We read with alarming regularity about fines being waived by the courts.
The question that arises is: Should the justice system consider financial penalties an effective form of punishment when clearly many offenders blatantly ignore these orders from the courts?
There is an element of farce when so many realisethat they can clock up many fines, plead poverty and have them remitted. If a punishment is not enforced, it ceases to be a deterrent - and if the justice system is not able to enforce fines, why don't we impose more effective penalties from the outset?
Some of the write-offs around the country have been staggering.
The highest remittal since 2010 was in Christchurch, where one offender had $294,491 remitted for breaching the Tax Administration Act and a vehicle offence.
Sensible Sentencing Trust spokesman Garth McVicar says offenders who refused to pay fines were "giving their fingers to the system, getting away with it and laughing their way to the bank". Mr McVicar suggests an alternative solution adopted by Canada, whereby criminals were sent to work on a working farm if they could not pay fines. Perhaps such a system could be considered to dissuade offenders from the belief they can ignore court orders.
The public expects that criminals will be held to account for their actions.
