Sabin Mike: Prohibition of Gang Insignia in Government Premises Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSabin Mike: Prohibition of Gang Insignia in Government Premises Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 10 July 2013. Volume:692;Page:11873. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]MIKE SABIN (National—Northland):I could not possibly comment on your choice there but thank you very much for the privilege and opportunity. The member Andrew Little unfortunately takes after his name in the sense that he has tried to belittle the issue of criminal gangs of organised crime in this country. There is nothing more certain in my mind than that the proliferation of gangs and the drugs that they peddle the money-laundering and the crime and misery that they have wrought on New Zealand society are nothing more than an out and out disgrace. Every single effort that we can actually put forward that undermines their ability to perpetuate the intimidation the crime and the misery that they bring to New Zealand society is a positive thing.Mr Little seems to suggest that courthouses have little signs and therefore all other Government buildings can have little signs as well. If Mr Little had spent a little bit of time in the real world he would have actually seen the challenges of gangs and the one area that is dealing with them more than any other Government department of course is courthouses. There have been stabbings shootings beatings and the like in courthouses—inside the courthouses outside of the courthouses—and for a long time they have had rules on the wearing of gang patches. The rules are not always because of the fact that the gangs are actually beating up innocent members of the public who may be waiting in the gallery or may be waiting outside the courtroom. They are beating up fellow gang members from opposing gangs because that is what gang members do.What happens is that the violence is created because of the fact that when a gang member wears a gang patch it is about identity it is about mana. To them it is everything. It encapsulates everything that they are as human beings. That patch is so important to them. So courts have long decided that to avoid that sort of confrontation they would have a “no gang patch” requirement inside courthouses.The big difference between a courthouse and a primary school Mr Little is that in a courthouse they have court security. There are plenty of people who with a few seconds’ notice can respond to the outbreak of violence. The difference is Mr Little when we see the ability of a courthouse to enforce the rules—and trust me they cannot always enforce them. I have been called to the courthouse on numerous occasions toremove gang members who are wearing patches taken their patches off put them back in the cells and put them back upstairs.Chris Hipkins: So who’s going to enforce it in a primary school?MIKE SABIN: Well the police can enforce it because obviously when gang members wear patches in there according to this bill—and it is a very good question Mr Hipkins—the police will be able to respond very promptly and will be able to come in there with the power of arrest that this bill will provide and take care of that. But the point I want to make here Mr Hipkins is the difference between how a courthouse tries to operate and is dealing with it compared with the many other Government departments or Government buildings that this bill will actually give effect to. The difference is quite significant.The idea though that in the local Inland Revenue Department office or at Mangonui Primary School or atKaitāia Intermediate School a teacher can wander up to a patched-up gang member and say “Oh no you must remove that.” and they will say “Certainly ma’am. I will comply with that order immediately.” is just ridiculous. It just does not happen. It just does not happen.Andrew Little: But if she turns up with the bill in her hand she’ll be fine.MIKE SABIN: I have some respect for Mr Little because he does actually make some learned comments at times. But I am afraid that on this occasion Mr Little has gone right off tangent. This is really what we see in this bill—the fact that the Labour Party has gone right off tangent. Its members are out of touch with what New Zealand society is saying.I am very interested to hear what the member Louisa Wall will say about this because she is making a big stand on party pills and recreational drugs. But of course what gangs do is deal in illicit drugs. So I am sure that member will be wanting to make some very strong comments about gang members and the proliferation of gang members in her electorate and the significance of the gang patch to the gang member. I would ask that member to tell us what she believes the importance of a gang patch is to a gang member. I would welcome that call from the member.When we look at the problem of gangs in New Zealand there is nothing that will convince me otherwise than that this bill is going to have a positive effect.