The Nation: Andrew Little on criminal justice reform

One Newshub’s Nation this morning: Justice Minister joins us to discuss why the criminal justice system needs an overhaul, and what will happen if the reforms don’t go far enough

Mike Williams, who now works with the Howard League for Penal Reform, is on the panel so could have some interesting comments.

 will be on their Twitter panel so that could be worth watching.

Justice Minister says…

…at this point repeal of three strikes is off the table but might be considered further down the track.

Says the advice he has received states unless substantial change occurs, a new prison will be needed every two to three year.

On potential law changes, says he will look at the parole act, the bail act, and sentencing law but the real “game changer” is what we can do inside our prisons to rehabilitate offenders.

On high recidivism rates, “It’s not good enough. If I ran a business where 60% of customers were coming back for a refund within two years, I wouldn’t have a business. Yet we tolerate that within our justice system

Says the fact that 60% of inmates re-offend within two years of being released is a sign of failure for the last 30 years of criminal justice policy.

Little rejects assertion by that 98% of inmates are ‘serious criminals’ , says most prisoners entering the system in any one year are there for non-violent, ‘low level’ offences.

This sort of claim has been controversial in parliament this week.

To be honest, my major concern with the NZ form of three strikes are the third strike consequences. Just having the second strike consequence repeated (no parole) would be a possible compromise.

Our prison numbers are nowhere close to the US.

It doesn’t sound like Labour isn’t promising criminal justice reform, but welfare reform, education reform, CYFS reform. But why double-bunk current prisoners in the interim?

If we wanted to reduce the remand population, you don’t need to change bail laws, you need to change police bail practice. National’s law change was minor. What changed were the actions of prosecutors and judges.

How on Earth has *Treasury* identified 20,000 at risk kids? Estimated there are 20k such kids, sure. But how has it worked out their names?

‘Identified’ is a poor description of what must be a rough estimate.

On the panel Mike Williams insisted there were people in prison solely for driving without a licence.

82 Comments

  1. Gezza

     /  June 16, 2018

    Starts in a minute. I’ll have a watch of this.

    • Gezza

       /  June 16, 2018

      Lisa Owens started off by referring to a Corrections report they’ve obtained under the OIA which states that if current incarceration trends continue the Government will need to reduce the prison population by a minimum number of … and the figure given has been redacted.

      She asked Little what that number was. He said he didn’t know & would have to read the report & tried to steer her away from that one. She asked if he would read the report and release the figure to Newshub because she considered it was something the public and news media were entitled to know.

      It will be interesting to see whether the number gets released & any explanation of why it was redacted.

      • Gezza

         /  June 16, 2018

        I can’t remember who the woman on the panel was with Espiner and Williams. Williams didn’t like her. I’ve given up trying to find the panel discussion with google. Useless tits haven’t made that available.

    • Zedd

       /  June 16, 2018

      Mr Little clearly saying ‘We need a fresh look.. not just status quo’.. which has resulted in take a hard line on all ‘crims’ & ‘lock em up’ rhetoric.. which has been the catch cry of the right for too long.. its has been a failed system (even Mr English said so)

      Prison is not the place to shove everyone who are seen as ‘antisocial’. there are other options: mental health & addiction treatment & its time to have another look, with a focus on preventing the huge amount of re-offending that is current

      • PDB

         /  June 16, 2018

        Wanting to let more people out on bail that shouldn’t be out on bail has nothing to do with preventing reoffending or prisoner rehabilitation.

      • Gezza

         /  June 16, 2018

        What we don’t know is which cases are being remanded and why they’re being remanded. If they’re being remanded for persistent reoffending (burglary, shoplifting, skipping or breaking bail, removing their ankle bracelets etc – the intention of remand would be that they’re not reponding to chances given).

        There’s a lot of sloganeering & rhetoric going on and no bloody details about the reasons or the offending.

