The Sentencing Act 2002 is in mostareas a huge improvement on the mishmash of law whichapplied to sentencing prior to the 1st of July

It greatlyassists the court.'' The other statement he made was thatunder the new law the sentence would not have been 9 years.If the offence had occurred Rosetta Stone outlet before the new law, the sentencewould have been 14 years--considerably more severe. Hon. Tony Ryall: Why is it Government policy to allow, say,a rapist sentenced to 9 years in jail to qualify for paroleafter only 3 years? Hon. PHIL GOFF: That is preciselywhy the new sentencing law enables the court to set aminimum non-parole period of up to two-thirds, and why thisGovernment abolished the nonsense of automatic release attwo-thirds for such a rapist, which occurred for 9 yearswhile Mr Ryall was a member of the National Government. Marc Alexander: Can the Minister tell us why a distinctionis required for minimum parole sentencing purposes for acrime with circumstances that ``takes the offence out of theordinary range of offending'', when, from the victim's pointof view, there is nothing ordinary about any offence? Hon. PHIL GOFF: Of course, any offence is obnoxious anddeserves to be punished, but there are different degrees ofculpability and seriousness in offending. The sentencingshould reflect the degree of seriousness of the offence andof the offender. Rt Hon. Winston Peters: So that we allunderstand, could the Minister explain--seeing that underthe old regime an offender was eligible for parole aftertwo-thirds of the sentence, and under the new one iseligible after one-third--how is it that the new regime ismore harsh than the old one? Can we just sort of followthat? Hon. PHIL GOFF: Both Justice Priestley andJustice Salmon made the point that the new law is moresevere on those who commit the worst offences. Both justicesmade that point explicitly. That member will know that, as aresult of the Budget round, $90 million has been put asideto imprison those people who will serve longer because theyare serious recidivist offenders, and of highest risk to thecommunity. Hon. Tony Ryall: I seek leave to table adocument that shows that the Labour Party, including thePrime Minister, voted against the bill that lifted themaximum sentence for rape from 14 to 20 years-- MrSPEAKER: Is there any objection? There isobjection.Question No. 11 to Minister Questionpostponed.Prisons--South Auckland Regional Men'sPrison 12. Dr PAUL HUTCHISON (NZ National--PortWaikato) to the Minister of Corrections: What is the totalexpenditure-- Rt Hon. Winston Peters: I raise a pointof order, Mr Speaker. You, I think, have failed to observethat Mr Cunliffe is here. Mr SPEAKER: The member didnot call. I have called No. 12, and I will have that. I willcome back to No. 11 afterwards. Rt Hon. Winston Peters:I distinctly heard you say ``No, not here.'' We assume, onthis side of the House, that that meant that MrCunliffe-- Mr SPEAKER: I looked at the place where hewas sitting in, the last time in Parliament. I did notrealise that he had changed his seat. It was my mistake. Dr PAUL HUTCHISON: What Rosetta Stone Spanish Spain is the total expenditure so far oniwi consultation relating to the proposed South Aucklandregional men's prison, and is he confident that all themoney has been spent wisely? Hon. MARK GOSCHE (Ministerof Corrections): I am informed that $545,048 has been spentso far. I believe it is wise to spend money on adequateconsultation to avoid long delays and expensive legalcosts. Dr PAUL HUTCHISON: Does the Minister regard itas wise standard practice to spend monthly, and in advance,all or part of the $500,000 intended, and now spent, forfacilitation, iwi consultation, and cultural input, if so,why? Hon. MARK GOSCHE: My understanding is that thereis an agreement that requires certain work to be carriedout, and then, on the conclusion of that, for that paymentto be made. That is my understanding of the contract withthe trust concerned. Mahara Okeroa: Why is theSpringhill corrections facility required? Hon. MARKGOSCHE: Currently, there are 600 inmates from this regionwho are serving their sentences as far away as Invercargillin order to reduce reoffending. It is important to bringinmates back to their local communities, as family supportis part of successful rehabilitation. The Springhillcorrections facility will help to achieve that. Dr PaulHutchison: Does the Minister regard it as wise standardpractice to pay one of the prison consultants an alleged$90,000 or more for his services, which includes $120 anhour, plus mileage, for driving to Waitangi and back, and$120 an hour for reading and research, given that that wasthe same man who, in the same year he was collecting thatmoney, was convicted of 53 counts of fraud, if so, why? Hon. MARK GOSCHE: I am not able to comment on allegedpractices. I am aware that there was a person doing work forthe Department of Corrections, who was paid a considerableamount of money. He was also convicted of fraud, althoughthat had nothing to do Rosetta Stone Spanish V3 with the work he was doing. TheDepartment of Corrections had no fault with the work heperformed for it.