Prasad Rajen: Corrections (Use of Court Cells) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Prasad Rajen: Corrections (Use of Court Cells) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Sitting date: 24 November 2009. Volume:659;Page:8161. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Dr RAJEN PRASAD (Labour) 
: 
 That last contribution to this debate on the Corrections (Use of Court Cells) Amendment Bill added absolutely nothing. The member Dr Cam Calder displayed his ignorance about the causes of crime. The member displayed his ignorance about how little his own Government is achieving in this important area. The member simply believes in some Crosby/Textor - type information. The member knows nothing. He could not give us one example of policies of the last 9 years that had actually caused crime to rise—not one. There was a lot of rhetoric but no substance. 
Labour will support this bill because it provides a response at this particular time to a difficulty. When no options are available then cell facilities at courts ought to be used and this is what this bill allows. That is a reasonable thing to do. At the present time court cells can be used only during the day but they ought to be utilised when there is urgency in terms of demand. This bill amends the Corrections Act 2004 to allow for prisoners to be accommodated in court cells for up to 4 days. That is a reasonable thing to do. Because court cells cannot be used in this way under the Resource Management Act an amendment also has to be made in the bill to exempt the use of court cells in this way from section 9 of that Act. The Labour Opposition will support that because overcrowding is a potential problem in the next period. This bill is a way to resolve it and it is the responsible thing to do. 
But the bill does point to some real difficulties that the Government has with regard to provisioning its law and order policies which presumably are policies that National designed several years before the last election campaign. National members had all the figures available to them and now that they have been in Government for a year all they have managed to call on is the punitive approach that sections of our community demand and that they have tried to make political capital from. They promised to be tough on crime by locking up more people. 
It is important to go back to the website of the Department of Corrections to really see the things that the department is telling us it has known about for some time. Clearly the prison system is under pressure and clearly the department would have been telling the Government that for some time. The Government also knows that the future of the policy of double-bunking is uncertain. There are difficulties with the processes as we have seen in the Employment Court. So the Government does know. 
Hon Member 
: Well it’s a nonsense. 
Dr RAJEN PRASAD 
: It is a nonsense I agree. So the Government does know—[ 
Interruption 
] it is a nonsense I agree—there will be insufficient accommodation from 2010 onwards. The Department of Corrections is telling us about its problems via its website. 
Although the Government talks about this measure being a temporary provision the member from the Greens raised an important point. The Government’s own website says it is thinking about this facility being made available on an ongoing basis. It is not as though the issue of prison numbers will just go away; it will be there for some time. This measure will be used for some time and I would like to hear from the Minister as to how she intends to resolve that. For how long does the Minster intend to use this provision? What are the plans for ensuring that it will not be necessary in the future? 
There is some good news and I commend the Department of Corrections for this. It has actually thought matters through and it does say—both in notes that we have and on its website—that it will do some more work to make sure there is a good understanding of how the use of court cells overnight will work and to make sure that provisions are made so that prisoners are treated in a humane and effective manner and their rights are protected. 
The Department of Corrections’ website also raises—and we have not talked about this a great deal—the fact that there will be difficulties with regard to getting this type of exemption from the Resource Management Act. We should think about that for a moment. If the cells are in neighbourhoods the people who live in the area will now have no opportunity at all to object to this measure. I am not saying everybody should object but the facility to object has been taken away. The department’s website also says there are some risks of litigation from the people who are being held in this type of facility. 
The Government has promised to look at a whole range of other facilities for prisoners. It does know that we cannot keep on putting more people in prisons. We have an awful performance rate in this area; it is one of the worst rates in the world after the US. 
Todd McClay 
: It’s been pretty appalling over 9 years—you’re right. 
Dr RAJEN PRASAD 
: I will come to that. The member talks about the last 9 years. Members sit there talking about the last 9 years but that is intellectual dishonesty. When will the Government really address the drivers of crime? Government members have had the meetings and have had the information put before them but we have seen nothing. We would like Government members to get up and tell us what their crime prevention strategies are. When should we expect to see them or is it that Government members have found a sore in our society—the view of those who want to be punitive? Is it the case that the Government has utilised that and that it intends to utilise this issue in that particular way? If the Government was really sincere about addressing the drivers of crime and about getting into early intervention we would have seen that by now. The Government is a third of the way through its term and we have not seen any really significant proposals. There is the opportunity to change the performance of this country in this particular area but we have not seen anything. We would like to hear from members opposite about when we can expect to see their proposals. They have had meetings and there has been plenty of input. Or is the issue becoming too hard? Does the Government intend to keep the proposals for the last 6 months of its term and to take them up from there? 
Perhaps the biggest irony—and I liken this to a form of intellectual dishonesty—is the fact that we are here pushing this bill through under urgency and agreeing to these provisions when National members day after day pilloried this very provision when they were in Opposition. Previous speakers have already referred to that. Where is the intellectual honesty of the members opposite who ought to say yes they were wrong to raise this issue in the kind of way that they did. They ought to say they now realise the difficulties and that this provision is needed to overcome them. Some acknowledgment of what Ministers from the previous Labour Government were trying to do in order to use the cell facilities at courts during times of crisis would not be unreasonable. 
It would be useful to gain that kind of acknowledgment from members on the Government side of the House because there is a pattern here: they stand up use their Crosby/Textor lines—the same thing time and time again—and simply say nothing has been done in the last 9 years. 
Dr Cam Calder 
: A lot of damage has been done in the last 9 years. 
Dr RAJEN PRASAD 
: The member for Rotorua repeated that earlier. Mr Calder is also making some noises over there. Mr Calder has shown his ignorance of this field already by not even knowing what the research says and by not being able to give us any example of what he was talking about. The Minister for Social Development and Employment goes on day after day in an intellectually dishonest manner saying Labour did nothing for 9 years but we should look at what the National Government is doing. I advise that Minister to go and talk to her own advisers in the Ministry of Social Development. They will tell her chapter and verse about the actions that were taken to address our society’s social issues in a manner that she would be impressed by. 
Perhaps one day the National members will come to the House and acknowledge what they are having by default to acknowledge. They criticised this very provision yet they are slipping it in before the Christmas break under urgency to enable court cells to be used. We are ready to support that but I look forward to seeing intellectual honesty on the part of members on the other side of the House so that we can actually work on that basis in the future.