        Certainly there must be something better than what we have if Little is correct that 40% of remand prisoners don’t get a custodial sentence, but how many of that 40% reoffend and then do get a custodial sentence? Nobody asked – and Little wouldn’t know, because frankly he’s just not very bright & never has been.

        It was telling that Little referred to two trials in Christchurch & Wellington of evidence-based targeted intervention being used to deal with young offenders with backgrounds of family violence, drug sbuse and offending as showing promising results. As Lisa Owen pointed out, in other words, National’s social investment approach he thinks is one way to go, but he tried to avoid giving them credit for that.

    • Kitty Catkin

       /  June 16, 2018

      Downtick to Garth McVicar, not you, Pete.

    • Corky

       /  June 16, 2018

      . ”Little refers to “not wanting nutters on the panel” after a question about Garth McVicar .”

      In my opinion Garth McVicar is worth a tonne of Andy’s. Without Garth nobody would be the slightest bit interested in victims. McVicar has taken the fight to the justice system and woolley woofter liberals. And they hate him for that.

      Talking of Knighthoods, this chap deserves one. I’m sure he would prefer being on his farm with the grand kids rather than working 24/7, even if he’s taken a backseat in the SST organisation.

      • Kitty Catkin

         /  June 16, 2018

        Many people are interested in victims, like victims’ advocates and Victim Support.

        Garth McV confuses justice and revenge. The law punishes the crime. In law, a murder is no less one because the person murdered was not a good person themselves. If Mr McV is applauding someone’s being shot, he would appear to have gone well beyond what he claims to be doing. I wouldn’t want him as an advocate, either.

        • Corky

           /  June 16, 2018

          ”Many people are interested in victims, like victims’ advocates and Victim Support.”

          True, but many were non entities in the public eye. Scourging for funding and media coverage. SST changed all that. New laws were enacted and victims rights, while still secondary to perpetrators rights, in my opinion, have come a long way with positive changes.

          ”Garth McVicar confuses justice and revenge.”

          That depends on your political and social outlook. Many would agree with you. Many will disagree.

          ”If Mr McVicar is applauding someone’s being shot, ”

          I can find no reference to him applauding someone being shot Not when the full context of his comments were quoted. Seemed to me like a throw- away line.
          He was feeling sorry for the police.

          • Kitty Catkin

             /  June 16, 2018

            It’s hard to interpret someone saying that there’s one fewer to clog prison as not applauding the death,

          • Kitty Catkin

             /  June 16, 2018

            Victim Support was going in the 80s, SST began in 2001.

            • Corky

               /  June 16, 2018

              A cold hard fact from his perspective. I don’t believe he was applauding.

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  June 16, 2018

              It sounded like it, and not just to me.

            • Corky

               /  June 16, 2018

              Fair enough. That’s yours and others perspectives. But not mine and those of a similar opinion as mine.

  2. PDB

     /  June 16, 2018

    Has anybody looked into any financial Labour party links with mattress & bunk bed manufacturers?

    • Zedd

       /  June 16, 2018

      meaning ??

    • PDB

       /  June 16, 2018

      Ghahraman press release about the new prison: “As we work to significantly reduce the number of people in prison and the number of people going to prison, we have to ensure that current prisoners’ human rights and dignity are protected, which is the only way to ensure effective rehabilitation before they are released back into the community.

      “That means ending double bunking, and ensuring all facilities are safe.”

      Um…….

      Stuff: “The new double-bunked cells at Waikeria Prison will not meet the international standard set out to prevent torture and inhuman or degrading punishment.
      The guidelines for the minimum size of a two-person cell is 10 metres square of living space, plus sanitary annex.
      But Corrections Minister Kelvin Davis has said the Government’s plans for the new cells at Waikeria Prison do not meet that criteria, and will be only be nine metres square”

      • Kitty Catkin

         /  June 16, 2018

        Shouldn’t that be 10 square metres ?

        • PDB

           /  June 16, 2018

          10m2

        • Kitty Catkin

           /  June 16, 2018

          10 metres square is 100 sm, I think.

