Borrows Chester: Wanganui District Council (Prohibition of Gang Insignia) Bill — Second Reading 
Borrows Chester: Wanganui District Council (Prohibition of Gang Insignia) Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:652;Page:1642] 
CHESTER BORROWS (National—Whanganui) 
: 
 I move  
That the Wanganui District Council (Prohibition of Gang Insignia) Bill be now read a second time 
. Now that this bill has returned to the House for its second reading I wish again to reiterate that I do not believe that it alone can solve the gang problem that exists in Wanganui let alone in New Zealand or vice versa. Anyone who argues that gang culture in New Zealand is not as rife as it is serious is kidding himself or herself. 
Over recent years we have seen an increased level of gang-related activity and confrontation both nationwide and within Wanganui and in most other provincial cities around New Zealand. Probably the most widely known story in respect of Wanganui is the story of little Jhia Te Tua who was fatally shot as she slept on a couch in her parents’ house. Why? The bullet was meant for her Black Power member father and she was in the wrong place at the wrong time even though she was sleeping on a couch in her home where but for the gang membership of her parents one would have expected her to be safe. 
I take this opportunity to commend those police officers who were involved in Operation 55 which recently concluded with a total of 12 men being put in jail for the part they played in this tragic incident which resulted in the loss of life of a small and innocent child. It is interesting to note that the scorn heaped upon the police and their investigation by members of this House and the media at the time of the investigation has not since those convictions been replaced by the grateful thanks of members of this House and the media and an acknowledgment that a job was very well done in the investigation of that inquiry. 
This bill was proposed and drafted by the Wanganui District Council and put to the people of Wanganui. Over half of the community turned out to vote and of that group more than 65 percent supported these proposals. They are the people who endure the sight of patched gang members in close proximity to their homes and families. No doubt they think of innocent victims like Jhia Te Tua as these gang members walk past their children on the street. It is interesting to note that the Wanganui District Council conducted a survey on safety amongst young people. The most significant and prime fear that those young people have as it was reported to the Law and Order Committee was intimidation from gangs and pressure to become involved in gangs. 
The New Zealand Police Association has supported the bill’s proposals from the outset. Our police officers who patrol our streets and compromise their own safety to keep us safe are telling us that in their view this legislation is one of the ubiquitous tools in the tool box that make it easier for them to do their jobs. They are the ones who have to enforce the legislation. The President of the New Zealand Police Association Greg O’Connor rightly stated that there is not one initiative on its own that will disempower gangs but a series of small things can be done that will serve to diminish the standing of gangs in the eyes of those who have intimidated or who seek to intimidate people. 
The bill has now been through the Law and Order Committee which recommended that the bill be passed with amendments. We have always been happy to open the debate to hear the evidence and to accept that the bill did not commence without its flaws. This is all part of the democratic process and we do live in a democracy. 
Under the Local Government Act 2002 the power is conferred upon councils to make bylaws for the purposes of protecting the public from nuisance; protecting promoting and maintaining public health and safety; and minimising the potential for offensive behaviour in public places. The powers available under the Act clearly anticipate that communities would—and should I might add—seek to find local solutions to local problems and this is what we seek to do. The bill seeks to decrease intimidation and the likelihood of violence by creating what is known colloquially as neutral turf. We have already enabled this in hotels courts and hospitals and it is far from uncommon to see signs displayed in the windows of bars and pubs banning the wearing of gang insignia within the establishment. So why do we not extend that ban further? 
It is also common and it has become the rule of thumb that there is acceptance of those rules—that gang members voluntarily remove their patches as they go into those premises. That is what they do when they want to obtain access to those venues whether they be rock concert venues hotels or the buildings they need to visit. 
We are now living in a time when the wearing of colours such as red and blue is such an issue that kids cannot wear them to schools because the colours are perceived to be gang colours. Around New Zealand we have schools—right down to those at primary school level—that ban the wearing of certain colours because they are identified as showing an allegiance to gangs. That allegiance is usually wrong but in any event that is what is happening in our schools and cities around this country and certainly not just in Wanganui. This is how out of control the gang problem has become. 
I faced some strong opposition to this bill during its first reading. The Hon Tariana Turia made the point that the only thing this bill would do would be to exclude suppress prohibit and ban and would not address the real issues behind gang culture. To some extent the first part of that statement is accurate. We do seek to exclude suppress prohibit and ban but we do so not because we seek to jeopardise the rights of those who wish to affiliate themselves with a group to dress in the way they wish or to in any way introduce legislation that is inconsistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act—although there may be some contravention—but because we believe that it is a small but vital step in working towards countering the escalating street violence and intimidation that is a result of gang versus gang conflict which affects those who have to witness it because of the communities they find themselves living in usually without the opportunity or option of moving somewhere else. 
In 2004 in Wanganui there were 11 such incidents in public places; by 2006 that number had risen to 48. One can only speculate about what that figure could be if we do not take this action now bearing in mind that with the death of Jhia Te Tua a lot of gang activity ceased almost instantaneously probably because of the death of a gang member—an event all those gang members could relate to because they want to maintain the safety of those they care about—but also because a dozen of the Mongrel Mob went to jail and others of Black Power were on remand on similar charges to those for which the Mongrel Mob members found themselves in jail. 
During the course of the debate in the select committee consideration was given to definitions of gang insignia and to whether those definitions would include tattoos. Various parties across the House voted in differing ways and no doubt that will form the subject of debate within the Committee of the whole House stage. 
Amendments were made to allow for instance for the stopping of vehicles in public places in which gang insignia are seen and to extend the definition of public place to include vehicles within a public place. There is the need under the bill to denote by signposting the areas the provisions of the bill will relate to and which public places—whether they be streets or parks and reserves. Obviously the definitions that relate to “gang” and the way it will be defined and added to the schedule to which this legislation will relate were also part of the discussions. The penalties for non-compliance are a $2000 fine and confiscation of the gang patch. Along with that are the power to seize and the power to dispose of seized gang insignia. 
The suggestion was raised by members of the then Government—now the Opposition—that we should wait and see after an investigation and scrutiny how legislation introduced in South Australia will impact on the gang situation there. The point the Wanganui District Council wishes to outline in support of its local bill is that introducing accepting and passing this bill does not in any way inhibit what action may be taken later on down the track after such scrutiny has taken place in regard to what is relatively new legislation introduced to South Australia and to how well it may affect or be used as yet another tool in the tool box in New Zealand. I commend this bill to the House.