down the New Zealand public and more importantly he has let down the victims of those terrible tragedies. This Minister can do more than apologise; he needs to act in a way that this never happens again and that the New Zealand public are safe as we would expect from someone that has his position.