          So a 90 sm cell would be the size of a 2 bedroom house.

          • PDB

             /  June 16, 2018

            10m2 is 10 square mtrs

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  June 16, 2018

              No, I think that it’s 10 m on each side.

              Square metres and metres square are quite different.

              A 10 square metre bedroom would be a reasonable size, a 10 metre square one would be enormous.

            • PDB

               /  June 16, 2018

              You are correct though nowadays if someone says ’10 mtrs squared’ (10m2) I don’t take that as meaning 100 square mtrs (100m2). Common for people to say 10m2 exactly as written.

            • Gezza

               /  June 16, 2018

              Personally I interpret 10 metres square as 10 metres long by 10 metres wide and most people do.

              10 metres squared I interpret as 10m x 10 = 100 metres.

              I dunno how it’s written on plans.

            • PDB

               /  June 16, 2018

              Not sure why you are getting downticked – have an uptick.

            • Gezza

               /  June 16, 2018

              PDB’s right
              https://www.gubbagardensheds.co.nz/10m2-sheds/

              I note on my plans square metres is written by hand so the m2 is in handwritten superscript anyway.

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  June 16, 2018

              I would say 10 x 10 (or whatever the lengths are) for ms and 10sm for sm so that I get it the right way round.

              The PDT/s will downtick anything I say, I think.

              Have some upticks from me,

              I bet that prisoners would like 10 ms cells.

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  June 16, 2018

              Gubbage sheds is wrong, unless their sheds are enormous.

            • Gezza

               /  June 16, 2018

              Gubbage sheds is just the first one saying the same thing. If they’re wrong, it isn’t affecting their sales to people who can look at the pics and know what they mean.

            • Gezza

               /  June 16, 2018

              Here you are. This should sort it out,
              https://www.mrsphysics.co.uk/blog/difference-between-square-metres-and-metres-squared/

              Personally I think this is a piffling irrelevance to the main topic.

  3. Gezza

     /  June 16, 2018

    The sheila on the panel discussion picked up the point I keep getting irritated by the media about. Andrew Little keeps banging on about low level offenders but he never bloody says what he calls low-level offending. And they never frackin ask, and keep asking until the beggar spells it out.

    I’m not disputing there may be such a thing as low level offending – but surely to Allah by now they should be identifying what offences they are talking about!

    The only case Little’s ever come out with was the infamous ONE 3rd strike case where a sevond strike prisoner groped and pinched a female corrections officer’s bum.

    Mike Williams claimed there were cases of people in prison for driving without a license. When that sheila challenged him & said she did not believe there were any people put in prison for a single instance of driving without a licence; there must be other offences besides that – he insisted there were cases of one instance – in prison. Then later he casually throws in at the end “do it often enough, you’ll go to jail”. So he was talking crap.

    • Blazer

       /  June 16, 2018

      jailing someone because they continually drive without a licence is not a good idea.Confiscating their car would seem a better and obvious..option.Possibly D.U.I cases.

      • Kitty Catkin

         /  June 16, 2018

        The drunk who killed three innocent people as well as himself had had his car confiscated, so he borrowed another one.

      • chrism56

         /  June 16, 2018

        As usual Blazer, you comments are rank stupidity. You can’t buy a car without a valid driver’s license so they don’t “own” a car to confiscate. They also often steal cars (look at the newspaper articles on those who die in police chases) so there is that involved in their crime as well.

        • Blazer

           /  June 16, 2018

          didn’t mention owning a car or having a valid drivers licence…did I?

          • Gezza

             /  June 16, 2018

            How could they confiscate their bloody car if they didn’t own it?

          • chrism56

             /  June 16, 2018

            As usual Blazer, you lie when caught out. In your post that I responded to, you wrote “.Confiscating their car would seem a better and obvious..option.” Then when I pointed out about ownership, you wrote “didn’t mention owning a car “”. Yes you did. You used the word “their”. That is ownership. If it is a vehicle that they don’t own, it is not theirs.
            . Or are you going to do a Bill Clinton on us, and argue the meaning ofd words you used isn’t what the dictionary says?

