Goff Phil: Prohibition of Gang Insignia in Government Premises Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeGoff Phil: Prohibition of Gang Insignia in Government Premises Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 12 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11118. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon PHIL GOFF (Labour—Mt Roskill):I am going to pick up some of the issues that have been raised by National members. I will begin with Mark Mitchell because he said: “Well yeah we don’t cover children’s playgrounds we don’t cover beaches we don’t cover recreational areas but we had to start somewhere.” Well I would have to ask Mark Mitchell why you would start with the area where you already have the power to prevent the entry of anyone wearing a gang patch. One of the National members asked why schools have to put up with patch-wearing members coming into our schools. The answer is they do not—the answer is they do not. The school the education system the Minister of Education and any Minister in charge of any department has the power right now to prevent gang members from coming on to their premises. So I reiterate the advice given to the Law and Order Committee by the officials. It was that this Prohibition of Gang Insignia in Government Premises Bill adds no new power to any power that already exists to exclude gang members wearing patches. [Interruption ]Where you do not have the power Mr McClay is where my colleague Andrew Little talked about. If you take your wife and kids to the beach and there is a guy there with a gang patch on you cannot do anything about that. If you walk down the street in Rotorua as I am sure you do from time to time you will find gang members walkingdown the street. There is no power to deal with them. But you are going to give the power to remove patch-wearing gang members from areas where they are already excluded. That is dumb that is nonsense and that is why this is a powder puff piece of legislation that has no meaning. Richard Prosser moved his Supplementary Order Paper 253 I think in good faith. He listened to the arguments I put up at the select committee and said: “Here are all these anomalies.” I am sure that Mr Sabin knew when my colleague Andrew Little talked about putting lipstick on a pig that that is a well-known saying—no matter how much cosmetic change you make the animal underneath it is still the animal that it always was. This bill makes no difference. I have got to say to Richard Prosser that despite his best efforts there are always going to be anomalies all the way down the patch. So we keep them off the grounds but now we cannot keep them from the gate of the grounds. We cannot keep them from the beach. We cannot keep them from the playground. You are going the wrong way about it.Actually I want to give some praise to one of the suggestions that Mike Sabin made. That was about addressing the reasons why people become members of gangs. It is notable that Black Power said earlier this year that John Key was the gang’s best friend. Everybody knows Rob Muldoon was and he was open about that. He was the former National Prime Minister who gave the gangs the house up in Hill Street—you know Ministry of Works and Development houses for the gangs is the tradition. But this guy was saying that John Key is the gang’s best friend because he said recruitment was skyrocketing under the National Government because disaffected youth were drifting towards the gangs quicker than ever before because they had no jobs. If I were to do anything to try to stop a kid from getting into a gang putting that kid into an apprenticeship and giving him a job would be a bloody good start. That is the sort of positive action that would really make a difference. So I agree with Mike Sabin. We need to deal with the factors that push people—The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson): I am sorry to interrupt the honourable member but the time has come for me to report progress.Progress reported.Report adopted.