I am sure that we are all familiar with the saying, attributed to Mark Twain: “Lies, damn lies and statistics”.

 And, of course, I will be using statistics today myself to illustrate aspects of what the Government has been doing to advance the rights of victims, but I wanted to say straight off today that there is one saying I cannot tolerate.

 That is the saying, attributed to no one, but which we have all heard time and time again, that he or she is just another statistic.

 It might be talking about the victim of a road accident; it might be a murder victim; or it might be someone whose property has been defaced ---- but whatever it refers to, the phrase “just another statistic’ is one that both angers and frustrates me.

 It angers me because ‘just another statistic’ conceals the reality that the statistic is a real person or persons, and diminishes, in the case of death, a real and human tragedy.

 And the phrase frustrates me because ‘just another statistic’ tends also to dehumanise a community, and maybe harden that community against some of the tragedies people see around them.

 We must treat each statistic, each victim, as a real person, and that is why, when I became Justice Minister late last year, I said straight off that one of main priorities would be to place more emphasis on victim’s rights.

 It is the nature of societies all over the world that there will be fresh victims of one kind or another every day. No Government or community can prevent that happening, but the more we can focus on the fact that each case involves real human beings, the greater our commitment will become to progressively improve the rights of victims, and support for them.

 Inevitably, because it is also the nature of things that human tragedies and the overall theme of law and order are often the stuff of public attention, the whole issue of victims, particularly victims of crime, is prone to being politicised.

 The more political an issue becomes, the more glib solutions that are offered, then the more likely real people are to become unwitting sidebars or pawns in arguments that can lose sight of their real welfare.  

 Thank you for inviting me to join you at this important forum, and welcome to my home town of Wellington. I want to acknowledge Garth McVicar and other members of the trust, and to say that your theme, Advancing Victims’ Rights, reflects one of my most important responsibilities both as Justice Minister and Police Minister. 

 As you will be well aware, in February I announced a range of new Government initiatives aimed at strengthening victims’ rights and increasing the level of support provided to victims. I will talk more about these and other initiatives shortly, but I thought it was important to place all these initiatives within the broader context of what the Government has already put in place.

 Legislation strengthening victims’ rights 

 

 I believe the Labour-led Government has put in place a strong legislative framework for victims of crime through the Victims Rights’ Act 2002, and other legislation including the Sentencing Act 2002, the Parole Act 2002 and The Prisoner’s and Victims’ Claims’ Act 2005.

And, more recently, the Evidence Act 2006 hasprovided for the needs of vulnerable witnesses and victims by making provision for witnesses to give evidence in alternative ways, such as giving evidence from behind a screen, via CCTV and pre-recorded video.

 The Children, Young Persons’ and their Families Amendment Bill also includes provision to ensure victims of youth crime can attend Youth Court hearings, and provisions to ensure these victims are kept properly informed.

Prior to those pieces of legislation, the only real victim-specific legislation was the Victims of Offences Act, passed by the fourth Labour Government in 1987.

The Victims’ Rights Act turned many of the general principles of the Victims of Offences Act 1987 into rights. The Act has achieved much of what it set out to do --- to improve provisions for the treatment and rights of victims of offences. This view is supported by the 2006 New Zealand Crime and Safety Survey. The survey indicates that generally victims of crime have a positive view of the New Zealand criminal justice system and are satisfied with the service they receive.

Victim Satisfaction

 

What is clear to me, from issues raised by victims and from the Report of the Justice and Electoral Committee’s Inquiry into Victims’ Rights, is that more can still be done to ensure the Act works even more effectively for victims of crime.

 They should expect to be treated with sensitivity and respect and be provided with information about their rights and the services they should receive. Victims should know what the justice system requires from them and what it will deliver. As I have said, this is what happens for most victims most of the time. But most victims most of the time is not good enough. 

 This year, a Victims’ Charter will be developed to build awareness of the standard of service that victims can expect from government agencies. The Victims’ Charter will be a significant step in ensuring that victims of crime are aware of their rights under the Victims Rights Act. The Charter will also be a reminder to those who deal with victims of the standard of service victims should receive.  

 Rather than build a new bureaucracy deep within the Ministry of Justice, the Government has decided to work with the highly successful Victim Support organisation to establish a central contact point for victims to provide information and to assist victims with advice about support agencies and services.

 Funding of $1.2 Million per year over four years has been provided from 2008 for this initiative, which will include a sustainable national 0800 victim helpline and a website for victims.  

The Police executive has also agreed to establish a Victim Services Manager position that will oversee services to victims, including informing victims of their notification rights.