            • Blazer

               /  June 16, 2018

              change their to ..the to make the nitpickers ..happy.

            • chrism56

               /  June 16, 2018

              So your lying can be washed away by just retroactively changing the words? No wonder Labour supporters have a lack of credibility?

      • Gezza

         /  June 16, 2018

        What are the odds they don’t even own the car? It’s mum’s or their brother’s. Or that they’ll add nicking cars or taking cars without their parents’ or owners’ permission. And what legislative provisions are there for police to do this? And if there aren’t any, how long will it be before there are? Meantime, what do you do, if they persist? Remand them until a judge orders confiscation?

      • Gezza

         /  June 16, 2018

        I saw plenty of cases on Motorway Patrol when I used to watch it where the driver’s got no licence or it’s been suspended & the car’s unregistered & unwarranted & in a few cases looked like a bloody death trap. This is what I mean – people say “in prison for driving without a licence. Bollocks. There’ll be more to it than that, I’m certain.”

        • Gezza

           /  June 16, 2018

          Oops, quotes ended in wrong place:

          People say “in prison for driving without a licence”.

          I say “Bollocks. There’ll be more to it than that, I’m certain.”

    • PDB

       /  June 16, 2018

      Both he and Ardern have been putting out this lie about our prisons overflowing with low level offenders – it isn’t true. Chuck in the absurd comparison to ‘American style’ justice and the lies sound even better;

      Ardern on the AM show: “”We still remain committed to moving away from what has become an American-style justice system where we build bigger and bigger prisons and have low-level offenders in them, and it doesn’t necessarily make us any safer,” Ms Ardern said.”

      The ‘bum-pincher’ wasn’t getting a harsh sentence solely for a bum pinch, that was just the final act of a guy with two serious strikes for robbery and aggravated robbery – hardly ‘low level’ offenses.

      • Kitty Catkin

         /  June 16, 2018

        I find it sad that the PDTs who automatically downtick me will do this to score cheap points over a tragedy like three people being killed and leaving their partners and children bereaved because a drunk ploughed into them on the wrong side of the road as they approached a corner on their motorbikes. This because someone lent a drunk who could hardly stand, let alone drive, a van.

        Do you think that drunks SHOULD be let to keep driving and killing people, PDTs ?

        I don’t.

        • Kitty Catkin

           /  June 16, 2018

          Three PDTs seem to find it acceptable.

          I take it that this has never happened to anyone they know. I knew the father of one of the motorcyclists who were killed by the drunk.

          • Kitty Catkin

             /  June 16, 2018

            PDTs, you are very sick people indeed. Have you ever seen a fatal crash and seen the hideousness of it ? If you had, you might – just might – have some compassion for those who die horrible deaths because of drunks.

    • duperez

       /  June 16, 2018

      So Andrew Little keeps banging on about low level offenders but he never bloody says what he calls low-level offending.

      Driving at 51kmph in a 50kmph zone is low level offending. Driving in the same zone at 181kmph is higher level. Is driving a very needy person to hospital in that zone at 73kmph a higher level than driving there 53kmph?

      Would you like Little to put out a big list to specifically indicate what he means as it applies to any possible situation?

      • Gezza

         /  June 16, 2018

        Yes that would I think be helpful because then we can see what low level offending is and whether persistent bag snatching & continual burglaries are among them, or whether these people are in prison for jaywalking or driving once without a licence.

        Driving at 51kmph in a 50kmph zone is low level offending.
        Excellent. Thank you. Now please give me a link to a case where someone has been imprisoned for driving at 51kph in a 50kph zone.

        Is driving a very needy person to hospital in that zone at 73kmph a higher level than driving there 53kmph?
        If they hit someone,possibly. Please give me a link to a case where someone has been imprisoned for doing this.

