Collins Judith: Sentencing and Parole Reform Bill — Second Reading 
Collins Judith: Sentencing and Parole Reform Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:662;Page:10673] 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Corrections) 
: 
 I move  
That the Sentencing and Parole Reform Bill be now read a second time 
. This bill has two main purposes: to deny parole to repeat serious violent offenders and to offenders who are guilty of committing the worst murders and to impose maximum terms of imprisonment on persistent repeat offenders who continue to commit serious and violent offences. 
This bill is specifically focused on offenders who show no regard for victims their families or the community and who are repeatedly convicted of serious violent and sexual offending. Parole is not a right for prisoners; it is a privilege. This privilege is earned and it should not be granted to those who demonstrate total disregard for the law by continuing to commit serious violent offences despite being warned of the consequences. This bill ensures that the victims of repeat offenders and their families do not have to experience the additional stress of attending regular parole hearings or worry that an offender may be released on parole. 
I thank the members of the Law and Order Committee and in particular the chair of the committee Sandra Goudie for returning this bill to the House in good time. The committee has recommended by majority that the Sentencing and Parole Reform Bill as amended be passed. I also thank the ACT Party for its continued commitment to this bill. 
In February 2010 the New Zealand Police became the lead advisers on the bill with the Department of Corrections assisting. It was particularly important for New Zealand Police officials to advise the select committee. That was because the threshold for the regime was to be changed from a qualifying sentence to a conviction for a relevant offence. That meant that police discretion as to what charges were laid and the charging process itself would be critical to the operational elements of the new legislation. Under the new regime all prosecutions involving charges that qualify for stage three of the regime will be referred to the Crown solicitor for peer review either pre-charge where circumstances allow or by the second appearance. This provides an assurance that the appropriate charges will be laid in those cases. 
I would also like to thank all those members of the public who took the time to make submissions on the bill. Ninety-four percent of submitters supported the bill. They stated their concerns about violent crime public safety and the need to hold offenders to account. Many supporters wanted to address what they described as the disparity between the rights of offenders and those of victims and to spare victims the stress associated with repeated parole hearings. In addition to that concerns were expressed about how violent crime impacts negatively on the reputation of this country. 
Only 3 percent of submitters opposed the bill. Many of those submitters considered that the Government should be focusing on addressing the causes of offending and/or reoffending. Let me assure those people that this Government has a strong focus on addressing the causes of offending and it views that as a vital component of our efforts to create a safer community. 
The Labour Party did not support this bill. Labour members say that it could result in disproportionate sentences for offenders at stage three. I make no apology for that. By stage three an offender has been convicted of two previous serious violent offences and has been warned on two occasions both orally and in writing of the consequences of further convictions for serious violent offences. This legislation recognises the repeat nature of offending by those few who fail to heed the warnings and continue to offend regardless of the consequences. The community can rightly expect to be protected from these serious recidivist offenders for a lengthy period. 
In January this year the Government proposed a number of changes to the bill as introduced in February 2009 to better reflect the purpose of the bill. The Law and Order Committee agreed by majority that the bill be passed with those changes. The first change is that the threshold for each of the three stages of the regime has been changed to a conviction for a qualifying serious violent offence rather than a determinant prison sentence of 5 years or more or an indeterminate sentence of imprisonment. Secondly the sentence for a conviction for a qualifying offence at stage three has been changed to the maximum sentence for that offence and unless it would be manifestly unjust the court must order that the offender serve the sentence without parole. That replaces the sentence of life imprisonment with a minimum non-parole period of 25 years at stage three as in the bill as introduced. Section 86 of the Parole Act 2002 is to be amended so that an offender serving a short-term sentence of imprisonment at stage two serves the sentence in full rather than being released after serving half the sentence as is currently the case. 
Other changes have been made to ensure consistency in the definition of what constitutes a qualifying serious violent offence. This includes five further offences being added to the list of qualifying serious violent offences. All of these offences carry maximum penalties of more than 7 years’ imprisonment which is a defining characteristic of the offences in the bill as introduced. The offences are all closely related to the existing offences contained in the definition of “serious violent offence”. In addition all cases involving offenders on a final warning who are subsequently charged with committing a serious violent offence will have their cases heard in the High Court. Only the High Court Court of Appeal or Supreme Court will be able to sentence an offender for a stage three offence. 
This bill creates a three-stage regime that will improve public safety by imprisoning the worst repeat violent and sexual offenders for longer periods and under stricter regimes if they continue to offend. At stage one offenders who are convicted of a serious violent offence will be sentenced as normal but will be warned both verbally and in writing that they are on the first rung of the regime and what will happen if they are convicted of another serious violent offence in the future. 
At stage two an offender who is convicted for a second time of a serious violent offence and has previously received a warning will be sentenced as normal but will be required to serve any sentence of imprisonment imposed by the court without parole. Such offenders will also be warned both verbally and in writing of the consequences of a further conviction for a serious violent offence. 
At stage three an offender who is convicted for a third time of a serious violent offence and has previously received a final warning at stage two must receive the maximum prison sentence for that offence and serve that sentence in full without parole. The exception to this is a conviction for manslaughter for which an offender will be required to serve a life sentence with a minimum non-parole period of at least 20 years. The minimum non-parole period recognises the difference in seriousness between manslaughter and murder. The court also has the option at stage three of imposing a sentence of preventive detention in which case the minimum non-parole period must not be less than the maximum finite term of imprisonment for the offence. 
The bill makes specific provision for those convicted of murder at either stage two or three of the regime. At either stage an offender convicted of murder will be required to serve a life sentence without parole. However this bill also recognises that in some very rare cases the circumstances of the offender and the offence will be such that a sentence served without parole would be manifestly unjust. The bill takes that into account and makes provision for the court where it is satisfied that a non-parole order would be manifestly unjust to not make such an order at stage three when imposing the maximum term for a serious violent offence or when imposing a sentence of life imprisonment for murder at stage two or three. In the case of murder the court can instead direct that a substantial minimum term of imprisonment be served before parole eligibility. 
In addition to the three-stage regime the bill makes special provision for offenders who are convicted of the worst murders. In these cases offenders can be sentenced to imprisonment for life without parole even if they do not have a record of previous violent offending. 
This bill is tangible evidence that the Government is delivering on its election promise to toughen up on criminals. I am proud that this bill puts the victim’s and the wider community’s interests ahead of the interests of our worst serious violent offenders. 
This bill may appear harsh to some but I make no apologies for it. The bill is aimed at the minority of offenders who even after receiving two previous warnings continue to offend in a serious violent way. These people have demonstrated that they will not change and for those few people there is no alternative but to prevent them from offending in such a way that they no longer present a danger to law-abiding New Zealanders and visitors to this country. I commend this bill to the House.