 There will be more information available to victims by improving the coordination and integration of information across government agencies and non-government organisations.  This is a focus of work being undertaken in the Ministry of Justice’s Review of Services to Victims of Crime, which aims to improve the provision of information to victims about their rights and the services available to them.

 The Government is also providing more funding for Victim Support. 

 

Victim Support funding

 

 As this graph shows, in recent years the Government has invested significantly in Victim Support’s National Restructure Programme to ensure Victim Support’s structure effectively meets the needs of victims of crime and trauma. In the 2006 Budget process, Victim Support was provided with additional funding of $10.780 million over the budget forecast period (including an additional $2.4 million in 2006/07) to maintain effective service delivery to victims.

 Commencing this year, to help Victim Support attract suitably skilled and experienced staff, the Government is providing additional funding of $2.8 million over four years to Victim Support to build the capability of its frontline service co-ordinators.

 Most victims need support from services such as Victim Support, and, in some cases, victims may also need legal representation at Coronial Inquests and Parole Board hearings.

 I can announce today that the Government is drafting a Legal Services Amendment Bill to ensure victims do not face any additional stress during the processing of legal aid grants.   

 The Bill will ensure that victims of crime (those affected by an alleged or committed offence) involved in Coronial Inquests and Parole Board hearings will not be subject to financial eligibility tests, or need to repay legal aid grants when they need to be represented by a lawyer.

 The Bill will also enable the Legal Services Agency to write off victim legal aid debt from the outset rather than waiting till the end of a proceeding.

 The Government recognises that victims, as well as having general needs for information and support, also have specific needs arising from particular crimes committed against them. 

 Receiving prompt information and having access to support services can be especially critical for victims of domestic and sexual violence, for example, both in terms of recovery and preventing re-victimisation.

 The New Zealand Crime and Safety Survey indicates that victims of domestic violence are over represented in re-victimisation statistics.  The Ministry of Justice is currently considering amendments to strengthen the Domestic Violence Act to reduce and prevent domestic violence and re-victimisation.

 Victims of domestic violence also need to be well supported through the court process, which for these vulnerable victims can be an especially difficult experience. To better meet their needs, the Government is providing funding of $3.4 million over the next four years to NGOs for independent victim advocates, who will support and assist victims of domestic violence in Family Violence Courts.

 While this work is taking place as part of the Taskforce for Action on Violence within Families, the Government will also consider how the service could be extended to victims of other violent crimes, including sexual violence. The Review of Services to Victims of Crime will also look at how the role of Victim Advisors could be extended to better meet the information and support needs of victims and their families.

 The Government is also providing additional funding of $5.2 million per annum over four years for NGOs to deliver stopping violence programmes to perpetrators of domestic violence to help break the cycle of violence and re-victimization.

 I am frequently dismayed when political opponents play down the impact of domestic and sexual violence in our society and in our crime statistics. I will say more about this shortly, but, as far as I am concerned, family violence is an evil in our society, and the more those who should know better try to play down its significance, the more likely it is that innocent women and children will be re-victimised.

 The initiatives I have been talking about represent part of an ongoing and significant commitment by the Government to ensure that:

 ·        victim’s rights are properly observed

·        victims feel supported through the criminal justice process and

·        victims have proper access to information and services.

 

I am, of course, aware that these initiatives do not address all the issues raised by victims of crime. We still have work to do, including work pertaining to victims’ compensation and reparation, issues that were raised in the Report of the Inquiry into Victims’ Rights.

 As the Government response to the Report stated, a victim compensation scheme and State-funded reparation raise complex issues that need to be worked through to determine if there would be benefits to victims over our current ACC and reparation system. The Government has asked the Law Commission to undertake this work. If we are to do things differently in the future, we need to do so in a fair, sustainable and considered way.

 I know there is considerable interest in a scheme that exists in Victoria, called the Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal or VOCAT, and I am sure this is one area the Commission will look at.

 While there are, as I said, complex differences between New Zealand and Australian compensation schemes, I believe we need to consider all such schemes carefully to ensure that any scheme that is put in place in New Zealand provides the best services for victims as well as meshing in with our comprehensive ACC scheme.

 A so-called compensation scheme that raises at best estimate $5 million could not compare to the sort of well-researched and planned schemes that exist in other countries.

 A cold and brutal fact of crime is that the damage some crimes inflict on the victims is beyond compensation and can never be repaired, and I support the contention that one of the best things we can do is to help victims move on and leave the label of victim behind.

 This is one reason that the Government is committed to the use of restorative justice. By choosing to participate in a restorative justice conference, victims have a voice in the criminal justice system, and they can receive reparation, apologies, and answers. 

