Worth Richard: Criminal Justice Reform Bill — In Committee 
Worth Richard: Criminal Justice Reform Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:640;Page:10230] 
Dr RICHARD WORTH (National) 
: 
 It is a pleasure to speak on Part 2 of the Criminal Justice Reform Bill. I was amazed to hear an earlier speaker on the Labour side say that this Government was tough on law and order. That is incredibly empty misleading rhetoric. This is a Government of which I think it can be properly said that justice must not only be seen to be done it must be seen to be believed. It is as bad as that. 
Why do I say that? It is in connection with Part 2 that we see a substantial rewrite of the Sentencing Act 2002. For those of us who were in Parliament at that time including the Minister in the chair Mark Burton it was much vaunted legislation. It was heralded by the Labour Government as the answer to the sentencing regime. There was to be a comprehensive plan a clear hierarchy of sentences. It was to be the final word but it was not the final word was it? Because we now see in Part 2 in the changes that are made to the Sentencing Act some 67 amendments of varying complexity. We see very detailed provisions relating to for example intensive supervision and community detention. So it is right to say that this is a night of rich irony when we see the Labour-led Government exposed for the sham that it is and for the falseness of the representations it made as to the effectiveness of the Sentencing Act 2002. 
Others have said and it is worthwhile repeating this in the presence of the Minister that the changes made by this Government in respect of parole are truly startling. If we look back at the Sentencing Act the regime was very simple. The regime was that the rapist who was jailed for 9 years would be eligible for parole after 3 years. National was shocked at that and I actually believe the community was shocked too. But Minister Goff stood before us and said that this was the fair thing to do this was the appropriate thing to do and this was how the public was to be protected. He said that it reflected an adequate measure of retribution in respect of some of the worst crimes we had known. 
Now what do we see? In clause 120 of the legislation we see that a very substantial change to section 84 of the Sentencing Act is proposed. Instead of the rapist being out after 3 years on a 9-year term if parole is granted it will now be increased to 6 years. There will be some in National who say that even that move is not good enough. I could not believe that Lynne Pillay would stand here in the body of the Chamber and talk about truth in sentencing. Because what truth in sentencing is about is that if the sentence of the court is 9 years then that is the sentence that is served. 
This legislation is not about truth in sentencing. There is a case I would say when no parole should be given. Although I support what others have said that this bill certainly is an improvement on the failures of the Sentencing Act there will be some who say it does not go far enough. 
House resumed. 
The Chairperson reported progress on the Criminal Justice Reform Bill and no progress on the Te Roroa Claims Settlement Bill. 
Report adopted.