Bridges SimonHon SIMON BRIDGES (National—Tauranga): Thank you Mr Speaker. I just want to start by saying it's a novelty to speak on a bill. I haven't done it for a few years in this way and I've got to make sure I don't enjoy it too much actually. Can I just acknowledge a couple of people—firstly Darroch Ball for bringing forward I think a thoughtful bill and I also acknowledge Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi who is our lead spokesperson in this area with responsibilities for National in the area of youth justice. I'm sure he's already said we support this at first reading.That's not a guarantee of where we will go but I do want to say—in a sense what I've just already said in acknowledging Darroch Ball—I think this is an interesting idea. I think it's thoughtful and thoughtful and New Zealand First don't always go hand in hand but I think they do on this bill. I think the idea of a demerits points system—I suppose what New Zealanders will think of when they think of traffic offending; of course I've never got demerits myself but some members in this House will now know the feeling and how that works and ratchets it up for recidivism and for more serious offending—I'd just say it's interesting and is thoughtful.I also like and think what is thoughtful about this bill is what I also understand from my perusal of it was on the other side that notion that there are things that you can do to wipe those points. That I think is a good thing; it's cause and effect. So for example having been out and seen the Limited Service Volunteers programme out in Whenuapai I think it was and what is happening out there—what an excellent programme. The notion that a young person can do that and get credit for that and then have those points worked—and there are other things I know they can do that are in this bill. That is in principle at least I think right.I want to say this bill appeals to I suppose National Party sensibilities and values. And I say that because you know there are basic notions that we believe in strongly. And they are accountability for your actions they're incentives and disincentives. That works better than just sort of you know a less nimble less cause and effect way of thinking.Can I address the fact that of course this is in the youth arena and there are some verities that go with youth offending and sentencing that I think have become almost religious amongst lawyers—that you know there can't be penalties and we have to treat things so differently and da-da-da-da. And look I go along with that at a level. But as someone on the other side of the House likes to say sometimes these things are shibboleths. You know they're there without actual purpose and we can't just treat them religiously like they're absolutes and that's it and we're never going to question it. So I personally go along with the idea that yep in youth justice there should be lesser sentencing we should treat young people and children differently. But you know what? Common sense and right tells me that for recidivist offending and for serious adult crimes that requires consequences actually. If you're going to do serious adult crime and you're going to repeatedly do even petty crime there are consequences that should follow for it. Otherwise we as a society are creating a breeding ground for criminals amongst our young. And that's not fair to them and to their future because you're not giving them a sense of consequence from their actions over time and it's also not fair to society.Look in my brief perusal of this bill I think there are some serious questions to be asked in the select committee process. These are simply the ones that as I say have occurred to me briefly; there may be others. And I suppose they revolve around this point: this bill may be in my view right in principle but have we got it right in terms of the outcomes in it? Have we got the weightings right in those sections or clauses 210C and 210D I think they are in terms of are we too soft on the points or are we too punitive? We've got to think that through and make sure we get that right if we're as a Parliament to pass this. And have we got the punishments and the way they ratchet up and the remedial actions right? Are there other ones we should include? Are there some we should get rid of? I think those quite practical questions are ones we're going to have to think through at committee stage. But at this stage we support this I think thoughtful bill to the House.