Mitchell Mark: Sentencing (Aggravating Factors) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Mitchell Mark: Sentencing (Aggravating Factors) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Sitting date: 12 September 2012. Volume:683;Page:5202. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
MARK MITCHELL (National—Rodney) 
: 
 Under Labour serious assaults against police officers increased from 216 in 1999 to 412 in 2009. Labour had 9 long years to introduce changes to help keep our law enforcement officers safe but it chose not to. Under Labour violent crime increased by 47 percent. Mr Goff this actually was not part of my speech but I have to say that I acknowledge your service and I acknowledge you as a member of our Law and Order Committee but I feel your comments have been very ungracious towards your Minister who has brought an excellent bill the Sentencing (Aggravating Factors) Amendment Bill to the House. 
I also congratulate Charles Chauvel because it is an excellent Supplementary Order Paper. I just want to say that last week I did actually attend the Rodney volunteer firefighters awards. What strikes me about this and why I feel this Supplementary Order Paper is so good is that I highlight the fact that they are volunteers. They are first responders and when they are responding they are dealing with motor vehicle accidents they are dealing with fires they are dealing with incidents where there are intoxicated people and they deserve to have the same protection wrapped round them as our police officers and corrections officers and also of course Supplementary Order Paper 14 includes front-line health service providers as well. So I do congratulate Mr Chauvel on his Supplementary Order Paper. 
I would just like to speak about the fact that one of the points Mr Chauvel raised was that he does not feel that this bill is actually going to make any difference in terms of sentencing. 
Charles Chauvel 
: I said the jury is out on that. 
MARK MITCHELL 
: OK he said the jury is out on that. Well I would just like to talk about something a little bit personal to me. I did spend several years as a first responder. I had a very good partner—probably the most loyal partner I have ever had. He was stabbed twice he lost an eye and he had to have surgery to have it put back in he was beaten up kicked and punched and they tried to drown him once and he was not protected by any form of legislation. The only protection he had was under the laws in relation to the SPCA. There was actually a law brought in that made it an offence to assault or kill a police dog. This immediately did wrap some protections round him. All of a sudden he did have some protection and this did make a difference. This made a difference to me it made a difference to my family and it made a difference to members of the public. 
I just wanted to use that as an example of the fact that he was not a dog that sat at home. He was not a family pet. He was actually a dog that went out night after night and put himself in danger chasing offenders pursuing gang members and pursuing the most violent people in our society actually. He was probably a first first responder so he deserved to have more respect and more protection wrapped round him than those dogs that we have sitting at home as our companions. I think exactly the same can be applied to this bill here. Our first responders the people who are going out there who are serving us and who are protecting us deserve to have a bit more protection wrapped round them and this is what this bill does. I commend Minister Collins for bringing this bill to the House. Thank you.