Cosgrove Clayton: Bail Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Cosgrove Clayton: Bail Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:651;Page:531] 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Labour—Waimakariri) 
: 
 I want to pick up on a couple of points that were made. Firstly I think that the fabric of the Bail Amendment Bill has started to unravel. Even the coalition partner—or whatever it is called—the ACT Party’s Mr Garrett made quite a valuable contribution. We finally teased it slowly out of him when he said that basically the changes proposed by Mr Power and the National Party do nothing—they do little. 
David Garrett 
: I didn’t say that. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: Yes the member did; I wrote it down. He said that in itself this change will do “little.” That is what the member said. 
David Garrett 
: I said “little”. That is different from “nothing”. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: I invite the member to whip out his  
Hansard 
 and have a look at it. That is what the Opposition has been saying for the last few hours. This is political puffery. This is propaganda. 
In response the Minister said to Annette King as the fabric of the legislation unravels and frays that this legislation is designed to send a message. We have an admission from Mr Garrett—he is a lawyer; I am not—that this legislation will do virtually nothing. We have been saying that. Mr Power says it is designed to send a message. Well by that admission we can see it is not designed to have any practical effect. At the start of this debate I said that the day after the enactment of this bill no one in New Zealand will be any safer because of it. This is what we have now come down to. This is political puffery. 
The Minister did get up and do what the Minister last night failed to do: he answered some questions. One key question that was put to him again was about his position on the parole legislation. His policy is the sentencing parole and bail policy of the National Party. Nowhere in there can I read of Mr Power sending a message. Under the heading “Our Principles” National’s policy states “Tough on crime.” Being tough on crime was the principle not the sending of a message. We now know not only because of what the Opposition said but also because of Mr Garrett’s admission that this bill does virtually nothing—very little. 
David Garrett 
: No I said “little” not “virtually nothing”. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: “Little” or virtually nothing. I do not have a dictionary in front of me but I am sure that we could get the  
Collins English Dictionary 
 out and have a debate about “little “very little” or whatever. There is another more colloquial way of putting it but I will not do that because it would be unparliamentary. Nowhere in the policy that the Minister sent to people before the election did it say National was going to send a message and that was all it was going to do. 
The question that Mr Goff Mrs King and I put to the Minister was about a practical solution. A practical effect that would make people safer would be to trigger the parole legislation. He was asked by me Mr Goff and Mrs King when he would do that. I tell the Minister to feel free to interject and answer that question. When will he ring the Governor-General and sign off the Order in Council? Today? Tomorrow? Next week? He could turbo-boost it if he liked. He could ring now; there is a phone in front of him. When will he actually do that? There is no answer. 
The other question that Mrs King put to the Minister was very interesting because he had rattled off that he had evidence from the Police Association the Police Prosecution Service and the New Zealand Law Society that our change had weakened the test for granting bail. She asked him was whether he could table the evidence of that. I am reliably informed that when he was asked in a side-bar conversation what the evidence of that was and whether he would table it the answer was that it consisted of news clippings and that he had never tabled news clippings in his life. So now we know there is no evidence. 
The hem is starting to fray on this bill because we have heard Mr Garrett say it is useless and does very little judges have said there is no change with this legislation and we know that it will not make one New Zealander safer the day after its enactment. I invite the Minister to change his mind get up in Parliament say “taihoa” go out to the phone booth behind him ring the Governor-General and do something that will be tough on crime. He could text him. I am told the Governor-General is well up on technology; the Minister could text him. He could do something that would be to quote his policy “tough on crime” and enact the parole legislation through an Order in Council. I wonder whether he will get up after this and answer that question. If not today then when will he do that? 
Hon Ruth Dyson 
: Better than Kate Wilkinson. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: He is better than Kate Wilkinson; I agree. He has actually got up and made a contribution. I know he is itching to make another but the whips have probably told him he is not allowed. 
Hon Ruth Dyson 
: No they’re not allowed to do that. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: Oh they are not allowed to do that. But when will he bring into force the parole legislation? 
That is a fair and serious question I say to the Minister. It is a fair and serious question. The Minister knows—and all members from both sides of the Chamber who have made contributions and who have a view that we wish to help victims and to make New Zealanders and our communities safer know—that we cannot compare this piece of political propaganda with a phone call from the Minister to the Governor-General that would actually make a real difference to New Zealanders.