1. JOHN KEY (Leader of the Opposition) Link to this
to the Prime Minister
Does she have confidence in the Minister of Corrections and his department; if so, why?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK (Prime Minister) Link to this
Yes, because the Minister is hard-working and conscientious. Although the department clearly has room to improve, I am confident that, with its current leadership, that will happen.
Does the Prime Minister agree with Barry Matthews that the Department of Corrections’ handling of Graeme Burton’s parole was “well managed”; if so, why?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
I am on the record as saying that it could have been better managed.
Does the Prime Minister stand by her previous comments in reference to Mr Matthews: “I think Barry is your man if you’ve got a problem and want it fixed.”; if so, why?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
Because I actually have great respect for Barry Matthews, and I will support him fixing those problems in the department.
When the Minister of Corrections will not speak, and the chief executive of the Department of Corrections will but only to tell the public that as far as he is concerned the parole of Mr Burton was “well managed” and that he “doesn’t have blood on his hands”, why does the Prime Minister have confidence in Mr Matthews when the public of New Zealand clearly do not?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
Because I know of Barry Matthews’ record as an outstanding public servant.
Hon Phil GoffHas the Government identified any systemic problems in the way the parole system is operating, and how does the Government intend to address those systemic problems?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
The Government has, as a result of the tragedy inflicted by Mr Burton on members of the public, decided to bring a number of changes to the House around the parole area. One change will clarify that, indeed, the Parole Board can receive information that is not sworn information, another will require that the Parole Board have the power to call its own evidence or witnesses, and a third will enable the police, where they believe there is an undue risk to public safety, to go straight to the board to apply for recall.
If she is of the view that all is well with the leadership of the Department of Corrections under both Damien O’Connor and Barry Matthews, can she tell the country why she felt the need to step in and answer the media inquiries and would not let Mr O’Connor do that, and why does she think that Mr Matthews made the kinds of comments he did, implying that there was nothing wrong and therefore nothing to be fixed?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
In the first place, I do not believe Mr Matthews did imply that. In the second place, the reality is that several different portfolios were involved with the issue. If members are interested, I could point out that the Parole Board is appointed by the Attorney-General, that policy on parole is the responsibility of the Ministry of Justice, and that operations and the Department of Corrections come under a different Minister. That is why I, as Minister, decided to speak.
Can the Prime Minister confirm that if the National Party had introduced the reforms that came in in 2002, instead of doing nothing for 9 years, Mr Burton could well have faced a minimum parole period of at least 17 years—considerably longer than the 10 miserable years that were applied when the law was as it was under the National Government?
Madam SPEAKERI did not hear that question. Could the member please repeat it succinctly. I ask for order, or members will be leaving the Chamber.
Can the Prime Minister confirm that if the reforms that were introduced in 2002, which required a minimum period of at least 17 years before parole could even be considered, had been introduced earlier under a National Government, which did absolutely nothing, Mr Burton might still have been in prison?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
I can confirm that Mr Burton, I understand, was sentenced in 1992 to life imprisonment. Under the legislation, which the National Party did not change, he served 14 years before being let out on parole. Had he been sentenced under Labour’s legislation, the minimum non-parole period would have been 17 years—longer.
Nandor TanczosDoes the Prime Minister accept that the Parole Board already has significant powers to receive information, including sworn or unsworn information as the Law Commission report makes clear, and what will her Government do about one of the biggest issues highlighted by this case, which is the lack of monitoring and enforcement of breaches of parole?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
The answer to the first part of the question is yes. But as I said last Tuesday, I believe that the Parole Board applied an inappropriate standard of proof around allegations. The law change will deal with that, and make it abundantly clear that information can be received. Secondly, as a result of the review in the Department of Corrections of the management of parole, the chief executive of the department has announced three areas of tightening up on the management of people like Burton.
Is the Prime Minister not holding anyone accountable for the killings Mr Burton undertook because she is viewing this through a political prism, and she knows that this will reflect badly on the Government if she holds someone accountable, and, in the case of this decaying Labour Government, she is more interested in protecting Labour than she is in protecting the people of New Zealand?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
I would point out that Judge Carruthers has accepted responsibility for the release; that is a very fine thing for him to have done.
Can the Prime Minister tell the people of New Zealand how many New Zealanders need to die before she considers Mr Matthews and Mr O’Connor not fit to have their jobs?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
I have to say that with the best parole system in the world it would be impossible to say that someone like Burton would not have abused the trust put in him.