        Would you like Little to put out a big list to specifically indicate what he means as it applies to any possible situation?
        Even a small list of say half a page would be very helpful. If you have access to Corrections data and can supply a list of what are defined as low-level offences, I would happily accept your list, as long as you confirm it is what Mr Little and Ms Ardern and Mr Davis means.

        If you’re just being a smart arse, ignore this comment and I’ll ignore any more of yours in this vein.

        • Kitty Catkin

           /  June 16, 2018

          The most that anyone would ever get for jaywalking is a small fine, and I’d guess that that’s only if they were endangering themselves and/or others like the fools who run in front of buses thinking that the driver won’t hit them.

          Low-level offending to me would be (in some ways) hard to define. The man who was given life for stealing pizza would have terrified the children he stole it from as much as if it had been a Rolex watch. There must, I suppose be an arbitrary definition,

          If someone shoplifts a diamond ring, is that more of a crime than if they shoplifted a Moro bar ?

          I know people who had some very expensive plant pots stolen, but is that more of crime than our having our cheap solar lights stolen was ? Not that I rang the police over that, although the thought of someone creeping around the garden was disturbing, well out of proportion to the theft of a few cheap lights.

          • Gezza

             /  June 16, 2018

            If you can’t say what low level offending is how the hell can you credibly talk about people being in prison or on remand for low level offending. It should be easily possible to come up with numerous representative examples, and even stats. If his conclusions are only anecdotal and he can’t come up with more than one bloody anecdote – the bum pincher – who wasn’t even in the slammer for low level offending – how much confidence can anyone have Little even knows what the hell he’s talking about?

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  June 16, 2018

              Yes, I agree 100% (nearly put 10% by mistake)

              He is the bloody minister. We shouldn’t even be having this discussion and trying to work out what low-level offending is.

              How hard can it be to ask a clerk to look up this and that and collate the information ?

              Don’t be so coy, Andrew. We don’t want names and details like that, just a rough idea.

              Low-level is x, y and z. The offenders are given a, b or c on average,

        • duperez

           /  June 16, 2018

          Definitely not being smart-arse just putting out a perspective. Some people think a law breaker is a law breaker is a law breaker and should be chucked in jail forever.

          An event someone might describe as ‘minor’ break-in or incident, the victim might describe as very serious.

          You seemingly don’t understand the perfectly reasonable example of comparing ‘levels’ of crime with the kmph scenarios. Asking whether anyone’s being imprisoned for that, in a sneering manner, (my impression), along with the tone of the direct comments about Little, suggests you’re irritated by more than the media. Andrew Little for example. Because he’s got the job? Because you don’t agree with his perspectives? Because he’s in Government and not someone like Mark Mitchell in the role?

          Andrew Little has some challenging areas to deal with. One problem is that he actually wants to do something, not just let things be as they are. Just as much a problem is that there are some who don’t recognise there are problems with our systems of justice and corrections. Worst are those with the ‘lock ’em, throw away the key’ mentality.

          • Gezza

             /  June 16, 2018

            No you’re reading too much into it because you’re not thinking you’re reacting.

            The current system came about not just because of one or two high profile cases as some folk are now trying to suggest but because a trend had developed with judges turning recidivist offenders of all types back onto the streets and people got fed up with up with it.

            All Little seems to talk about is these are not violent offenders. When you’re an old couple getting harassed like those folk in Huntly, or your place is getting constantly burgled, or a persistent shoplifter is getting pulled in time and again – these sorts of things might be low level offending but they’re are not insignificant.

            My point is quite a simple one and I fail to understand why you can’t grasp it. It is that Little keeps using the manta low level offending. Fine.If they can be released without persistently offending let’s do that. But we have no idea what his term low level offenders means.

            So, who are these low level offenders? What are these low level offences? Why are they being remanded? It’s HIS fucken phrase. He’s spouting it constantly. What is he talking about? Surely to Jaweh he can fucken tell us?

