Jones Shane: Wanganui District Council (Prohibition of Gang Insignia) Bill — In Committee 
Jones Shane: Wanganui District Council (Prohibition of Gang Insignia) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:653;Page:2116] 
Hon SHANE JONES (Labour) 
: 
 Kia ora tatou. Greetings Mr Chair. I accept the wisdom that lies behind your ruling that I should wait for a turn and that we should suffer the foolishness of Mr Quinn. I now know that that man Mr Quinn is related to Keith Quinn because when he stood and gave his delivery he reminded me of some of the lesser-known speakers in the Maori world. The tauparapara goes on and on. It disappears into the valleys covered with mist into the blackberry into the trees where the turehu are before it finally gets to the point. There was no point—no point whatsoever—in Mr Quinn’s speech. Fortunately he ran out of things to say before the bell was rung. Mr Quinn came into this House with so much promise until a small level of due diligence revealed he has single-handedly destroyed Maori rugby. That is why we have so many people being driven to the gangs—because that option has been taken from them. 
Paul Quinn 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I fail to see what Maori rugby and sports activities have to do with clause 5. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker) 
: There is no need for this point of order. Let us address the bill thank you. 
Hon SHANE JONES 
: On page 5 if that member had taken the time to look for just a short period of what is generally just a wasted day on his part he would see that the Labour members believe that the opportunity should be taken to consider the related legislation in South Australia and that the bill should not proceed until such an evaluation has taken place. 
We know—and this is with particular reference to clause 5—that Simon Power has been to South Australia. He sought an audience with and was invited to meet three or four middling bureaucrats. He eventually got—during a coffee break I am told with stale wine—a very short meeting with those who count in that particular state. He would have been told that there are many practical challenges in implementing the statute that South Australia has on its statute book yet we see a similar provision in clause 5. 
I acknowledge that the council is doing the best it can and I acknowledge that I have quite a bit of time for Chester Borrows. He has brought this bill forward but he needs to make sure that his old colleagues members of the police force from Wanganui when implementing this legislation do not lose paperwork or hand paperwork containing the names and addresses of enforcement officers to the very same gang that they are trying to chase out of town. Those officers will be cursed with the task of trying to breathe life into the diseased limb otherwise known as clause 5 of the ailing body otherwise known as this foolish legislation. 
Clause 5(1) states: “The Council may from time to time make bylaws … identifying an organisation … as a gang.” But of course the definition of a gang is riddled with difficulties—there are signs symbols and representations. Gang members may turn up with red hoodies or handkerchiefs as I have said to my whanaunga Tau Henare. People from Moerewa may be having a holiday in Ngawha or they may be digging kumara in Kaipara. They need only take a red handkerchief red toothpaste or be wearing yellow. If there ever was a dreadful term and a debasement of the Maori language it lies with the notion of gangs being tribesmen. They are not tribesmen. They are corrupt. They are weak. They prey on our children. They abuse their women. But unfortunately this bill will not protect anyone. 
According to clause 5 this bill may designate “any public place as a specified place for the purposes of this Act:” I can see great debates already emerging in the courts as the Treaty lawyers move from one trough to another trying to breathe life into this and wondering whether a marae or a bit of land under section 439 of the Maori Affairs Act a trust or some other sort of reserved land that Maori might have influence over is a public place. Paul Quinn understands that. 
Hon Tau Henare 
: No. 
Hon SHANE JONES 
: No—he does. He understands that space and place are related—and both are absent from his mind as is evident every time he stands and talks. 
But let us bring some seriousness back to this debate. Let us move away from Paul Quinn who has demonstrated that the more he talks the sooner and the quicker the people in his party will realise that they have to pay a great deal more attention to their party list compilation next time around. It is a bit like Mr Garrett. He is entitled to bring his views to this House but the more he speaks about this bill the sooner we will see their disappearance which will be a great thing for this House and a great thing for this country. 
Hon Steve Chadwick 
: And a yellow jacket. 
Hon SHANE JONES 
: Yes well there is a point: was Rodney Hide a gangster by dint of his clothing and by the fact that he has decided to buff up? Was it an act of gangsterism to drop that woman on her head during the dancing competition and did he derive much pleasure from that? Well that is for another discussion. 
The reality of the matter is that during the course of implementing this failing defective foul piece of legislation there will be an opportunity to review the by-laws. But members should think about the costs and about the people who will be unfortunately and unwittingly caught up in this short-sighted but nevertheless well-intentioned attempt to stamp out gangs. Costs will go up. 
Hon Members 
: Ha ha! 
Hon SHANE JONES 
: It is well intentioned. It is short-sighted. It is unlikely to work. OK I accept that people will be required to go around and put up notices saying that people cannot have a gang there and the council will need to hire security officers. That will be a new stream of jobs in Wanganui. The difficulty however with that is that just as dogs visit lamp posts so the gangs will visit a similar level of attention on those posts. They will need to be replaced and it will soon become evident that this is not a bill that once enacted can actually be turned into effective law. 
The reason that the bill cannot be turned into effective law—quite apart from its flaws—is that it has been born out of a dangerous compromise. In order for the National-led Government to continue to enjoy the attention and support of the ACT Party it will have to vote according to the ACT Party for the successful passage of the “three strikes and you’re out” legislation. 
Hon Member 
: No no. 
Hon SHANE JONES 
: No Rodney Hide stood and said that he knew he had abandoned his principles—although he had very few of them to start off with—and he knew that he had said very strong things but he is now cuddling up under the National Party korowai with his friends from the Maori Party. The funny thing about the ACT Party members which is why they like this bill is that they are busily trying to criminalise Maori youth. The Maori Party for reasons best known only to its leaders is trying to privatise the misery of Maori youth through having Maori run private prisons. Neither will work. National is in the middle manipulating both of them. 
Hon Tau Henare 
: Oh you don’t want Maori to run things? 
Hon SHANE JONES 
: Tau Henare had his chance in 1996. He is my whanaunga. He is up to tahi rua toru wha—wha parties. Of course we know what the Maori word “wha” means—far too many e Tau. He has had his chance e hoa. 
Let us come back to other reasons why this bill will not work. Will the signposts be bilingual? If they say “Wanganui” will it have an “h” in it? It is highly unlikely. I can see Michael Laws trading on this bill as evidence that he is fit to be the mayor of the potential mega-city of Auckland. But he is using this bill for short-term triumphalism. The gangs will simply change their attire get their whanaunga who are reasonable lawyers and—as Tariana has already said—pay not a blind bit of notice to this bill and the eventual Act. Of course the other foolish thing members opposite think this bill will do is to actually change behaviour. All the gangs have to do tonight is to look at Paul Quinn; they do not need to change their behaviour. In fact it is like a cracked mirror: part of the refraction actually shows a bit of them. No it will never ever work. 
Why do we not agree with this bill? It is not that we are against the Wanganui District Council and it is not that we are against Michael Laws although a number of us might think that his pollution on the airways is at an insufferable level. It is because the bill is poorly conceived and is written in a flawed way and at the end of the day it will not work—it will not. Of course what will happen for New Plymouth and Palmerston North is the gangs that are really troublemakers will simply move out of Wanganui and take their foul deeds and their vicious ways to other nearby cities. That is why this legislation will never work.