 The 2005 evaluation of the court referred restorative justice pilot confirmed that victims generally find restorative justice conferences a positive and healing experience. Many victims said that they could make clear to the offender the effects the offence had on them; they could say what they wanted to; they felt involved; and they were treated with respect. Many victims said they would recommend restorative justice conferences to others and would attend again.

 Restorative justice is not a soft option for offenders. It requires offenders to face their victims, redress the harm they have done, and confront the causes of their offending.  Many offenders find this far more difficult than the court hearing.

 The Ministry is working with other agencies, including the Department of Corrections and Police, toward extending the availability of restorative justice to meet the needs of victims and offenders in the criminal justice system nationally.

 So far I have been talking about what the Government is doing to meet the needs of victims of crime, but there is another side to this story --- our investment into making our communities safer, with fewer crimes and fewer victims.

 To make our communities safer we have to start with families. We all have a responsibility to support efforts to put an end to family violence in our communities.

 The $14 million Campaign for Action on Family Violence, a major initiative led jointly by the Ministry of Social Development and the Families Commission, is raising awareness of family violence in our communities and is helping change attitudes and behaviour towards family violence. Family violence is not okay and it is never okay.

 The campaign consists of three components:

• Communications including mass media advertising, an 0800 number, a website, media advocacy and resource development.
• Community action, including a Community Action Fund and partnerships with NGOs and the corporate sector.
• Research and evaluation.

 As we all know, another significant factor contributing to offending in New Zealand is alcohol. Up to 50 percent of all arrested offenders have been drinking at the time they committed their crimes, and internationally 60 to 70 percent of all crime, involving people of any age, can be linked to alcohol.

 The Government is working in partnership with local government, communities and the industry to reduce alcohol related crime, though liquor bans, for example.

 A fatal mistake was made in the passage of the Sale of Liquor Amendment Act 1999 which has enabled district licensing agencies to grant liquor licences where, in the past, they had no power to do so. This has led to a proliferation of liquor outlets. For example, I’m told, since the passage of the Act, a city like Christchurch has seen 363 off-licences approved.

 As the advertisement says, it’s the way we are drinking. It is the 24 hour wholesale availability of alcohol, and our attitude toward it.

 We must change those attitudes toward alcohol. That is why the Government has strongly supported ALAC’s campaign to highlight the reality of binge drinking. Such advertising needs to hard-hitting to bring about attitudinal change.

 The Government is also acting to effectively address sexual violence. The Taskforce for Action on Sexual Violence was established in July 2007 to lead and coordinate interagency action to prevent and respond to sexual violence, and its work programme includes a focus on: recovery and support services for those who have experienced sexual violence, and the responsiveness of the justice system to victims and improving outcomes for victims.  

 Funding of just over $473,000 has been provided to implement the work programme and to enable NGOs dealing with victims of sexual violence to develop the capacity and capability of this sector. 

 I also want to mention graffiti vandalism, which as I know from personal experience, is a blight, and a particular scourge on some communities. Graffiti has negative impacts that extend beyond the owner of the property that gets tagged, creates an eyesore for the wider community, and leaves many people feeling intimidated.

 The Government recently launched a nation-wide approach to address tagging and graffiti vandalism in New Zealand.  The Stop Tagging Our Place (STOP) strategy includes a range of new initiatives including measures to strengthen the law in this area.

As well, the Summary Offences (Tagging and Graffiti Vandalism) Amendment Bill will create a specific tagging and graffiti vandalism offence, increase fines for graffiti vandalism from $200 to $2000, allow for community work as a sentence, prohibit the sale of spray paint to those under the age of 18, and require retailers to store spray paint under their control in order to reduce the problem of theft.

 Funding of $6 million is also being provided over the next three years to support community action to combat graffiti vandalism.

 

Police numbers and funding

 

A key element in making our communities safer is also, of course, the investment the Government is making in increasing Police numbers, particularly in terms of front-line staff, through our confidence and supply agreement with New Zealand First. We have almost completed the second tranche of the extra 1000 sworn and 250 non-sworn staff, recruitment is well on target, and I am confident all the extra police will be added by the end of June next year.

 I know from comments received from staff around the country that the extra police are making a substantial difference in terms of fighting crime and making our communities safer. 

Appropriations

 To accommodate the more than 2000 extra Police since Labour came in to office, total appropriations for Police output expenses has increased 45 percent from 1997 to 2007, with almost all the increase occurring under this Government. The average annual increase in appropriations is 4 percent.

