Connell Brian: Courts and Criminal Matters Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Connell Brian: Courts and Criminal Matters Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:626;Page:21679] 
BRIAN CONNELL (National—Rakaia) 
: 
 I love the smell of urgency. It builds the collegial spirit which is just so necessary for a team that will be going into Government very very soon. It toughens one up. I issue an invitation to anyone from the Opposition parties to come to coffee before we commence again tomorrow morning because we are digging in on this issue. National members will drag it out because we like being toughened up. We know what is ahead of us unlike this Government which is soft soft soft and I am about to explain why. This bill is a lost opportunity of immense proportions. The Government said it would get tough on fines defaulters but what it proposes is as Mr Alexander said a slap on the wrist with a wet bus-ticket. 
I want to thank the members of the Law and Order Committee who worked on this bill. I will even acknowledge that some fair work was done on the part of the Government members. It is not their fault that their leadership is soft on crime and they had to work on conditions that were imposed on them. 
A key objective of this bill and the most substantial part is to improve the compliance of fines defaulters who travel overseas. Let us have a look at the scope of this problem. In June 2003 there was approximately $500 million in unpaid fines and of that amount $305 million was overdue. On 31 May 2004 it was a whopping $527 million in unpaid fines and the overdue component was $326 million. Now we are told and I accept Mr Ryall’s figures that it is now over $600 million— 
Hon Tony Ryall 
: That’s at December. 
BRIAN CONNELL 
: Mr Ryall tells me that is the figure as at December last year. Goodness knows what it might be now! 
Hon Tony Ryall 
: It’s probably $650 million now. 
BRIAN CONNELL 
: It could be as high as $650 million or even $700 million and the unpaid component I imagine will have gone through $350 million already. We have been told that this bill will fix that problem. 
Under the bill as it was introduced as Mr Ryall pointed out only 35 people would have been stopped at the border and now as it has been recommended back to the House 117 people will be stopped. That is one person every 3 days. That will scare the hell out of those people who thumb their nose at being fined—that will really scare them! That will make them lie awake at night and think: “Should I take the risk of travelling or not because this tough mean Government has introduced this tough mean bill that will stop me at the border and say: ‘You need to pay your fines!’.” Pigs might fly as well. 
The revenue from fines collected will be about $1.5 million. That is 0.25 percent of $600 million and we are expected to believe that is tough. I ask my colleagues what the point is of introducing a fines regime if legislation to enforce it is not also put in place. The problem is not with the people out there being fined; it comes right back to this Parliament right back to this Government which is soft on crime and sends out all the wrong messages to the criminals of this country. It sends the message: “It doesn’t matter if you get a fine; the chances of it being imposed are slight.” The only people who pay fines in this country are the compliant people the mums and dads who go about their everyday business and get caught by a traffic officer on one of our main highways for doing 4 or 5 kilometres over the speed limit—and that is meant to be an example of being tough. The only reason they get nailed is because they have a fixed abode so the authorities know where they live. 
Rather than take the opportunity to drive home that message to people who thumb their nose at the fines regime in this country this Government let that opportunity slip through its fingers. It is not as if we cannot find out where those people live. The excuse we have been given is that most fine defaulters have no fixed abode keep moving addresses and cannot be found. But if they are registered with the Inland Revenue Department or if they register their Lotto number and have a win in the Lotto they can be found—no problem whatsoever. Michael Cullen and his cronies have no problem whatsoever finding out where those people are if they have an inland revenue issue. That is the great travesty of this PC soft Government. Rather than insist that Government departments share information it has allowed the Inland Revenue Department not to share this information. That window could have been closed very very simply but it has not been. The ministry tells us that at present the system of enforcement is very ad hoc. I will allow that this bill goes somewhat towards improving that situation but as I have said it is a shame that the opportunity has been lost in such huge proportions. 
The ministry receives information about a fines defaulter for whom there is a warrant for arrest. It normally gets that information because of an ex-partner or someone the fines defaulter owes money to dobbing him or her in. That is how this system normally operates. The ministry then tells the police and the police if they are not too busy on our main highways writing tickets or trapping motorists will wander down to the airport intercept someone and tell him or her to pay the fine or be arrested. That sounds all well and good—very ad hoc. The chances of being stopped are one person in three. 
Hon Tony Ryall 
: How much? 
BRIAN CONNELL 
: One person in three. Those are the odds. They are not bad. 
Hon Tony Ryall 
: No one person every 3 days. 
BRIAN CONNELL 
: One person every 3 days. They are not bad odds. Fine defaulters will say: “Well I’ll take the chance. I’ll travel. What’s the issue?”. But if fines defaulters are caught they are told to pay their fine and if they say they cannot afford to pay they are released on bail. They are set free. It is like the woman during the Michael Jackson trial who released a white dove every time someone was released. This is what happens: Michael Cullen sits there with all those white doves and every time someone is arrested then released on bail he releases a white dove. That is the teeth of this bill. Rather than close down the system the Government has reinforced it—and the Government wonders why people have no confidence in it. 
We were told by the Government that one of the reasons it could not enforce the situation more vigorously is that it would interrupt overseas travellers. The ministry’s suggestion on this has some merit. It suggested loading a silent alert system into the New Zealand Customs Service database that would alert the authorities as someone checked in not to load that person’s baggage if a warrant was out for his or her arrest. That suggestion makes a lot of sense but it would work only if at the other end there was an enforcement regime that threatened people sufficiently enough for them not to take the risk. It will not work unless we have a tougher approach from this Government. 
The other lost opportunity was in respect of the liable parents who all the time drift out of this country to Australia. Was this net widened to incorporate those people as the National Party members suggested? No the Government could not do that; it would be politically incorrect. So there is another lost opportunity. On one hand mum and dad the compliant people in this country will pay their fines but on the other hand the boy racers will not get nailed. Those liable parents— 
Ron Mark 
: They’ll get nana! 
BRIAN CONNELL 
: They will get nana but there will be no repercussion for liable parents whatsoever. Here is a Government that maintains that it is tough on crime but when the rubber meets the road it is soft soft soft. Unless when we go into Committee there are significant amendments brought to support this bill National will have severe reservations about whether to continue its support.