Katene Rahui: Policing (Storage of Youth Identifying Particulars) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Katene Rahui: Policing (Storage of Youth Identifying Particulars) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
[Sitting date: 16 August 2011. Volume:675;Page:20855. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
RAHUI KATENE (Maori Party—Te Tai Tonga) 
: 
 Ata marie. The bill we are now debating was introduced in the urgency motion described only as a Government bill to be introduced and passed. Even in the internal email circulating about this bill it was referred to as the “Policing Amendment Bill”. In fact until 9.30 a.m. this morning I did not think it was even going to be debated today. One has to wonder why the intrigue. What was so contentious and so sensitive about this bill that we dared not speak its name? That name is the Policing (Storage of Youth Identifying Particulars) Amendment Bill.  
As a matter of principle I try to act in a way that is driven by trusting in the best of people. But here we are on a quiet Thursday morning in Wellington conscious of two very significant events occurring in other parts of the land. In Ngaruawahia at Turangawaewae Marae whanau hapu and iwi from right across Aotearoa are now gathering to remember Nga Kawe Mate o te Motu. This is one of the most significant components of the koroneihana where the people gather from the four winds to pay tribute and remembrance to all those who have passed on since the last coronation. The people come in their hundreds. The widows and children are welcomed on to the veranda of Mahinarangi and the korero begins. This year we are all aware of the significance of so many losses right throughout the land that we grieve collectively. Moe mai ra e nga huhua kua ngaro ki te po. 
[ 
Slumber there the many lost to the void. 
] 
Meanwhile whether in Auckland or in our homes by virtue of coverage from Maori Television the nation will shortly be stopping in our tracks to pay tribute to our former Governor-General and Archbishop of Aotearoa the Rt Rev. Sir Paul Reeves. It is a big day for Aotearoa. I return to a quiet Thursday in Wellington where with little fanfare or fuss while the nation is otherwise distracted legislation is being introduced under urgency and under plain cover to empower the police with the ability to store fingerprints and photographs of arguably our most vulnerable citizens our rangatahi. Is this conspiracy theory? Time will tell but at the very least I hope the Minister of Police can explain why even the name of the bill was not published until this morning.  
The key phrase omitted from the public record until 10 a.m. today was “storage of youth identifying particulars”—in other words the storage of things that can be used to identify youth. Currently under the Policing Act 2008 police can store youth identifying particulars like photographs and fingerprints only following a conviction. This bill amends the Policing Act 2008 to now include a wide range of categories for youth for which an order in the Youth Court other than conviction is made. Examples of orders for which the bill will allow police to keep youths’ fingerprints and photographs include orders discharging a young person without further order or penalty; admonishing the young person; fines; ordering the youth to come before the court for further action at a later date; paying money towards the cost of prosecution; repairing damaged property or any restitution or forfeiture of property; driving disqualification orders; or an order to attend programmes or courses on drug or alcohol abuse parenting etc. supervision or community work. One might well ask what is not being included in the bill. 
As a consequence of this bill if a rangatahi goes through the Youth Court and gets one of those orders against them the police will be allowed to keep their fingerprints and photographs. Currently that is not the case. So is there cause for concern? Presumably if the police are holding on to the fingerprints and photographs it will make matching up future crimes easier. One could argue that if a person commits a crime they need to do the time. It is important to note that this bill deals with retaining fingerprints and photographs not obtaining them. The assumption is that the fingerprints and photographs have been obtained legally. This bill deals with what happens after they have been obtained. For our people when they read this speech online tonight and they see orders such as “admonishing the young person” or “ordering the youth to come before the court for further action at a later date” their antennae will be raised.  
In preparing for this bill I came across an article published in 2007 in the police bulletin  
Ten‑One 
. It featured a police practice note that encouraged members of the New Zealand Police to promote the fact that it is in the best interests of children and young persons to voluntarily agree to be fingerprinted. To be fair the practice note made it clear that children under the age of 10 years should be fingerprinted only for the purpose of eliminating them from a police inquiry and that children aged 10 to 13 years cannot be fingerprinted without written approval from the Youth Aid section of the police. But the note also described the collection of fingerprints as being a crucial part of policing in the community. “Crucial” is a big word. There is not a lot of option built around that word. It means that collection of fingerprints is going to be and will remain a priority in the police officer tool kit. So although this bill is focused on storage and retention rather than on obtaining the fingerprints and photographs in the first place it is still part of a bigger picture in which the material relating to young people is being obtained and stored by our authorities in an attempt to establish serial profiling of youth offenders.  
That brings us to a much bigger discussion about racial or ethnic profiling and the connection to human rights—that is the fundamental rights relating to the protection of personal data and non-discrimination. Those are areas I will focus on in later readings of this legislation. The recognition of discriminatory ethnic profiling practices has taken on a new light in comparable jurisdictions around the world in the context of recent policy changes relating to counter-terrorism law enforcement immigration customs and border control. Discriminatory ethnic profiling describes the practice of basing law enforcement decisions solely or mainly on an individual’s race ethnicity or religion. For many of our community it is an issue they have unfortunately associated with too many policing decisions in relation to apprehension of our young people. It must be an issue that we give serious consideration to in this debate. The Minister will be well aware of the robust body of evidence related to police bias and over-scrutiny of Maori as is best articulated in the series of research reports around police responsiveness to Maori and Maori responsiveness to police.  
The Policing (Storage of Youth Identifying Particulars) Amendment Bill introduces a huge raft of issues for rangatahi and for the Maori population as a whole. The Maori Party will be opposing it at every stage.