Dalziel Lianne: Electoral (Disqualification of Convicted Prisoners) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Dalziel Lianne: Electoral (Disqualification of Convicted Prisoners) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:667;Page:14683] 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL (Labour—Christchurch East) 
: 
 The people of Timaru who are very interested in the position that the previous speaker Jo Goodhew has taken on certain events that have occurred there will find that speech very interesting. I was very interested in the reaction of Government members during the contribution of my colleague the Hon Clayton Cosgrove. I saw all the heads go down as they realised that they have been made fools of by this legislation. I cannot for the life of me understand why the Government has decided to back this silly bill. This is so political. Here we have a bill called the Electoral (Disqualification of Convicted Prisoners) Amendment Bill. Which select committee would we refer it to? Would we refer it to the Justice and Electoral Committee or would we refer it to the Law and Order Committee? 
Hon Ruth Dyson 
: The Justice and Electoral Committee. 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: I think I would go for the Justice and Electoral Committee. I ask the member who is interjecting in reply to my questions which would otherwise be rhetorical why the choice would be the Justice and Electoral Committee over the Law and Order Committee. Why would we choose the Justice and Electoral Committee over the Law and Order Committee? Could it have something to do with the terms of reference of the different committees and who chairs them? 
Hon Ruth Dyson 
: And who the Minister is. 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: Oh yes; and who the Minister is. Who is the Minister responsible for the Justice and Electoral Committee? Could that be Simon Power the Minister of Justice? Who is responsible for electoral law reform? I think that might be Simon Power the Minister of Justice. OK well let us look at the Law and Order Committee. Which Minister is responsible essentially for the work that goes through the Law and Order Committee? I think it might be Judith Collins the Minister of Police and the Minister of Corrections. OK; that is good. 
Then we have the issue of the terms of reference of the particular committees. What are the terms of reference of the Justice and Electoral Committee? Who are the advisers to the committee on justice and electoral matters? They might be the Ministry of Justice officials. OK so we have got that sorted out. Who are the advisers to the Law and Order Committee? That might depend on the bill. If it is a police bill then it might be the police and if it is a corrections bill then it would be the Department of Corrections. OK. So we have different Ministers and different advisers. 
Who are the chairs of the relevant committees? Whom is the Justice and Electoral Committee chaired by? It is chaired by Chester Borrows. Chester is actually quite a good chair do members not think? I think Chester Borrows is quite well regarded. He has spoken openly and has some good views. He has the advantage of having been a police officer and he is also a lawyer. He has the benefit of both sides of those debates. He is an excellent member of Parliament and I find him very very good to work with. Now who is the chair of the Law and Order Committee? 
Hon Ruth Dyson 
: The rocket science woman. 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: The rocket scientist. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: The genius. 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: The genius we hear. It is Sandra Goudie. If we wanted to have a piece of political puffery would we want it presided over by Simon Power Ministry of Justice officials and Chester Borrows or would we like a piece of political puffery presided over by Judith Collins Department of Corrections officials and Sandra Goudie? Which ones would members choose to preside over a piece of political puffery? This is where the politics of this whole process began. 
The choice of select committee—the bill went to the Law and Order Committee—was absolutely deliberate and it was obvious. The Department of Corrections told the select committee that it had no expertise in providing advice in this area. No one can blame the department because it was upfront about that. The second point is that it is unacceptable to blame parliamentary counsel. We cannot blame parliamentary counsel because they can operate only off the drafting instructions they receive from the select committee and that advice comes from the Department of Corrections which told parliamentary counsel that it was not in a position to advise in this area. If the Ministry of Justice had been allowed to give advice it would have picked up on this problem—the ministry has the expertise in this area—and we would not have the nonsense we have today. 
This bill extends voting rights to the most serious offenders in this country who are currently locked up behind bars. If this bill were to pass in its current form then the worst criminals who are in jail at election time next year will be allowed to vote. [ 
Interruption 
] That member can blame whomever he likes. He should look in the mirror he should talk to Sandra Goudie and he should lay the blame where it belongs. That choice of select committee was the reason why we have the problems we have today. 
For a bill to be referred to the Law and Order Committee there has to be a reason that is related to law and order. The bill would have to have a deterrent effect and it would have to change prisoner behaviour—one or the other but preferably both. That would be the reason for sending a bill to that committee. In respect of this bill not one element of evidence produced anywhere in any of this debate or at the select committee showed any deterrent effect. If we say: “I am sorry but if someone goes to jail for this serious offending or for this minor offending that person will not be able to vote.” will that seriously put people off offending? I do not think so. Will it change behaviour if we say: “We will not let you vote at the next election.”? 
The member who resumed his seat earlier did not tell us how many prisoners currently vote. Do we know how many people this bill will affect? Does the member know how many people who are in prison currently vote? 
Paul Quinn 
: You didn’t give me an extension of time. 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: The member sat down before his time was up. I want to know whether that member knows the answer to that question. I suspect that he does not know the answer to the question. How many people does he expect will be affected by this bill should it pass through the House? How many people who are in prison currently vote? I am absolutely prepared to stop speaking and hear the answer to my question. I would like to hear the answer to the question. How many prisoners currently vote? 
Hon Ruth Dyson 
: He doesn’t know. 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: The member does not know the answer to my question. There is not one word in the report back from the select committee not one word on how many prisoners currently vote. We have no idea how many prisoners will be affected by this bill. 
One of the issues that we raised in the report back related to a person who serves a 2½ year sentence. We want to ask a question. Somebody who has served a 2½ year sentence and who is in prison on the day that the election is held will not be able to vote but somebody who is let out the day before the election will be allowed to vote. What is the sense in this? What is the point of this? What message are we trying to send? 
I heard Jo Goodhew say that the Government is sending a message that people will not be allowed to vote if they offend. Actually no; that is not what the Government is saying. It is saying that as long as the offender is not in prison on the day that the election occurs then the offender can vote. What about the person who gets home detention and the person who does not get home detention for committing exactly the same offence? I know of a case in Christchurch of two kids who were up in court in a relatively short space of time. One went to prison and the other got home detention. Yet this bill is giving different rules. One offender will be able to vote and the other offender will not be able to vote. Until the Government puts some numbers on the table this is meaningless political puffery; it is nothing else. 
I think that this Government has some serious explaining to do. It is not good enough just to blame the officials when the Government deliberately set up those officials to fail by choosing the wrong committee choosing the wrong Minister choosing the wrong advisers choosing the wrong situation and choosing an environment that produces no deterrents—not one ounce of deterrence—and no change to prisoner behaviour except for the very small number who I presume will vote on election day and will not be able to do so in the future. I think this bill is a complete waste of Parliament’s time and I regret that we have to even debate it.