Cosgrove Clayton: Sentencing (Aggravating Factors) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Cosgrove Clayton: Sentencing (Aggravating Factors) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 08 February 2012. Volume:677;Page:222. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Labour) 
: 
 I rise to take a call on the Sentencing (Aggravating Factors) Amendment Bill. Despite the sort of colourful approach of the other member I would state for the record that Labour will support this bill. But we do have some reservations about it and that is why this is called a democratic Parliament. We are charged with actually raising some issues.  
The point is this—and Mr Parker who is a lawyer had a word to me before and I think he made a very interesting point: does the Government really think that for the last 150 years when a police officer or a prison officer has been brutally attacked—as with other analogist cases where an adult as we have seen recently actually tortures or imposes themselves on a young child; that is an aggravating factor—that judges for the last 150 years have not taken that into account— 
Hon David Parker 
: As an aggravating factor. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: —as an aggravating factor? Of course they have. I know Simon Power a pretty good member of this House—he is not here now; he is in the hallowed halls of Westpac but the bill is in his name actually—will be kissing the ground that people walk on up in Auckland or wherever he is saying thank God he does not have to come down and front another tinkering fictitious bill.  
Everybody in this House—before the squawk-boxes start—everybody on this side of the House like everybody in this Chamber agrees that where a police officer or prison officer who puts their life on the line is attacked then of course that should be dealt with by the judiciary and of course it should be an aggravating factor and it is. But this is a “Judith Collins Special”—another one because Simon Power is not here; this is another one. The huge detail in this bill—we are talking 3½ pages maybe if we can get there 3¾ pages that again sound tough but actually will do nothing. The history of police officers and prison officers who are assaulted when those cases are dealt with in the courts is that judges do take it into account as an aggravating factor.  
In fact this bill is so light that it says that a judge must take account of it as an aggravating factor but then it does not go on to compel a judge to do anything—not a thing. It just says the judge must acknowledge mentally or however that this is an aggravating factor and then it is over to you which is exactly what a judge does in the present-day judicial system. They sit there they look at the aggravating factors and they sentence accordingly.  
This bill says: “Judge you must sit there and you must say to yourself ‘this is an aggravating factor’ and then you can sentence accordingly.” What does it change apart from being another little political pamphlet where Ms Collins can stand up and say: “I’m being tough and I’m standing beside our police and our prison officers.”? Well she did not do that a few years ago when a lot of the prison officers got attacked had their bones broken and she got up in this House and said they were minor injuries. 
Hon Judith Collins 
: That’s just not true. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: It is true and it is in  
Hansard 
. This is the sort of lightweight political pamphlet stuff we got from the last Government and we get from this— 
Hon Judith Collins 
: Angry member. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: “Angry” she says—angry. Well I will tell you the people who may well be angry tonight. They are the people the men and women in the police force—as she chirps away because she does not take these issues seriously—who actually know as prosecutors and others stand up in the courts and know Greg O’Connor and others how their men and women are dealt with by the judiciary. They know this is piffle. This is a political pamphlet.  
Everybody supports the judiciary ensuring there is an aggravating factor when a police or prison officer is attacked. You do not actually need this. The judiciary do it anyway. But Judith Collins can get up and say: “I’ve been tough again”. Remember the old boy-racer thing—we had a hundred out the other night—when Judith Collins said: “I’m going to go and crush them.”? None have been crushed. She said: “I’m going to say that it is mandatory—no I am going to make sure that the judges deal with these silly boys and girls.” Then she did not make anything mandatory on a judge. She did not say that a judge had to crush a car— 
Hon Judith Collins 
: Yes I did. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: No you did not. 
Hon Judith Collins 
: Guess what? What’s happened? 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: Well there was a hundred of them a couple of days ago reported in the paper or is she blind? Let us get past all the piffle and political politics. Simon Power will be sitting up there in private banking which I am told is sort of professional shopping for the rich or something like that saying: “Thank God I got out. Thank God the Prime Minister didn’t force another bill that I had to hand over to Judith Collins because I knew it was wrong. I didn’t want to represent it as a justice bill. Thank God I don’t have to stand up and humiliate myself and front this sort of piffle.”  
Anybody who stands up in this House—and the next Government speakers will I am sure—and accuses the Labour Party New Zealand First the Greens or anybody else in this House of not standing beside and with our police or not standing beside and with our prison officers shame on them. If the test and commitment and loyalty to our police force to our prison staff who in many cases—especially our police—put their lives on the line is to support political pamphlets and piffle like this if that is the benchmark then I am sorry but that does not wash with the public. For 150 years where police and prison officers have been done over or killed or grievously injured and the accused has gone before a court does anybody on that side believe that a judge has gone: “Nah that’s not an aggravating factor.”? In the same way does anybody on that side believe that if an adult does over kills injures or imposes themselves on a young child as we have seen in recent days—[ 
Interruption 
]—and keep interjecting; it says more about that member than anybody else. Does anybody believe—does that member believe yes or no—that a judge would not take into account an aggravating factor of an adult doing over or worse a child? Well well? Of course that judge will always take that as an aggravating factor. Why? Because they would be negligent in their duty—and I do not speak of them directly—and I suspect they would be removed by a higher authority namely this House.  
So this is just another “Judith Collins You Beaut Special”—stand up stomp your feet say you are being tough with a bill that is sort of akin to half a fish and chip paper which actually will change nothing and do nothing and will not actually provide any added protection to our prison officers or to our police. What Miss Collins would have been better to do when she was Minister of Corrections and Minister of Police was not cut the police vote as she did and actually stand up in the House when prison officers were done over when they had their phones broken as we know happened and instead of saying they were minor injuries and belittling them actually getting off her backside and standing behind them and doing something about it and supporting them and not treating as she did the Corrections Association and other people who were representing members—the New Zealand Public Service Association and others—like dirt. Prison officers do a hell of a job an awful job that I could not do I suspect. I suspect that member could not do it though she would tell everybody she could—although I suspect if she did take up a prison officer’s career she would probably scare the hell out of a few of them in solitary confinement up at Paremoremo.  
So this is not—this is not—a bill of substance. This is not a great law reform. Yes we will support it but let us be honest about what it is. This is not the benchmark and the acid test of whether we support our police whether we support prison officers. This is about the Government as usual talking tough acting tough but producing absolutely nothing and changing a couple of words in an Act. And do you think the judiciary are going to be poring over this piece of legislation over every fine word changing their behaviour? No because they do not have to change their behaviour because they do this anyway and they have done it for 150 years.  
So I say let us be honest for once. Let us say what this is. Let us stand by our police let us stand by our prison officers. And the Government continues to play this pathetic little game of saying that if you are not fully supportive of this rubbish then you are selling out the police and our prison service. I believe the public are better than that are far brighter than that and they will continue to see through that sort of political piffle.