Nash Stuart: Electoral (Disqualification of Sentenced Prisoners) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Nash Stuart: Electoral (Disqualification of Sentenced Prisoners) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:668;Page:15188] 
STUART NASH (Labour) 
: 
 Thank you. It was a difficult decision I know but you came up with the right answer in the end Mr Chairperson. 
When I look at the Electoral (Disqualification of Sentenced Prisoners) Amendment Bill I wonder if the member Paul Quinn actually spoke to the National Government’s Minister of Justice—I wonder if he did. When I look at this bill I see that the only people who will be in jail for 3 years or less who will vote will be the blokes who voted for that side of the House anyway. They are the chaps from the 40-odd finance companies who I hope will end up as guests of Her Majesty in the big house for the damage they have done to the vast majority of people. 
I must say one thing: the previous National speaker Cam Calder spoke about denying the rights of Kiwis who had done great harm to society. Well I may be wrong but the way I read this bill is that it is only for people who are in jail or have committed an offence and are jailed for 3 years or less. The men who have murdered our citizens and the women who have neglected their children the ones who are in jail for a long length of time have already been denied their right to vote anyway. 
When I look at this bill I see that this is a nasty bill. What does this bill do? It does not save any lives it does not protect society and it does not deliver equity. There is no mention of rehabilitation there is no mention of redemption and there is no mention of restoration. It delivers only a further kick in the guts to people in jail who have made wrong decisions and who are there at the moment for 3 years or less. We will be denying them every single possible right that they could have. That is the wrong message to send. 
I wonder whether in fact the member who is sponsoring this bill took it to caucus to be debated. The reason I ask is that the Attorney-General himself who we know knows absolutely everything about everything wrote a report that stated that this bill contravened the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. The Attorney-General said that. I am sure the Attorney-General would have been in the caucus when that member brought the bill to caucus and said that he wanted to put it in the ballot. I cannot believe that the Hon Chris Finlayson did not stand up and say “Whoa hold on a second here. This is not what our party stands for. This contravenes the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act.” 
Simon Bridges 
: Whoa! 
STUART NASH 
: I know that member over there would not have stood for it; he admitted he lost 50 percent of his cases. 
Is this what we want to do? Is this the sort of slippery slope that we want to send our society down denying the rights in the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act a fundamental piece of constitutional law which outlines the fundamental rights of every citizen? The Attorney-General said “No”. 
The other thing is that Simon Power stood up in the House—well he has stood up numerous times—and said this Government would be hard on criminals. Is this legislation hard on criminals? He said this Government would look after the rights of victims. Does this bill attend to the rights of victims? No it does not. It does not do anything positive at all—it does not do anything positive at all. As my colleague the Hon Lianne Dalziel asked will this bill stop people committing crimes? Cam Calder said it may. Of course it will not. People who commit crimes will not stop and think “Well hell if I go to jail I’m not going to be allowed to vote.” 
This bill has no positive impact whatsoever. It will not stop crime it will not address the causes of crime and it will not address social equity. It does nothing. It does nothing to help rehabilitate people who are already in jail and it is not the track that I think our society needs to go down. I am sure Mr Bridges over there would agree. I cannot believe that a lawyer who is versed in constitutional law would back any bill that would deny the rights of citizens and would go against the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act—I just cannot believe that. 
So I ask Mr Quinn to have a look at this bill to take a deep breath and have a look at what he is trying to achieve because I do not know what this bill is trying to achieve. The worst offenders in our society who have committed the most abhorrent crimes have been denied the right to vote already—they have been denied the right to vote already. This bill is aimed at the petty criminal who has a chance of rehabilitation. It is aimed at the petty criminal who we can provide rehabilitation for. This is not a good bill.