Scoop has an Ethical Paywall
Work smarter with a Pro licence Learn More

Gordon Campbell | Parliament TV | Parliament Today | News Video | Crime | Employers | Housing | Immigration | Legal | Local Govt. | Maori | Welfare | Unions | Youth | Search


Voting Choices this Election

Voting Choices this Election

The Sensible Sentencing Trust has many thousands of supporters from all walks of life with varying political, religious and cultural beliefs. Trust Spokesman Garth McVicar says the one thing they all have in common is wanting a safe environment to raise their children.

“Many of our supporters have asked for our opinion on who they should vote for this election. SST has always been, and remains, an A political organization. Our policy is to comment on the party’s' policies in the law and order area, but to leave the overall decision to the voters on which party to support.

Of the two major parties, National's policies on law and order clearly fit much more closely with our policies than do Labour's. National has announced that life without parole will be a possible punishment for the worst murderers, and give William Bell as one example of a murderer who would have been jailed for life without parole under National. National also says it will deny parole to the worst repeat violent offenders, and toughen bail laws. All of those policies are in line with SST policy.

Of the minor parties, the Act Party is clearly the pick of the bunch, and the party whose law and order policies are the closest fit with SST's. Act also proposes life without parole for the worst murderers, and truth in sentencing, meaning a criminal will serve the full sentence handed down by the judge. As part of its truth in sentencing policy, Act will push for abolition of parole, and instead proposes post sentence supervision conditions.

Advertisement - scroll to continue reading

Are you getting our free newsletter?

Subscribe to Scoop’s 'The Catch Up' our free weekly newsletter sent to your inbox every Monday with stories from across our network.

From SST's point of view, Act's proposed "three strikes" law is identical to SST policy. Many members will know that David Garrett, long time legal advisor to SST, is the person who drafted the "three strikes" law, and is at number 5 on Act's party list. Act points out that under its "three strikes" policy William Bell would not have got the chance to kill in the first place because of his 102 previous convictions prior to the murders at the Panmure RSA. And Liam Reid - the piece of tattooed vermin formerly well known to SST as Julian Edgecombe - would not have had the chance to rape and kill Emma Agnew. Both killers would already have been in jail.

At the end of the day whether to support National or Act - or indeed any other party - is a decision you – the voter – must make, based on each party’s' policies as a whole. National is of course one of the two major parties. Act is marketing itself as "National's spine" - in other words it says it will use its influence in a National - Act coalition government to stiffen National's policies. Whether Act is in a position to do that depends of course on how many party votes they get, and consequently how many MP's.

Again, at the end of the day, SST endorses no party, and the decision on which party to vote for is one for you, based on both the policies each party offers, and whether you believe their candidates are credible, and will fulfill the promises they have made to the electors. We urge you to think carefully before casting your party vote.


© Scoop Media

Advertisement - scroll to continue reading
Parliament Headlines | Politics Headlines | Regional Headlines




InfoPages News Channels


Join Our Free Newsletter

Subscribe to Scoop’s 'The Catch Up' our free weekly newsletter sent to your inbox every Monday with stories from across our network.