          • Gezza

             /  June 16, 2018

            Some people think a law breaker is a law breaker is a law breaker and should be chucked in jail forever.

            Possibly Corky. Not sure I can think of any other regular posters here who have shown that attitude.

            I certainly don’t think that. Little should be on top of this sort of information. Before he starts down the track of legislating to release these folk we need to be certain there actually ARE resources in place sufficient to prevent some types of offences continuing to be inflicted on the public.

            National’s done a shit job there. But I want to be convinced Labour know what they are talking about and what they are doing.

            • Corky

               /  June 16, 2018

              ”Some people think a law breaker is a law breaker is a law breaker and should be chucked in jail forever.”

              Don’t confuse hard justice with liberal stupidity.

  4. chrism56

     /  June 16, 2018

    You are right PDB. I am surprised no-one has yet asked Andrew Little a Parliamentary question (with followup supplementaries) on how many prisoners are there because they drove without a license. As has been pointed out, there are none.

  5. Higherstandard

     /  June 16, 2018

    Mike Williams is better than that, he should hang his head in shame.

    • Gezza

       /  June 16, 2018

      Is he? He was the party president when I used to be a staunch Labour voter. While I don’t doubt that he is genuinely motivated, he has never impressed with anything he says. He’s always struck me as a poor contributing panel member on these sorts of things.

      • Kitty Catkin

         /  June 16, 2018

        I still have a cartoon of him and Helen Clark when they were trying to dig up dirt on John Key and failing. He is saying ‘Nothing but a boomerang and a two-edged sword so far.’

      • High Flying Duck

         /  June 16, 2018

        He was a great fund raiser and party bully boy. Not sure he had any other redeeming features.

  6. Gezza

     /  June 16, 2018

    It seems to me whatever ends up happening there’s not much doubt there’s too little in the way of resourcing in the mental health area – in prison and outside.

    If gangs are running the prisons there aren’t enough prison officers: they should be running the prisons.

    If we have a 60% reoffending rate too many prisoners are being released straight back into the same environment and conditions that cause or permit their offending (reportedly now more skilled criminals because gangs are running the prisons).

    That’s where the focus needs to be. And that’s where the resources need to go.

    • Blazer

       /  June 16, 2018

      who wants to hire ex cons?No one…incarceration is a slippery slope with little upside for…many.

      • Gezza

         /  June 16, 2018

        So that is one area where resources need to go. There ARE employers prepared to give that a go. But there needs to be follow up and monitoring if more are to be encouraged to do that.

        Williams referred to one case where a prisoner came up for parole but because of “administrative inefficiencies” his parole was deferred for a year, although he had completed a literacy program which was apparently part of his parole conditions. Another area where resources need to go, by the sound of things.

        • Kitty Catkin

           /  June 16, 2018

          I saw a news story about prisoners being taught trades; this one was building. They were being taken on when they came out. I don’t know how widespread this is, though. There are other programmes in prison, but if a prisoner won’t learn, they can’t make them, I suppose.

          The ‘one woman crime wave’ who was deported back to NZ now has a career and says that the deportation, that took her away from her life and circle of family and friends was the best thing that ever happened to her. She has been open about her past to people who employed her.

          • Pickled Possum

             /  June 16, 2018

            Isn’t Serco and Placemakers in partnership at Auckland South Corrections facility making houses??
            This certainly will make Serco shareholders very happy!!
            I wonder what the low hourly rate is for prisoners doing the building.

            Serco is responsible for prison operations at Auckland South Corrections Facility, however, they are not contracted directly to Corrections. Corrections signed a contract with SecureFuture to design, finance, build, operate and maintain Auckland South Corrections Facility. SecureFuture have in turn subcontracted the operation of the prison to their operator Serco

            The Chief Executive of Corrections remains responsible for the prisoners.

            Serco Service Providers say; “It’s our policy to use private sector innovation as well as international experience in running prisons to improve the quality, efficiency and cost-effectiveness of prisons, and to share improvements across the corrections system”.

