Locke Keith: Policing (Involvement in Local Authority Elections) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Locke Keith: Policing (Involvement in Local Authority Elections) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Sitting date: 22 June 2010. Volume:664;Page:12055. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
KEITH LOCKE (Green) 
: 
 I think the previous two contributions were very useful and I agree that the five existing police officers who are also councillors—and I only really know of Alf Filipaina—appear to have conducted themselves with honour and in the correct manner. But when we write legislation in this Parliament we are not writing it for the better people in society—the ones who are well motivated and have good morality and everything else—we are writing legislation to cover situations where people are not so well motivated and might act in self-interest or meanness or get involved if they are on a local body in political fights. They might act in a way through their other role—in this case that of a police officer—that is not in accord with best practice. I do not think we can just think that in the future everyone will be angels and everything will be great. 
We have to look at the background of local body politics. Watching local body politics in Auckland in particular in the last few years we have seen quite a bit of not only political conflict but also personal conflict. People have been getting quite nasty to each other including in Manukau City— 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: You don’t have to be in the police for that to happen. 
KEITH LOCKE 
: —yes—and in North Shore City. I have seen quite a few personal clashes mixed up with political clashes of late. Therein lies the problem: it is not necessarily true that police officers who cover both positions will act in a bad way but they can be perceived as acting in a bad way if they are involved in these conflicts in their local bodies. They can be put in a very tricky position if they happen to stop a car for example that is driven by the son of one of their antagonists on the local body. What will they do in that situation? They will be caught in a bind. If they proceed with the ticketing they could get it back from the faction in the council that they disagree with who might say they did it because they were trying to get at the family. If they go the other way and say that they do not want a fight so they will not write out a ticket they get it from the police saying that they are not acting in a politically neutral way. So it is very difficult for them. 
There is also a question of a conflict of interest when bringing in by-laws. Alf Filipaina has stood aside when his council is making decisions on particular by-laws in order to remove a conflict of interest. That is often difficult where there is a very factional situation on a council such as there may be soon in the Auckland Council where two camps are developing in the electoral campaign. They might end up very finely balanced with just one vote between them. If all of a sudden a person in one camp happens to be a police officer and has to absent himself or herself from the vote it changes the whole balance of power on the council. 
A whole lot of problems can arise through having a potential conflict of interest and the easiest way to overcome it is to retain the original law.