Dalziel Lianne: Electoral (Disqualification of Sentenced Prisoners) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Dalziel Lianne: Electoral (Disqualification of Sentenced Prisoners) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:668;Page:15198] 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL (Labour—Christchurch East) 
: 
 I want to respond to the Minister—the member in the chair Paul Quinn’s response— 
Simon Bridges 
: Not yet Lianne. 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: No not yet. I think we will be waiting some time for that to occur. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: He won’t be here. 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: Well Paul Quinn is here for only 3 years but the point is that this is his one big moment in time when he has a bill before the House. He has managed to persuade his colleagues to vote for it even though it is stupid and even though the Minister of Justice would have nothing to do with it—even though the Minister of Justice would have nothing to do with it. It is an electoral law reform bill but it was sent to the Law and Order Committee. Why was it sent to the Law and Order Committee? The bill deals only with sentences of under 3 years because sentences over 3 years are already covered by existing law. So it was political puffery right from the very start; it was nothing more than that. 
What offends me even more than all of this is that I asked a whole lot of sensible questions and he answered not one of them. The first question I asked was not about how many people are in prison at the moment. I know the answer to that question. I asked how many of them voted at the last election while they were in prison. As the member does not know the answer to that question perhaps he could just nod or shake his head. Maybe I could engage with him a little bit; a bit of eye contact would be useful. No he is not really listening is he? Never mind I did try. 
The point I am trying to make is that I have been asking this question all the way along and the point is simply that we need to know how many people vote when they are in prison—and that will be only people who have sentences of under 3 years so it is not 8000 people at all I say to Mr Quinn as that member knows; it has nothing to do with that. The answer I am looking for is how many people were eligible to vote and how many of them exercised that vote. Does he know the answer to either of those questions? It appears not. It is a shame he is not able to answer those questions. 
The second question was not about what mischief this bill did because that is perfectly plain on the face of it. It asked about what mischief it was designed to remedy. Without knowing how many people exercise their right to vote at the moment while they are in prison which is only people who are in prison for less than 3 years I ask the member to tell me what it is about the current law that needs to be remedied by this bill. It seems to me that it is not much. We do not even know how many people now vote who are in prison for less than 3 years. We have had examples of the sorts of crimes that receive those sentences and all sorts of umbrage has been taken in the House. In fact I think I heard some members on the other side of the Chamber say that on this issue we were on the side of criminals. I have never understood that taking away a person’s right to vote was somehow being on the side of criminals. But that is OK; we have had the odd criminal in here too. 
There are some people who have been on the receiving end of fraudulent behaviour when certain documentation has been signed by certain Ministers acting in their private capacity. We will not go into that one either but maybe we could. 
Hon Tau Henare 
: What a shameful thing to say. 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: That member should talk to the New Zealand citizen—  
Hon Tau Henare 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. The Speaker earlier ruled out any accusations of that type towards a Minister of the Crown. That is what my point of order is. You just cannot allow— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: Thank you; I hear what the member is saying. I ask members in the future to just be very mindful of previous rulings. 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: I was saying that there are people who have been on the receiving end of criminal fraudulent activity that has implications for their lives and it has been endorsed by people whom one would expect to see better from. Anyway that is another particular case and it will keep because individuals who have been affected by that behaviour will speak out I am sure in due course. 
The point I am making is that the other questions the member in the chair failed to answer asked what mischief this bill is designed to remedy and about the differential between a prisoner who is in prison on the day of the election but is let out the following Monday and somebody who is let out of prison the day before the election. We have had all sorts of umbrage taken in the House as I said before about the sorts of criminals we are talking about. Someone could be in jail on a charge of criminal nuisance on the day of the election and this bill would affect that prisoner. I do not understand why we are talking about serious offences when serious offences are already covered.