            Clear as Mud to me.
            I wonder if The new government will cancel the contract with Serco as Labour has done twice before?

            • PartisanZ

               /  June 16, 2018

              It’s Spun Mud Possum … twice as opaque …

              I wouldn’t hold your breath for a Serco contract cancellation though …

              SecureFuture sheets back to Macquarie Bank Australia and these guys are more powerful than any government in Oceania …

              They own them … and by implication … They own us …

            • Gezza

               /  June 16, 2018

              They’re on around $90k a year already, Possum.

  7. Zedd

     /  June 16, 2018

    I see M Mitchell (natl), on TV news, again at odds with Mr Little; parole for ‘Class A’ Drug offenders. Mitchell says all those charged with these ‘offences’ should be remanded in custody.. Little disagrees, saying not all are ‘violent DRUG offenders’.. Im presuming he mainly means users & small time dealers.
    Mitchell added (fear-mongering) that we should not allow these Hardcore Drug offenders out in the public (paraphrased); I think he needs a wake up call.. most already are, the ones not already arrested/charged !!

    BUT again I say, what should we expect from a ‘hard-nosed ex-cop’ who really appears to agree that ZERO-tolerance & the WAR on DRUGS is still the preferred option (with Natl MPs & their supporters ?)

    • Corky

       /  June 16, 2018

      ”BUT again I say, what should we expect from a ‘hard-nosed ex-cop’ who really appears to agree that ZERO-tolerance & the WAR on DRUGS is still the preferred option (with Natl MPs & their supporters ?)”

      Seen Ross Meaurant latel?. From crushing skulls to talking with gangbangers and making wind chimes

      • Zedd

         /  June 16, 2018

        Seen Ross Meaurant latel? sez Corky

        I have no idea who you are referring to.. please enlighten me :/

        • Corky

           /  June 16, 2018

          No need. Go back to your beer…and enjoy the game tonight. Our team is called ” The All Blacks.”

          • Zedd

             /  June 16, 2018

            may I suggest you not jump on the ‘tar them all with the same brush’ bandwagon.

            btw; some still say ‘Cannabis is gateway drug’.. which originally claimed that ALL people who even smoked one joint would move onto to other ‘HARD Drugs’ & eventually to Heroin addiction. Extremist B-S sez I & others

            Thx; yes I will enjoy the match & a few ales too Corky

            ‘Our team is called ” The All Blacks.”.. ‘

            yes I know. I support OUR team too. Im a NZ citizen too 🙂

    • Zedd

       /  June 16, 2018

      I wonder whether Mitchell even thinks Alcohol & Tobacco purveyors are also actually ‘Drug dealers’ too.. even though they have a different ‘legal status’ ? :/

      In a report from UK, an expert categorised Tobacco as similar to Class A (Heroin etc.) & Alcohol as similar to Class B (MDMA etc.).. in regard to their addiction stats, annual deaths, other social harms (drunk driving, violence) etc.

  8. Frances Warren

     /  July 3, 2018

    The what you call,’Justice System in NZ is a joke!’,I am sick and tired of hearing of cases where the perpertrator of serious crime like i.e. like Tony Robertson,whom killed Blessie Gotingo,after being released on bail, monitored by an ankle bracelet was able to commit a henous crime so disgusting, although they say he was traced or tracked is a huge catastrophe to all New Zealanders including Blessie whanau and friends!!!What is wrong with this Country and why is all the offender’s of serious crimes getting 3 meals a day,tv,cellphones,free time,gym time or weight training and probably pyschological and counselling sessions.The victims family’s and their friends have to live with this,and the worst thing about this is,after they serve over half of their sentencing they are eligible for parole,out sooner for good behaviour and compliance to seek help for rehabilitation.Corrections I would never ever trust to even look after my cat let alone CRIMS,WAKE_UP KIWIs.Bring the DEATH PENALTY,too many Bloody LIBERALS in this country!!!!;!