Kuriger Barbara; Xu-Nan LawrenceClauses 1 and 2CHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger): Members we now come to our final debate and this is on clauses 1 and 2. These are the Title" and "Commencement" clauses.Dr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green): Thanks Madam Chair. In terms of the title of this bill I think that the Gangs Legislation Amendment Bill is a missed opportunity and a missed direction for what this bill actually serves. I would recommend that this bill be renamed the "Gangs (Fearmongering and Division) Bill" because that is what this bill serves.What we have been seeing and what we have been hearing from the Minister is around the fear of gangs but at no point is the Minister actually addressing the root causes of gangs in Aotearoa. What we are hearing the Minister has mentioned is a lot of talk about the fact the Greens have mentioned colours and that we can't wear certain colours in certain places. But there are many other instances when we may not wear a certain colour—for example when you are supporting a particular sports team. I think if you a supporting a particular football team in the UK—you support Manchester instead of Liverpool—there will be certain colours that you will not be wearing both in terms of the respect you have for the team but also in terms of other things. For example I would not be wearing certain colours. I would not be wearing blue in certain instances for fear that I might be mistaken for someone from a particular political party because a lot of people think that Chinese people all vote for one particular party.There was no evidence as we've seen in the regulatory impact statement particularly page 30—this is from the Ministry of Justice—that ever suggested this legislation was going to do anything but harm the relationships that we have within our own communities. But I think that one other thing that also could be an alternative when we are looking at the title of this bill could be something like "Unwilling to Address Systemic Trauma That Contributes to the Root Causes of Gangs Amendment Bill". I do think that is quite a long title but it is an important point. This bill itself does not address any of that. It is simply putting a plaster on a much bigger wound and there is nothing that suggests this plaster is going to work for that. So I would seriously implore the Minister to reconsider the necessity of this bill and what this bill will do to our communities.Throughout this debate we have mentioned a variety of factors that mean this bill is not evidence based. There are things that we have not thought out in terms of this bill. If we look at this purest all things aside I would go to my Amendment Paper on the change of the title because I do think that "Gangs Legislation Amendment Bill" does not reflect the true intent of this or any sort of specific element of this. Just to be particularly factual and process based in terms of the content when we were looking at Part 2 and Part 3 of this bill which are the substantial elements of this I think "Gangs (Insignia and Dispersal) Amendment Bill" is a much more accurate reflection of the content of the bill as opposed to "Gangs Legislation Amendment Bill" which is not incredibly descriptive of its content.So I would hope that with everything else I mentioned aside the Minister would seriously consider my amendment to the change of the title to "Gangs (Insignia and Dispersal) Amendment Bill". Thank you Madam Chair."