SpeechVANUSHI WALTERS (Labour—Upper Harbour): There's a great Dr Seuss book that my kids love. It's all about making noise and we all know it well. It's a celebration of what Mr Brown can do or really all the noise that Mr Brown can make. But the joy of that book is the disappointment of this bill because this bill is all about making noise. It's not about public funds. It's most assuredly not about public safety. It's about making noise.But let's assume for a moment that Mr Brown does want to do more than make noise that he intends this bill to impact certain organisations. So who are these organisations that he'd like to take a hard-line approach to? What's his grand plan for public safety? Well he proposes inserting a section into the Public Finance Act that says This Bill would prohibit the Crown and its agencies from providing funds directly and indirectly to organisations that are run administered or associated to gangs." Hmm. Preventing Government agencies from providing funds indirectly to organisations associated to gangs. Now if you're reading the story I mean the bill at this stage Mr Brown has painted a villain: it's organisations associated to gangs. So if you're reading the bill you try at this stage to find this key definition "organisations associated to gangs" but it's not there. It's not in the principal Act either. But that's OK. There are several definitions that tell us that association means "connected to or related to". And we have noise—I mean tweets from Mr Brown that shed some light on who isn't associated to gangs. Mid - last year Mr Brown tweeted in part: "… helping people get off meth is the right thing to do but shouldn't the money be going to the Salvation Army rather than the Mongrel Mob?"So who are these dubious associations associated to gangs? And what could their intentions be? Well it turns out they're organisations like the Salvation Army. Perhaps as a lesson for what values-based services looks like for some in the room here's what one of the Salvation Army editors wrote in part about gangs published on their website: "we must remember that New Zealand gangs have their origin in urban poverty and disconnection … the greatest danger of prejudice is that it excludes people pushing them to the margins. Once situated there it becomes even easier for us to treat them as outcasts. But plenty of those who grew up in gangs don't want that for their children. As Pat of the Wellington Black Power says in this edition 'Most of our whanau are born into [the gang] and my role is to improve our kids' way of thinking and steer them away from the gang scene. This is the change I'm trying to make.'"In March 2019 the Sallies published an article talking about the Hauora Programme a partnership that they had with the notorious chapter of the Mongrel Mob and highlighted the story of one of the participants whose life was transformed by the programme Tracey who spoke about hers and her kids' experience. She said in part "The boys were adamantly opposed to getting treatment. It was only because this programme was being run in connection with the Mongrel Mob—their bros—that they became willing to give it a try." The Salvation Army article concludes "Treatment in this safe and secure setting made it possible for Tracey and her whānau to focus on getting well without distractions."It is possible to have meaningful community programmes that are based on values of understanding care and respect that connect people where they are that also embed systems of responsible and accountable spending. Anyone who has been in a management role knows this. So this is really where the story gets confusing. Does Mr Brown want the Salvation Army to continue to do this good work? Or does he not? Who knows! I'm quite convinced he doesn't know and it's because I don't think that he actually cares about the analysis here or the actual change to make communities safer. Mr Brown can make noise that's for sure but he can't make change. I strongly oppose this bill."