12. Question No. 12—PoliceHon MARK MITCHELL (National—Whangaparāoa) to the Minister of PoliceQuestion No. 12—Police12. Hon MARK MITCHELL (National—Whangaparāoa) to the Minister of Police: How much money has been paid out of the Retail Crime Prevention Programme to date and how many businesses have had protective equipment installed since the fund was established in May this year?Hon STUART NASH (Minister for Economic and Regional Development) on behalf of the Minister of Police: Fakaalofa lahi atu Mr Speaker. On behalf of the Minister of Police I'm advised that as at 14 October $147468 has been paid out from the programme and a further $233393 has been committed for further assessments and installations. In response to the second part of the question 126 stores have been contacted police have assessed 80 of these stores and 59 have been allocated to a supplier for a site visit. Thirteen stores have either had products installed or are in the process of having products installed seven are complete and six have commenced installation. This is in addition to the thousand fog cannons that have been installed to protect businesses across New Zealand from robbery since 2020.Hon Mark Mitchell: Does he accept that it's an abject failure on the part of his Government that only seven businesses have received any form of physical support from the fund while at the same time there have been over 210 ram raids?Hon STUART NASH: I don't know how things were done when you were in the service Mr Mitchell but these days police make sure they put processes in place to ensure the integrity of every dollar spent. I support the police 100 percent to get on top of this and I suggest you should as well.Hon Mark Mitchell: Well we were backed by a strong National Government and we actually arrested criminals back in my day Mr Nash.SPEAKER: Order! Yeah that question's out of order. Have you got another one?Hon Gerry Brownlee: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. That's exactly the point I was making with you earlier. The answer that was given by the Minister to the previous question invited that response. Now if you're going to look at the Standing Orders you can be liberal about the way they're interpreted but the one Standing Order for the asking of the question mirrors a question for the answering of a question. We always know it's an unequal contest and the answer to a question will always be longer and probably have more points in it but it should not have questions in it and that's exactly why Mr Mitchell would have responded the way he did. I think it's unreasonable to cut him off.Hon Grant Robertson: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. This brings us back to the earlier exchange. Mr Mitchell's question contained an assertion in it. If we were being strict about the Standing Orders as Mr Brownlee would want the question should have been ruled out before the answer even came.Hon Gerry Brownlee: You can have an assertion if it's in answer to a question.SPEAKER: Yeah I have ruled on this earlier. I'll reiterate what I have said before. When such questions are being asked I'm going to assume that the member knows what they're doing. If the member is saying to the House that they did not know then they should say it. But if assertions are in there I have said before if that's the part that the Minister would like to answer then that's what it is. The member also knows that to start a question with a commentary about the answer is out of order. That's the end of the matter.Hon Mark Mitchell: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am seeking your clarity on this as my initial response when I stood up was in direct response to the Minister asking me what policing was like back in my day.SPEAKER: Yeah and I called you based on you wanting to ask a supplementary. That was out of order and I've ruled it as such.Hon Mark Mitchell: When the Minister said today at a meeting with ram raid victims I absolutely accept there is a crime emergency"—can he explain what a crime emergency is?Hon STUART NASH: That there is a crime emergency. It is the reason why the Labour Government promised 1800 more police when the previous administration said there was going to be no more. We've delivered well over 1500 more police and it's the reason why the Minister has said to the police that we need to fast-track this. It's the reason why a thousand fog cannons have gone in place. It's the reason why we're putting all these programmes in place to ensure that police listen and work with key stakeholders to come up with innovative solutions and strategies and we are in the process of implementing these.Hon Mark Mitchell: So as the Government haven't been able to deliver their 1800 new police officers what does he say to police officers in Auckland that have had a net loss of front-line police officers in the last month?Hon STUART NASH: When we came into Government there had been a drop in police officers in the previous three years and they the previous National Government had said to the then commissioner "There will be no more police until 2020." We changed that. There are now 1500 more police on the beat dealing with key stakeholders arresting perpetrators and keeping our communities safe.Hon Mark Mitchell: Does the Minister realise that under a soft-on-crime approach the public is exposed to a ram raid every 15 hours in New Zealand?Hon STUART NASH: The Nats voted against our legislation that increased penalties for gun crime—now that is soft.Hon Mark Mitchell: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. That was a very short and concise question and it wasn't addressed at all.SPEAKER: No it contained an assertion and that's what was answered."