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:11890. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]MIKE SABIN (National—Northland):Once again it is a pleasure to rise to take a call on Part 2 of this Prohibition of Gang Insignia in Government Premises Bill. In doing so can I just acknowledge as I have not as yet the member Mark Mitchell a former police officer. He was of course a dog handler and spent a lot of time be dragged around by his Alsatians that he no doubt—they must have been big stocky brutes I am sure. I acknowledge him for the work that he is doing on this bill and alsoMinister Todd McClay who originally brought this bill to Parliament. Part 2 deals largely with the offences and the enforcement.I just want to pick up on a couple of points around the forfeiting and the ability for the Crown to subsequently destroy the gang patch. This goes back to the point I raised in the debate on the first part around the significance of a gang patch to a gang member. It is not just an item of clothing. In fact it is the single most important factor in identifying gang members and it is something that they will fight for that they will die for and that they will certainly have to commit offences to have. One of the challenges that the police have faced—and I certainly have—is the ability for a gang member to wear the patch unless it is used in the commission of offence. Only then do the police have the ability to seize it.In the second part of the bill here it lays out quite clearly the practical tools that police officers on the street will be able to use when they seize those gang patches. They will be able to stop vehicles and search those vehicles and I bet there will not be a single gang member in New Zealand who—if they bother to tune into Parliamentary TV. I am probably a little optimistic that they do; I am not sure that it is really their cup of tea. One thing I do know is that—Darien Fenton: You shouldn’t mention “cup of tea”.MIKE SABIN: As soon as word gets around that this bill—or cup of P as the case may be—has passed I bet they will be paying real attention to it as will the police who will use every opportunity they can to immediately start removing these patches from gang members who like to go around perpetuating their intimidation on society.What we will see in the practical sense is some gang members being very very upset by the fact that not only has their patch been taken but the patch will go into a furnace and it will be destroyed. Along with it will be their mana their identity and everything that they stand for because that patch is almost a part of them. As members have rightfully raised many of them actually go to the point of having their gang insigniatatooed on their body. I have of course seen one or two who have tattooed on their face in front of the mirror and it does pose some interesting problems when they tattoo themselves back to front. Once it is on it is on. No amount ofBrillo-pad scrubbing is going to get that thing off there. That goes to the point.Of course it would be ridiculous to assert: “Oh well you can’t remove”—sorry not you Mr Chairperson—“The police cannot remove tattoos from their face so this bill has no meaning or substance.” It is the patch that means something. The tattoo is simply an embodiment of what that patch means. They wear their taiaha as it were on their skin by red-tattooing it. The patch on their skin—the tattoo on their skin—is not their patch. Their jacket is their patch. For members who are not aware of that it does not matter what gang members will tattoo on themselves it is the patch that matters. So the idea that we should get caught up on the idea that if they have got tattoos on their face or insignia on their face—that is nothing. That is actually just someone who has got a bit of scribble on their face because they think it makes them look staunch. The point is that it is their patch that matters. They would sooner lose the skin off their face than lose the patch off their back. As a police officer I would just be jumping at the opportunity to see these patches going into the furnace because that sends a terrific signal to the New Zealand public that this Government does not back the gangs.