Mark Ron: Land Transport (Unauthorised Street and Drag Racing) Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Mark Ron: Land Transport (Unauthorised Street and Drag Racing) Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:607;Page:4592] 
RON MARK (NZ First) 
: 
 I welcome the chairman’s comments about the wideness of this debate and his recognition that the schedule contains elements that should allow us to expand the debate into Part 2 in particular. I want to make one point. One of the things I like about this bill is that it restores to the men and women in blue who work on the front lines— 
Darren Hughes 
: Come on! 
RON MARK 
: It is a bit sad when young members come to the House and display their contempt and arrogance. Hopefully in time they will grow up. I hope the young man learns. Particularly when Opposition parties are trying to support the Government a little bit of magnanimity in victory is always a quality that is admired. Arrogance contempt and puerile behaviour are not. [ 
Interruption 
] There he goes; grow up young man! 
One of the things I like about this bill is that it returns to the men and women who police our streets one thing that has been lost over recent years—that is the ability to use a little discretion. Although some parties look at some of the wording in the schedule and in the purpose clause in Part 1 in particular and say that it is too broad and too vague I look at it in a positive sense and say that this bill gives some discretion to the police. I remember the day when policemen and policewomen had the ability to look at a situation and decide that it was high jinks or nonsense and that a kick in the butt and a twist of the ear would likely set a young fellow on a straight path. I thank the member on the other side for his nod; it is encouraging. Such treatment would set a young fellow on the straight and narrow again without blemishing his record. But we have got into template law and I have to say that our friends in the legal fraternity make their money out of defining each and every little aspect of law. That is how they make their money. It actually hamstrings the boys in blue. 
The Greens can say that it is a breach of human rights and I am pleased I am hearing that from them because it is consistent with what they always say. I will never agree with them but they are consistent. But what I like in this bill is the discretion that is open to an officer. If it is a flaw if members want to say that it opens the law up to vagueness and ambiguity well I would rather put my confidence in the men and women in blue to make the right judgment. 
I do acknowledge that the bill provides for the ability to appeal and to appeal further again if people feel they have been unjustly treated by the police. That is a good thing and I congratulate the Government and the Law and Order Committee on putting it in the bill. But I say do not chuck the whole bill out based on the belief that it is too vague. I welcome the ability for officers to look at a situation where a car has spun its wheels and gone away from the lights and say: “Well that’s just a person of a particular ethnicity who can’t drive and has actually dropped the clutch.” or: “That’s a hoon who is spinning his tyres to get away in a race.” That is the sort of discretion the police need on the streets to get common sense into law enforcement. I am pleased that it is there. 
The only thing I am not comfortable with I will put on the record now. I will support this bill going through the House but I will watch it. If in time I am not happy then I will come back to the House with amendments either via another bill or by amending the legislation when we are in Government. [ 
Interruption 
] I do not believe we should be confiscating for 28 days the cars of people who have offended three times. We should not impound the cars; we should confiscate them—end of story. 
Clayton Cosgrove 
: If they do it twice in 4 years the car is confiscated. 
RON MARK 
: I understand it now. That is the sort of assurance I wanted. At the end of the day there are those people who continue to push the outside edge of the envelope and they never learn. That assurance has to be in there. I did not see it in the bill so if the member wants to take a 5-minute call and explain it to us all that would be very satisfying. The confiscation for 28 days and the $3000 fine are good things and the form seems to be fine and in that respect we will continue our support for the bill. But we will be watching over time. I will be listening to the cops. 
One of the things I do like about the form is that it is very brief. When I talk to police I hear too much about the endless forms they have to fill out keeping them off the beat for hours on end. The paper war is a distinct worry in the police force and it is good to see that we are down to something more manageable.