Collins Judith: Vehicle Confiscation and Seizure Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Collins Judith: Vehicle Confiscation and Seizure Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 20 October 2009. Volume:658;Page:7262. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Police) 
: 
 Part 3 is actually about the Privacy Act but as the previous speaker Mr Burns has ranged wide and free I think we should correct a few of the statements he has made. What he is doing and his party has consistently done today and last evening is to repeat the errors that they made in Labour’s minority report to the House. I hate to disabuse them of this but frankly a substitute’s car—in other words a car that is owned by someone else—can actually be confiscated on the second offence after one warning. That is provided for in new section 128(2)(b) which is inserted by clause 6. Their comments show that yet again they have not read the provision. So whatever the Labour members on the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee were doing they certainly were not listening when the officials from the New Zealand Police and the Ministry of Transport were trying to tell them what the bill said. 
Mr Burns has made some comments about finance companies. He seems to think that they will miraculously turn up at auctions and buy back cars or stop them being sold. It is a good point except that under the legislation that the Government has inherited from the previous Government the finance companies had no idea what was happening to the car because nobody ever told them. What this legislation does by its written warning procedure is advise the finance company about what is happening. 
In picking up on Mr Burns’ comment about finance companies I believe that one of those written warnings delivered by a member of the New Zealand Police will make a very strong statement about the security of the asset. I believe that they will have it stated in their finance agreements if they do not already that if their asset is being used illegally then they will take action. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: Make it one warning. Why make it three warnings? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: The member calls out and asks why we should give them three warnings. Well— 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: Two warnings. 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
:—two warnings now he says. It is three warnings rather than two warnings. I think it is very important that the member understands that it will take only one letter to make the message very plain to these finance companies because as Mr Burns rightly says they do not want to lose their security. But at the moment they do not even know what is going on. They do not understand that the car is being confiscated or sold off. They do not understand what is going on because frankly nobody tells them. How are they supposed to suddenly know that that is happening unless we tell them? That is one of the very important provisions that we have in the bill. This is not about taking cars off people; it is not about any of that. It is about the behaviours and the people most likely to influence behaviour are the people who have the right to take the car. In most cases we will find that finance companies can do that if they know that their car is being used illegally. 
I commend this part to the Committee. This part has amendments to the Privacy Act but I think it is important that I correct some of the misstatements made both today and yesterday and actually for the last 6 or 7 months by the Labour Party. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: I call Carol Beaumont but before I do I just want to bring members back to Part 3. This part is very narrow and I ask members to concentrate on that part.