 I am dismayed when the National Party suggests that few of the new recruits are frontline staff. As far as the Government is concerned, detectives, community constables, road policing staff, and staff working in the areas of family violence and sexual violence and with youth are clearly frontline, operational staff. Policing on the street is frontline as far as I am concerned. Frontline cannot simply be defined as those police staff you see passing by in I cars.

 Overall crime in New Zealand is tracking down, but unfortunately, there are those who will misrepresent single, often quite unique, incidents of crime as part of an overall trend. 

 

 International Crime and Victimisation

Survey

 

The recent International Crime and Victimisation Survey shows that overall levels of victimisation dropped over the period 1992 to 2005.

 

 

 

International Crime and Victimisation

Survey (two) 

 

And, even more encouragingly, the survey shows a decline in almost every offence category, excluding robbery.

 Contrary to what is often claimed, particularly in the media, latest crime statistics also provide signs of encouragement. The incidence of recorded crime in the 2007 calendar year has remained at roughly the same level as in 2006, and has actually reduced 0.5 percent on the basis of recorded offences per 10,000 of population.

 

Violent offences

 

Violent offences have increased, but, as the pie graph shows, the increase in violence offences is attributable mainly to recording of family violence offences which increased 31 percent from 18,448 in 2006 to 24,258 in 2007. That increase was the highest annual increase in ten years. 

 Increased reporting and social intolerance of domestic violence is likely the single biggest factor in explaining this increase. The heightened focus of Police on domestic violence and the success of media campaigns such as the “It’s not okay campaign” have also encouraged reporting and reduced tolerance, and I am encouraged that more women are coming forward and have confidence in Police.

 

Recorded Murders

 

The next slide may be a surprise for regular readers of daily papers because it shows that murder is actually on the decline.  Last year there were 45 murders, the lowest figure for the last 10 years. And it is worth noting, sadly, that 15 of the 45 murders last year involved family violence. Murders have decreased 32 percent from 1997 and have steadily declined since 2005, but, of course, even one murder is one too many.

 

Youth Crime

 

This brings me to the other old chestnut of the gloom and doom merchants: youth crime.   Youth crime is not out of control.  You can see from this chart that youth crime has been relatively stable over the past decade and that overall youth crime has actually fallen.

 Before I finish this morning, I want to talk briefly about two other issues, firstly what the Government is doing to make it easier for police and other enforcement agencies to detect and investigate crime.

 Many of the laws governing this area are outdated and overly complex, resulting in legal challenge and operational uncertainty.  This year, the Government will introduce a Bill that will clarify the law in this area. The Bill will give the police and other agencies greater tools while also providing greater certainty for everyone in terms of the exercise of those powers.

 For example, the law will be updated to ensure that computers may be searched and electronic data seized when a search power is exercised. 

 Warrantlless search powers will also be clarified and new powers introduced. This will include, for example, the scope of the power to search people, places or vehicles on arrest.  A new power will be provided allowing a search without warrant in cases where it is believed that evidence of serious offending will be compromised before a warrant may be obtained.

 The Bill will provide police and other law enforcement officers with the appropriate tools necessary to combat crime in the 21^st century.

 The better the tools we can provide for our police, the safer our communities will be for all of us.

 The final matter I want to mention is the constant challenge to reduce the road toll. I often find it ironic that when people talk about victimisation in New Zealand, they fail to acknowledge the greatest cause ---- trauma on our roads. I make no apology for being a strong supporter of road policing. Road police really are at the frontline of policing in all our communities.

We know from international research that 40 percent of drink drivers have a criminal history, about 50 percent of people charged with a dangerous driving offence have a previous criminal conviction, and 79 percent of disqualified drivers have criminal histories.

By way of example, a recent police operation in Auckland involving checkpoints in high crime locations resulted in 141 arrests. These included arrests for burglary, warrants, disqualified driving and drink driving.

The road toll has reduced steadily over the past decade, from 539 deaths in 1997 to 423 in 2007, but 423 is still far higher than the target of no more than 300 we hope to reach by 2010. We will continue to introduce new road safety measures, and we need organisations across the spectrum to support us.

There are many initiatives I haven’t discussed today, including the rewrite of the Police Act, the increased emphasis on a New Zealand style of community policing, the establishment of the Organised and Financial Crime Agency New Zealand, and the great improvement brought about in the emergency call system.

I have simply run out of time, but I thank you again for the opportunity to talk to you. I believe we have made substantial progress to advance the rights of victims of crime toward making our communities safer, but we still have much to do. I look forward to working with the sector to get closer to where we all want to be. Thank you.