Martin Tracey: Manukau City Council (Regulation of Prostitution in Specified Places) Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMartin Tracey: Manukau City Council (Regulation of Prostitution in Specified Places) Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 25 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1926. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]TRACEY MARTIN (Deputy Leader—NZ First): Kia ora Mr Assistant Speaker. I stand on behalf of New Zealand First to disagree with both previous speakers. I stand on behalf of New Zealand First to explain why we disagree. It is not that we do not understand. It is not that we do not understand the advice that was given to the Local Government and Environment Committee way back in 2005 and 2006 nor is it that we do not understand the advice that was given to the select committee only last year. We understand that we had a member on that select committee Andrew Williams. However it is our view—it is our view—that the people of Manukau have been let down by this Parliament. It is our view that the select committee could have done more. Although it might have recommended that this bill not go forward it could have made other recommendations.I note very clearly that the two previous speakers have relied on advice that Auckland Council can already create a by-law and that is true. That is absolutely true. As a person who was part of the submission process with regard to the Rodney District Council and the laws and the by-laws that were created then to create areas where this industry could do its business without interfering with the everyday lives of the other citizens in that area I know that what Mr Simpson has said is true. The Rodney District Council had very strong laws. Actually of all the amalgamated councils the Rodney District Council had the most conservative by-laws around this particular industry. It was threatened on several occasions with being taken to court because it wanted to protect and fit within the current legislation but it also wanted to make sure that its citizens who pay the rates in that area had a level of protection. So we created those by-laws. And then the Rodney District Council was absorbed into the super-city of Auckland and because the super-city of Auckland’s absorption has not worked as quickly as perhaps was imagined those by-laws still stand in just the 46 percent of the land mass of Auckland that was Rodney District.However it is a cop-out quite frankly to rely on what is a true statement—a theoretically true statement—that a by-law can be created because it absolutely can be. But then it must be enforced. I think the other thing too that is interesting about that is that as a member of the Rodney Local Board I knew that the by-laws staff had to go around every local board once we had this amalgamation of the super-city and had to ask about prostitution as a business and what sorts of controls we would want to put in place to flatten out the by-laws across the whole of Auckland. And there is one of your other things—I assume that the select committee had a briefing on the fact that this is now about flattening out by-laws across the whole of Auckland. Any by-law created or any issue that you might have in what is now Manukau City inside the super-city would actually have to be assumed across the whole of the city.But what was interesting about that consultation was that the Auckland Council staff told local board members: “You don’t need to create a by-law. You don’t need to create a by-law because they are hawkers so really this is just about hawking. So we can just use the current by-law”—which is a hawking by-law—“and then we can actually go and issue these people with a ticket.” Let us just have a think about the practicalities of that. What has just been said is that this bill wastes 10 years of this Parliament’s time but this is a real issue to real people who are just trying to go about their daily lives. So apparently there is a hawking by-law already on the books and we can send out by-laws officers at 3 o’clock in the morning 4 o’clock in the morning—[Interruption]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Order! I apologise to the member for those members’ rudeness. Thank you.TRACEY MARTIN: That is all right Mr Assistant Speaker. We can send by-laws officers at 4 o’clock in the morning to go and give a ticket—to go and fine the prostitutes who are outside these people’s houses leaving used condoms up on their doors and abusing them when the resident of the property wishes to get some sleep. Apparently—and it is a truism—we can send out a by-laws officer and give the prostitutes a ticket. How does Mr Simpson think that is going to go down?It is all very well and good to say: “You can.” and it is all very well and good to say that you have the ability to but it is another thing completely to say how that will take place. How? You can but how do you do it? There is absolutely no practical thought inside the select committee’s response to this bill. In all three parliaments that dealt with this matter over the 10 years where was the will to actually sort this out for the people of New Zealand? Where was the will to address street prostitution? It is not only the residents who are being affected by it but what about the under-age trafficking that is now taking place on the streets? What about that part which some sort of legislation in this House might have addressed?Hon David Parker: We’ve already got it. Just go to the police.TRACEY MARTIN: So here we go—we have got it again. We are going to leave it to the people on the street to have to deal with it. This Parliament brought in a law—[Interruption]; and those gentlemen are apparently very supportive of it—and then it dumped it out there for the people of New Zealand to deal with. When the people of New Zealand come back to their Parliament and say: “Something’s wrong with it and we would like Parliament’s assistance to actually fix it.” apparently it is in the too-hard basket. Apparently it is 10 years of wasted time which is what the two speakers before me said.These are citizens of New Zealand who pay our wages who have come to this Parliament and said that something is wrong with a piece of legislation. They are not asking for that legislation to be overturned—nobody here is. What they are asking for is recognition of a problem and for us to come up with a solution and this House is supposed to be here for them.So although this bill will fail New Zealand First will support it. We will support it because it actually is an issue that this House needs to address. We—Hon Member: Actually it’ll end up wasting the House’s time.TRACEY MARTIN: It needs to be addressed. We refuse to actually slap these citizens in the face and say: “It wasn’t important enough. We decided not to put any other solution in here or any other recommendation in here. We decided to just say it was 10 years of our time. Too bad. Go away and deal with it yourself. Ring a by-laws officer at 3 in the morning. Call a police officer and go into court and take all that time out of your day and your life because this Government and this Parliament decide that it is not worth our time.”