On the issue of being able to use evidance gained from another country which may have involved torture, I think we are close to agreeing. I have no problem with it not being used to convict some-one, so long as it can be acted on.
Peter Metcalfe points out that the UK decision is far more limited than originally published, and has been sexed up.
As for parole, I don’t accept that because we have finite sentences we eventually have to release almost every prisoner, so we should let them out early with parole as a carrot.
Unfortunately a significant proportion of the prison population are never going to turn from crime. In fact these couple of thousand or so people generate most of the crime and you just know that the moment they are out they will start robbing and beating people again. If we stop letting them out in half the time, we effectively cut the number of crimes they can commit in half.
It is nice to think we can rehabilitate everyone but we can not. there is no magic solution. If there was, it would be used around the world. Sure there are individual programmes that can get some good results with *some* prisoners. The sex offenders programme down south for example.
On the proposed Treaty Commission, to manage the foreshore for all NZers, NRT says it will give everyone a say. But isn’t this what local government is for? I don’t see the foreshore as something to be managed centrally. It should be done at a local level (subject to any national policy) by local councils which are directly elected by all NZers.