Alexander Marc: Prisoners' and Victims' Claims Bill — First Reading 
Alexander Marc: Prisoners' and Victims' Claims Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:622;Page:17997] 
MARC ALEXANDER (United Future) 
: 
 This bill has given us a great deal of difficulty for a number of reasons because from a purely gut instinctual point of view my attitude is that international obligations be damned. This is about justice in our own country. No criminal for whatever reason deserves one cent of compensation for being in prison for choosing to commit a crime. Sadly whichever way we look at it we see that the Prisoners’ and Victims’ Claims Bill is a compromise—nevertheless it is one that we have no choice but to accept at this time. Hopefully members will be able to improve upon it during the select committee process. I say it is a compromise that we have no choice but to accept for a number of reasons but chiefly because the idea of expecting victims to have to fight to take the compensation given to inmates is an absolute affront to any form of justice at all. If anything it is another kick in the teeth for victims by our criminal justice system which certainly needs a monumental overhaul. Criminals have won awards for things like hurt feelings. It is pathetic! In August 2004 the High Court saw fit to award $130000 to five inmates for alleged mistreatment under the provisions of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act but that was only the beginning. 
Let us consider one of those five Christopher Taunoa. That man was in prison because he slit the throat of someone so badly that it exposed the spine. He put at risk not only the guards in the prison but also the other inmates. He was put into segregation for 700 days and for that he was awarded a sum of money because it breached his so-called rights. 
Stephen Franks 
: $55000. 
MARC ALEXANDER 
: He was awarded $55000. Sadly there is no win here because had he been put back into the general prison population I have no doubt that he would have infringed the human rights of the other inmates and the guards. What is the Department of Corrections supposed to do with people like him? He must be in segregation for everybody else’s good and damn his rights because he has chosen to abrogate the rights of others. 
I find it absolutely horrifying that—as stated in answers to my written questions—in the last year there have been 41 claims made for breaches of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act the Crimes of Torture Act and the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment amounting to $963000. There have been 26 claims for breaches of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act and negligence amounting to $1569000. There were three claims for assault and breach of duty of care four for unlawful detention one for loss of opportunity and one for breach of privacy—that one amounted to $10000. 
There is clearly a problem within the corrections system that needs to be addressed but compensating inmates is not the way to do it. The total external legal costs incurred by the Department of Corrections for the five inmates was $616938.20 as at June 2004. The total amount of legal aid paid in relation to those proceedings was $357961.96 as at September 2004. The Government is appealing the claims which will escalate the cost to taxpayers further but regardless of that course of action for the $130000 that was given in compensation $1104900 has already been spent. That works out at an average of $220980 per criminal. The inmates’ lawyer Tony Ellis has filed a claim on behalf of 18 other criminals and has sought permission to represent 175 more. Assuming similar costs and outcomes that means it will cost at least another $3977640 for the first 18 criminals and a whopping $38 million – plus for the other 175. The taxpayer has to pay for compensation legal proceedings and legal aid for criminals who chose to commit crimes and that is an affront to anybody in our country who loves justice. 
If we add it all up we find that the taxpayer could be stung for up to $44 million and that is without looking at possible appeals. The fact is that law-abiding taxpayers are facing a potential bill that is outrageous in the extreme in settling compensation claims from criminals alleging mistreatment in jail. Complaints from inmates have been escalating at an alarming rate—from 96 in the year 1998-99 to 147 in 2001-02 204 in 2002-03 and 226 in 2003-04. Successful claims for compensation will only incentivise those criminals and worse their lawyers—who sometimes are indistinguishable from the criminals themselves in my opinion—at the expense of our notions of justice. The very idea that criminals are getting their taxpayer-funded day in court to claim taxpayer-funded compensation because they pose a genuine threat to the safety of guards and other inmates can be seen only as a slap in the face for all victims and it is happening because the Government is putting international treaties ahead of the interests of justice in our own country. 
The Greens are resolutely opposed to this bill. I cannot help but reach the conclusion that those members do not find it repugnant that criminals could be rewarded but their position gives the rest of us who do care about the interests of victims an opportunity. I urge all other parties—National ACT and New Zealand First—to work together with United Future to make this bill achieve what it needs to achieve because Labour will not get it through without one of our parties. We can make it better. 
I turn to the content of the bill. Some of these provisions are quite positive things that we ought to retain. Any compensation that might be awarded will be placed in a trust until a victim decides whether to make a claim. Legal aid charges and unpaid reparation will be deducted. A sensible protection has been included so that prisoners on remand who prove a breach of their rights and who are not convicted will not have their funds subject to the trust. The accessibility of prisoner funds will be extended to include offender income other than compensation such as accumulated savings bequests and so on. Those provisions will also apply to so-called victimless crimes whereby victims from previous offending are identifiable and may also have the capacity to take compensation from offenders. 
I am also particularly pleased that the Minister of Justice has picked up three points that I have been strongly pushing and advocating for. They include a rigorous complaints process that decreases the possibility of compensation. As I said earlier I would rather not have that possibility come up at all. A victim will have access to legal aid to claim the prisoners’ compensation without regard to the victim’s financial circumstances and I think that is important. As most victims do not actually want the money—because they think quite rightly that it is blood money—are scared to sue sometimes because of an offender’s gang connections or do not want an ongoing legal connection to the offender which is also understandable an organisation such as for example the Sensible Sentencing Trust would be able to sue for the money on their behalf. I think it is absolutely right and proper that it be able to do that. 
Above all else we must understand that compensation—a reward—should never be given to anyone who chooses to commit a crime and finds himself or herself behind bars. Where is the compensation for victims for their loss of human rights at the very crux of the crime that was inflicted upon them? Yet offenders demand those rights for themselves. It is an ironic and absurd situation when those who most despise the law then use it to assert their so-called rights. Rather than criminals pursuing rewards that eluded them in the pursuit of their unsuccessful crimes they are appealing to the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. It is a pity that we do not have a “Bill of Responsibilities” under which we could make the criminals pay instead of their victims and other taxpayers. United Future will be supporting the first reading of this bill and with other parties we hope to improve it immensely for the benefit of victims.