Snap debate in Parliament on the Ashton case

Madam Speaker, I want to acknowledge the courage, determination and grief of the Ashton family, and their commitment to trying to ensure that there cannot be a repeat of the tragic circumstances that led to Debbie Ashton’s death.

 I travelled to Nelson twice to see the Ashton family, firstly on 12 September last year to discuss the terms of reference for the independent inquiry conducted by Kristy McDonald QC, and secondly on 19 December to deliver to the family the first draft of the report, a day or two after I received it.

 At both meetings with the family, Hon Nick Smith was present as the Ashton’s local MP, and I want to acknowledge his advocacy for the family.

 I also want to acknowledge the co-operation given by NZ Police and the Corrections Department to the Inquiry, and particularly the tireless efforts of Win van der Velde, National Manager Crime, who worked closely with the family from the outset.

 Police and Corrections have both apologised unreservedly to the Ashton family for the human errors that occurred, and endorsed the recommendations of the Inquiry.

 The purpose of the independent inquiry that I set up in my former role as Minister of State Services was to determine the unvarnished truth of what happened, to provide a full, frank and transparent analysis of events which resulted in the tragic death of Debbie Ashton.

 The specific terms of reference for the inquiry were as follows

 ·        The circumstances in which the driver was able to use his new identity to be treated as a first offender

 ·        Whether, and to what extent, there were failures in the systems, practices or procedures of those agencies who dealt with this that caused or contributed to the driver being in a position to be able to drive a vehicle on 5 December 2006 and thereby causing Ms Ashton’s death.

 ·        The nature and timing and appropriateness of enforcement action taken against the driver while he was on parole.

 It was important that Debbie Ashton’s family, government agencies and the public understood what went wrong in terms of human error and failure of systems, to ensure there is no repeat of these circumstances and that there is accountability.

 The Inquiry found that human error was a key factor. The offender should have been recalled to prison when convicted of driving with excess breath alcohol and the decision not to recall him was inexcusable.

 As QC Kristy McDonald pointed out, instances of human error are inevitable when Corrections manages on a daily basis round 38,000 people on community sentence. However, systems should have been in place to avoid such errors leading to the tragic consequences which occurred in this case.

 The inquiry found that systems, policies and practices by Corrections were inadequate; there were failures in communication and a failure to provide proper direction and oversight.

 Corrections and Police accept in full the criticisms made and the recommendations to remedy the deficiencies that existed in the area of dealing with offenders who were under the Witness Protection Programme.

 They are committed to and have to a large extent already implemented the recommendations made by the inquiry.

 Kristy McDonald acknowledges that all who made mistakes in this case regret them bitterly and have been open and frank in their acknowledgement of their errors.

 The Police Witness Protection Programme was established in the late 80s to address the risks involved when members of the public were prepared to come forward and assist in the resolution of serious crime.

 Although the programme has continued to evolve, the focus of the programme remains on providing a safe environment for witnesses and their families, who are under a genuine threat to life or serious bodily harm.

 The evidence from these witnesses, results in the successful prosecution of offenders involved in the top echelon of criminal offending such as serious violence, homicide, and trans-national organised crime.

 The focus of staff involved with the programme, is to assess and mitigate the risk surrounding the witness and the threat group, and to work with the witness in their integration into a community under a new identity.

 In this tragic case, Police focussed on the risk to the witness, but accept that they failed to manage the risk “of the witness” himself to the community he was relocated to, and for this, Police have apologised to the Ashton family.

 The Witness protection programme continues to monitor and manage a number of witnesses and their families, and most people would agree that there remains a need within Police investigations and the judicial process for the protection of witnesses who are prepared to come forward and testify against criminal activity.  

 While that need remains, there can be no excuse for putting at risk the lives of innocent people, as happened in this tragic case.

 Since the Inquiry, Police have acknowledged the recommendations, and further enhanced their processes and risk mitigation to try to ensure that a tragedy like this can never happen again.

 While it is not possible to reverse the tragedy of Debbie’s death, it is critical that all factors which contributed to the error of leaving the offender in the community when he should have been recalled to prison are addressed.

 Protection of identities under the Witness Protection Programme is important but the paramount obligation of Corrections and Police is to the safety of the community.

 Fundamental changes have been made to the management of offenders on the WPP who are on parole, and I am assured by both Corrections and police that the recommendations of the inquiry to prevent any further tragedies of this nature will be fully implemented.

 One other outstanding issue needs to be addressed – that of the lawyer who defended the man in his two different identities and knew he was lying. I believe he had a duty to the Court to share this knowledge.

 I want to repeat that I have been moved by the courage and determination of the Ashton family. I thank them for their willingness to go along with an Inquiry that was essential for revealing the errors that must be eliminated in the future, no matter how painful that was.  It is my hope that the Inquiry will have achieved that, and I am sure the Ashtons share that hope.