Ardern Jacinda: Policing (Constable’s Oaths Validation) Amendment Bill — Procedure First Reading Second Reading Third ReadingText is subject to correctionArdern Jacinda: Policing (Constable’s Oaths Validation) Amendment Bill — Procedure First Reading Second Reading Third Reading[Sitting date: 24 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:14291. Text is subject to correction.]JACINDA ARDERN (Labour): I wish to use my time in the third reading of the Policing (Constable’s Oaths Validation) Amendment Bill to really clarify what I think are the quite justifiable questions that Opposition members are asking here. This is notan attempt to politicise a situation that clearly absolutely needs to be rectified. There is no question. That is why it is being passed unanimously through this House. I can see Mr Sabin muttering over there with quiet silent rage. He must be quite upset that he does not get to use his 10 minutes. Perhaps Minister Tolley might let him have his full 10 minutes for that.I just want to clarify that Labour is not liberally spreading the blame across our police force over the fact that we are having to deal with this issue today—of course not. In fact rightly so we have acknowledged the work that the police do on behalf of all of us in our communities. It is an incredibly tough job in that we constantly ask of them to reinforce the notion that no matter how much disrespect they are treated with they continually treat others with constant respect. That is what we ask of our police officers daily and by and large they do an absolutely fantastic job for us. We acknowledge that.What we are saying here today is that yes an error was made back in the way that the original legislation passed in 2008 was enacted functionally on the ground. That was rectified in 2009. Usually of course under normal circumstances it probably would be unfair to say that the Minister of Police should have oversight of every single little individual issue that has been implemented in the 2008 Policing Act. Under normal circumstances that would be a fair comment for the Government to make. But this was not a usual circumstance.The House went into urgency in 2009 to make a specific change and retrospective legislation was passed to cover the fact that for a period one part of the 2008 Act was not implemented correctly. That should have been a flag then to the Minister—in an area where she probably would not usually have functionally operated any oversight—to just ask some questions. That does not interrupt the concept of constabulary independence which is an incredibly important principle just as is the independence of the judiciary—very important principles. But we cannot blur the line between needing to maintain constabulary independence and ensuring proper accountability for a Minister who has oversight of the operational day-to-day functions of the police.Because a set of unusual circumstances did arise I think it is fair to say that at that point the Minister should have said: “Well look OK this law has been passed. Please in my next briefing or update with the commissioner at least demonstrate to me that the proper authorisations have been administered for those who are now giving out those oaths.” Just one question—one briefing. That is all it would have taken and that is not unusual. Once a piece of legislation has been implemented it is not unusual for a Minister to ask for an update on implementation—absolutely not. Because this is one very specific question it would not have taken much to ask for that. So I do want to highlight that yes constabulary independence is incredibly important but I see that used as an excuse time and time again when actually what we are asking for is simple ministerial accountability. We need to make sure it is applied correctly.In my first address I spoke briefly about some of the things that are going on generally within the police right now. I think it is only right to mention that the Police Association members are at their annual conference as we speak and it was a real pleasure to join with them last night at that event. But I would not want to leave the House with the view that the 63 officers since 2009 who have come back into the police force somehow demonstrate this amazing recruitment drive and increase in policing numbers. In fact those 63 returning officers represent more in terms of numbers than what the police force has grown by in its entirety since 2009. In fact we have had an increase of only 52 police officers sworn staff since 2009. Putting that into context that is under a Government that promised New Zealand that we would have functionallyone staff member per 500 New Zealanders. That means we should have had an extra 252 front-line officers if that Government stuck to its word. But it has not.What the Government may claim is that sure we have got only 52 more officers according to the annual report but of course there are all the non-sworn staff and the various roles that they play. Let us be very clear about what has happened to non-sworn staff who perform an incredibly important job on behalf of the policing family. They may not be sworn staff but sworn staff see how important and know how important their role is. They are the ones who do all of the work that often frees up police to do that front-line policing—those patrols that we expect of the police and which the Minister claims they are doing more of. There are 234 fewer non-sworn staff now than in 2009. That means the burden of those tasks is now falling squarely on sworn officers—234. That has not just been because people have left. Let us be absolutely clear. There was a restructure in 2012 which was extraordinarily unsettling for the police generally—not just for the non-sworn staff. The sworn staff felt acutely the fact that the people who were supporting them in their work were restructured out of their jobs asked to take early retirement or asked to apply again in cities that were quite a distance even from where they were performing their duties at that time. I know it affected a number of police officers in police stations deeply and the volunteers who worked for them.Of course we need to remember that there are a number of volunteers who work with our police force. I had the pleasure of knowing one of New Zealand’s longest-serving police volunteers Ian Jenkins who served with the New Zealand Police in Morrinsville—from memory for over 30 years—and did an incredibly stellar job. We cannot ignore that it is not just sworn police officers who play a role in keeping our communities safe; it is all the people who sit around them. I know that the police would want me to mention that and want me to mention how unsettling that period was.Mr Goff has already talked about what that has meant regionally and I think it is important to focus on it. When we use these statistics at a national level it is easy to lose sight of what it means for a community. But in Counties Manukau 104 fewer police personnel is going to have a significant impact on a community like that where of course our expectation is not that the police simply play a role of respond inquire and arrest. We for a long time have asked the police to form a much bigger role than that. In fact their own commissioner has significantly changed the focus of the police with the notion of prevention first. We applaud Prevention First as an initiative. It is fantastic but it does require police to be able to manage their file and case loads of their major criminal investigations. Unless they are able to do that it is very hard to implement this wider notion of prevention first. It is harder to ask them to do some of those early interventions and preventative work when they are doing just the day-to-day file management that they are required to do as part of their front-line duties.We all lose when we have a police force that is feeling those kinds of pressures on it. That is bearing out in some of the survey work that we have seen where the police have said that only a quarter of our cops claim to be fully engaged in their work and the number that are leaving is significant. In 2013 the average monthly resignations have doubled—have doubled—since 2008. Clearly these are police officers who are feeling the pressure of having less support around them the increasing demands and the fact that their budgets are barely keeping up with inflation and this is bearing out in their ability to do the job that they signed up to via the oaths that we are now fixing today.Those are the issues that I hope the Minister continues to focus on. I think the questions we have asked today have been fair and I would really appreciate a member of the Government benches clarifying some of those questions that we have asked. Thank you.