Jones Dail: Criminal Justice Amendment Bill (No 7) — In Committee 
Jones Dail: Criminal Justice Amendment Bill (No 7) — In Committee 
[Volume:612;Page:9539] 
DAIL JONES (NZ First) 
: 
 This bill was introduced on 5 October 1999—4 years ago—then in 2001 the Health Committee returned it back to this House. The chair Judy Keall in her report back said and I quote from page 12: “Occasionally Government departments will propose substantive and significant changes to bills after select committees have finished hearing submissions.”—this is a Labour Party chair—“We disapprove of that practice. Committees are not simply vehicles for Government amendments to legislation: they are committees of Parliament with a duty to scrutinise legislation and provide for public input so that New Zealand is provided with the best legislation possible reflecting a wide range of interests.” The Labour Party chair of the Health Committee said that. 
What do we have today? We have a Supplementary Order Paper being rushed through under urgency that we first saw only on Tuesday 21 October—today; in parliamentary time it is still Tuesday 21 October—and it is 44 pages long. Even as a lawyer I find it difficult to grasp everything in this bill but one thing that is very clear is in the explanatory note of Supplementary Order Paper 161—and I hope the people who support the Sensible Sentencing Trust viewpoint are listening to this especially the United Future people. The explanatory note says the Supplementary Order Paper is intended to “remove the current requirement that persons found unfit to stand trial or who are acquitted on account of insanity must be remanded to a hospital or facility while inquiries are made to determine how they should be dealt with.” So the current bill approved by the select committee has a mandatory remand provision; this explanatory note says that instead of a mandatory remand provision the Supplementary Order Paper gives the courts the option of remanding such persons on bail. What an appalling piece of legislation! I understand that the Ellis inquiry report came out yesterday. The person involved in that inquiry was given bail by a Family Court judge. Look what happened while that person was on bail! The Minister of Justice now wants to multiply that situation. This bill must go back to the select committee. 
I want to know what United Future members will do about this matter. Are they keen on harsh sentencing? I have heard a lot from Marc Alexander about this issue. Where will United Future stand? This morning barely after 9 o’clock I saw Darren Hughes having a long talk with Paul Adams. I wonder what Darren Hughes was telling Paul Adams. Perhaps it was “Vote this way or else!”. I would be very interested to hear what happened in that conversation. United Future was getting its instructions to be the lap dog of the Labour Party as usual and was being told to support a bill that is soft on law and order. 
What will the chair of the Health Committee say about this? This bill took only 1 hour in the Health Committee when it first came in. It will take less than an hour if it goes back to the select committee on this occasion and it will be back in the House in a fortnight. 
The Minister said yesterday that people have to be given the opportunity to have bail because of the human rights aspect of the matter. That was not a problem in the bill originally. The Human Rights Commission went to the Health Committee and it had no problem with the mandatory bail provision as I see it. The Human Rights Commission has supported it. The Minister’s advice and the Minister’s statement are all poppycock. It is absolute nonsense to suggest that it might be a human rights matter or a New Zealand Bill of Rights Act matter. The advice he has been given is appalling. It is absolutely appalling to suggest there could be a human rights issue when the Human Rights Commission has already supported the mandatory requirement to stay on remand. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: It has not. 
DAIL JONES 
: It has in the original bill. I tell the Minister to read the original bill that he is trying to amend under urgency. The mandatory bail provision as he says in his own explanatory note is being taken out. That is what the Minister is doing even though he does not seem to know it. We are talking about all those criminally insane people out there being let out on bail as a result of this Labour Party legislation. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: Don’t be silly. 
DAIL JONES 
: Those were the Minister’s own words last night by inference. He used a politically correct viewpoint. Clearly that is what this bill is all about. People who are unfit to stand trial or are insane will have the opportunity to have bail granted to them as a result of this legislation. New Zealand First says that is wrong and is a ground in itself for opposing this legislation. We are the law and order party in this Parliament. We stand by what we said. 
Georgina Beyer 
: You are not. 
DAIL JONES 
: Of course we are. If the member had any regard for law and order she would not be supporting people who are insane and having these problems getting bail. It is no wonder there are so many problems in the Wairarapa with representations like that from its member Georgina Beyer.