Ryall Tony: Prisoners' and Victims' Claims Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Ryall Tony: Prisoners' and Victims' Claims Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:626;Page:20925] 
Hon TONY RYALL (National—Bay Of Plenty) 
: 
 I wonder whether the Minister in the chair Rick Barker would be so generous as to take a call to explain exactly what is going on with this bill. What exactly is the deal that has been done on it in order to give to the Government the numbers to pass this piece of window dressing only a few weeks before the country goes to the polls? We know from this bill that prisoners will get to keep some if not all of the payouts they can claim under this Government’s liberal justice system because the bill allows for some of the worst inmates in this country to keep any such prisoner payout. Even though the Government may have moved to put in some sort of sunset clause to attract the support of the Green Party it cannot be denied that criminals will still get to keep some if not all of the cash. 
Let me explain why. If an inmate such as a drug dealer does not have readily identifiable victims there is nobody to make a claim. If victims choose not to make a claim or do not come forward then there is nobody to receive the money. Thirdly if the commission involved does not think the suffering is sufficient for a victim or victims to take the full booty of cash then some of that cash can remain with the inmate. 
This bill is dangerously flawed and seriously misleading. The House is being made a party to a public relations exercise by the outgoing Government in the weeks before the next general election. Through the rest of the evening numerous members from Opposition parties will seek to take a call to explain to the people of this country that this bill should not proceed. The National Party and most of the Opposition parties in this House are agreed on one thing: prisoner payouts should be blocked stopped and wiped. 
There is no justification for prisoners to receive cash from the Government because of imagined wrongs or hurt feelings. In one situation a man who killed a young woman—he also raped her and stuffed pebbles down her throat—received a $1200 compensation cheque from this Government because of hurt feelings. That is an outrage! The only reason the payout is being appealed is that pressure from Opposition parties has forced the Government to act. In another place a payout to four criminals is being contested. Those people will each receive a substantial amount of money but they simply do not deserve or need it and they should not be given it. 
If prison officers have committed offences they should be held personally accountable; there is no reason why public moneys should be paid to some of the worst criminals in this country. We want the Minister to take a call to explain why he justifies those payouts and also to explain to the nation what the deal is that is being done to keep this public relations exercise alive. 
 If the Government has the courage of its convictions and says this is a good bill why are some of its provisions due to expire in 2 years’ time because of the amendments made in the name of Mr Goff the Minister of Justice? I bet he will not participate in this debate so I would like the Minister in the chair to take a call and explain exactly what is going on here what the nature of the deal is what the impact of the amendments on the bill will be and why the Government would agree to a 2-year sunset clause.