Webb DuncanHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour—Christchurch Central): Tēnā koe e te Mana Whakawā. Well congratulations to the member for getting this bill drawn and as is apparent from the speeches that have gone before it looks pretty certain to make its way through I imagine the Justice Committee and we look forward to having a good old look at it there.I think it's really important though to recognise that putting an obligation in the Corrections Act doesn't magic up the resources to make sure that the obligation is complied with. We know that at the current time Corrections don't have the resources to do the things that they're legally obliged to do at the present time. The member whose name this bill is in was on the select committee when they were subject to annual review and fronted up and said that they can't comply with their legal obligation under the Corrections Act now. So if this bill goes through—it's got a pretty good chance of it—it's going to require more of Corrections it's going to impose further obligations on Corrections and we've got to make sure that Corrections has the resources to do that.Having said that the sentiment behind this bill is a very good sentiment and certainly in terms of having a survivor focus on how we manage prisoners that's a really good thing and I think that simply shifting the narrative to make sure that survivors are part of the conversation in terms of how prisoners are managed is a good thing; whether we need legislation to do that is quite another. The bill as is apparent from its slim nature does not make significant changes.I would note that there's already considerable powers. Section 33 of the Corrections Act which is the Act being amended gives a prison manager the ability to make rules for prisons and these are pretty uniform across prisons and they can deal with things like visiting rights correspondence telephone calls right through to what they can spend their pocket money on and all sorts of things. So the ability is already there to do that. In fact a ministerial expectation that this is part of prison rules would probably achieve the same thing. I suspect that when we go through a select committee process there will be some discussion around whether legislation is essentially a disproportionate reaction to that. I note in section 108 of the Act that there is an explicit power to withhold mail between the prisoner and any other person. So actually the power is already there in black and white in section 108 to stop mail from going from the prisoner to any other person. I'm aware of a number of the instances that we've heard where this power has not been properly exercised. That's not because the power didn't exist. All of those anecdotes that the member who just spoke alluded to that won't change simply because we say that there is now a function of Corrections to protect victims. There's already that power to do so and the expectation. So if we're going to make sure that this harm doesn't occur we've got to give the power the rules but also the resources. I also note going through again section 77 of the existing Act: outgoing telephone calls can be monitored. There are very narrow exclusions: lawyers and medical professionals for obvious reasons. But the very purpose of monitoring outgoing telephone calls is to stop calls which are not appropriate. I've had contact with people who for that exact reason have had phone calls stopped because they were essentially re-victimising people—and that's exactly what should happen and in section 112 it sets out the purposes for that.So look it's not a bad piece of legislation. You've got to fund Corrections to do these things; at the moment they're pretty much on their bones so to speak so we absolutely need to address that as much as this minor tidy-up of the legislation. Thank you very much.