Borrows Chester: Wanganui District Council (Prohibition of Gang Insignia) Bill — In Committee 
Borrows Chester: Wanganui District Council (Prohibition of Gang Insignia) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:653;Page:2560] 
CHESTER BORROWS (National—Whanganui) 
: 
 I rise because the previous speaker Jacinda Ardern raised a couple of questions that she wanted some sort of clarification on. It is my pleasure to be able to do that. 
Jacinda Ardern talked about where we were 10 years ago and she asked why there was a 10-year period for further reviews of by-laws. She reflected on the ability of the Wanganui District Council to have another look at a by-law and asked whether it had to wait 10 years. Well a number of Labour Party representatives were involved in the select committee process. The most eminent of course was Martin Gallagher. We have reflected upon Martin’s contribution on a number of occasions. There was also the Hon David Benson-Pope the Hon Darren Hughes and the then Government support member Ron Mark. Clause 5C which we have just completed debate on states that the first review will be no later than 5 years after the by-law was made. Clause 5D states that subsequent reviews are to be no later than 10 years after it was made. The ongoing review period of 10 years was not the subject of considerable debate by members on either side of the select committee. The point is made that the review can be done at any time. The Wanganui District Council can review what gangs are covered and which areas may be designated as prohibited areas. 
I note too that there seems to be a little note of cynicism whenever members talk about the various places where gang patches may be prohibited or banned. People always talk about leafy suburbs. There has been some concern that only the upper crust areas of Wanganui would be areas where patches are prohibited. If anybody from the other side of this debate bothered to look at the papers put out by the Wanganui District Council then he or she would see that places right across Wanganui including the areas of Aramoho Castlecliff Wanganui East and Gonville have a resident gang population and they are areas where gang patches will be prohibited as well to prevent intimidation. 
I think it is also important to note that under section 83 of the Local Government Act 2002 consultation is required as part of a review. Even if the Wanganui District Council decides to make no change it still has to go through the whole process under section 83. This involves making the proposal available in written form for a full month right across the electorate. People are able to uplift it at no expense through the courts libraries and district council offices and service centres. Wide-ranging consultation takes place with people who want to take part in the debate. 
I will make another point. Members have talked about the ability of this legislation to work and they have made quite scathing comments about whether it will work. It is interesting to note that the Leader of the Opposition said in his initial speech that the only reason Labour would not support the bill at this time is that it wanted to see how the legislation in South Australia was working. He made no suggestion that this legislation would not work for Wanganui. I think that is an important point to note. 
My final point is a comment on the point raised by the previous speaker Jacinda Ardern about the presence of the Bloods and the Crips 10 years ago. Well the Bloods and the Crips do not have a significant presence in Wanganui which is where this legislation will apply. The bill names the gangs that do have a presence there. The whole point of the legislation is that if a gang develops a presence in Wanganui in 2 years’ time or in 18 months 6 months or 3 years the Wanganui District Council can quite quickly move to place it on a parallel schedule under the by-law provision after going through the process under section 83 of the Local Government Act. It can have a review and make a change at any time it likes as long as there is a 1-month public review period. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Metiria Turei to clause 5D be agreed to: 
to omit “10 years” and substitute “5 years”.