Prasad Rajen: Prisoners’ and Victims’ Claims (Continuation and Reform) Amendment Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumePrasad Rajen: Prisoners’ and Victims’ Claims (Continuation and Reform) Amendment Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 05 June 2013. Volume:690;Page:10772. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Dr RAJEN PRASAD (Labour): I am pleased to take a short call on this particular bill the Prisoners’ and Victims’ Claims (Continuation and Reform) Amendment Bill. Let us be clear. I think we will all agree that the public expectation is that prisoners will not benefit from their crimes if you like in any way or indeed by what happens to them when they are serving a sentence. TheTaunoa case brought that to light and therewas the reaction against it justifiable public reaction that while this was happening to somebody when they were supposed to be being punished the victims outside were not receiving anything. So Minister Phil Goff in those days brought an interim measure into place and that was put in. Clearly and the records show it was in the expectation that a better system would be found hence the sunset clause which has been renewed several times.If I take what the last speaker Katrina Shanks was saying that this is as good as it gets—well Ms Shanks smiles but that is the message I take from what you said—that National is the Government that is interested in victims and this is its response to it. So if this is as good as it gets let us see how good this bill is. It has added nothing more than the original bill—$50000 has gone back to victims over what period of time? Since 2007. Members on the other side of the House stand up and crow about this as the exemplar—that this is how it ought to be done. That is intellectually dishonest. If indeed the thought had been put into how this bill was constructed then Ms Shanks could have got up today pointed to the new additions to this bill there would have been cross-party support everybody in this House would have supported it and New Zealand would have put a marker in the sand. But that is not what has happened.What has happened is that this is the further politicisation of this particular issue. When something like this comes out with great fanfare Ministers say “Look here we are addressing the problem.” but that lasts only as long as their story is on the front page of the newspaper. The grafting that needs to go on to actually address the problems is where the real work of policy makers goes in. That has not happened in this particular bill. In fact even the promise given for cross-party negotiations did not take place. Why did that at least not happen? As I say that did not happen.There is no moral ground on which the Opposition could stand to say that this is the best we can do and the best we can bring forward. There was no proper review. There have been any number of the ideas that have come out as to how victims could be compensated. Mr Goff raised very very good points about how to balance the victims of white-collar crime and the victims of blue-collar crime. The Government’s side—the National Government and the ACT Party—is not interested in the victims of white-collar crime. It is not. That has run into billions of dollars. In fact to be absolutely honest about the desire to redress victims if this bill was properly addressed—as Mr Goff designed it and as the promise was given—the Government would have come back today with a comprehensive bill that would say that this is how we compensate the victims of white-collar crime and this is how we compensate the victims of blue-collar crime and there would be no difference.So it is intellectually dishonest as I say to say that this is a demonstration of this Government doing the best it can in bringing forward an exemplar because that is not what this bill does. This bill does not deliver on a promise—the promise that victims will actually be properly compensated. I have not heard of any victim coming up and saying that $50000 over 8 years is really the best we can do. If that is the best that this country can do the best that the Government can do then I think we fall far short of the ideal. So it is an opportunity lost and again the victims are the victims again.As for the next time this bill is looked at I think members across the House have made many many good points as to what it would look like. We will support this bill because there is no reason why we should not support it but we are disappointed that it has not delivered on the promise. Thank you.