Tuesday 26 Feb 2002
The 20- year term for people-smuggling is a punch in the face for victims' groups who have been struggling to get the
Government to toughen up on crime says ACT's Justice spokesman Stephen Franks
"They see the Government taking only six months to get out a bill setting a 20-year sentence to deter anyone from
helping a willing person to beat NZ immigration rules. Perhaps that is fair enough, though there has not yet been any
flood of offenders.
"But contrast that with the Sentencing and Parole Reform Bill. In the face of a torrent of vicious crime it sets lower
penalties for deliberately killing New Zealanders. Ten years (perhaps) for ordinary murder and 17 years for the most
callous and brutal murderers. And it took two-and-a-half years since the 92% Withers' referendum.
"Phil Goff's people smuggling bill shows a Minister who seems to believe in deterrence. Why else threaten employers
with huge penalties for offences that could be as non-violent as not demanding citizenship papers from a job seeker with
a pommy accent.
"Yet the same Minister seems not to believe in deterrence for other criminals. Why else omit deterrence as a sentencing
principle in his Sentencing and Parole Reform Bill. Judges can't fix a deterrent sentence on criminals as a warning to
others. And the Parole Board must let criminals out at one third if they are not a danger to the community whatever the
message it sends to people thinking about crime.
For foreign people-smugglers Minister's other Bill means the 20 year-sentence threat will mean in practice no more than
seven years. The Parole Board can't possibly hold them as a danger to our community when they will be deported on
release anyway. And what will seven years in a cosy New Zealand jail mean to someone from a poverty-rocked country?
Ends