Burns Brendon: Vehicle Confiscation and Seizure Bill — Second Reading 
Burns Brendon: Vehicle Confiscation and Seizure Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:658;Page:6988] 
BRENDON BURNS (Labour—Christchurch Central) 
: 
 I am very pleased to speak in the second reading of the Vehicle Confiscation and Seizure Bill. I acknowledge the opening comments from the Minister who at least had the grace to say that this bill builds on the past legislation of the previous Labour Government. That was unlike the previous speaker Nicky Wagner who suggested that she was not able to get any traction on this issue at all. It is foolish for her or for any member of this House to believe that this legislation is going to be some kind of magic bullet solution. It will build—and Labour is supporting this bill to build—on some of the past actions but we will probably continue to have issues especially because this bill in its current form is not tough enough to deal with some of the issues that are presented by the boy-racer problem certainly in electorates like mine of Christchurch Central. 
I have to ask the previous speaker where the action is on the noise issue—action that was promised time after time after time. People in Christchurch who turned out to endless public meetings were told that we need to reduce the noise to 90 decibels. There were parliamentary petitions and a private member’s bill but there is nothing in this bill on that issue; there is not a squeak on the issue at all. What we have instead is a bill that proposes to take 10 cars a year off the roads and crush them. As has been indicated by my colleague Clayton Cosgrove on a given evening in the Christchurch Central electorate there can be 400 to 500 cars going around and around the four avenues. This bill proposes three warnings and maybe just maybe that a driver might lose his or her car. Labour will be proposing an amendment in the Committee stage to deal with that issue. 
I need to acknowledge that my electorate has the unenviable reputation of being the boy-racer capital of the country. Every weekend we see random and reckless activity with much impact on the quality of life of inner-city residents my constituents. I say to the House that we cannot overestimate what it is like to be somebody living within the four avenues or thereabouts of Christchurch central and having to listen to that incessant noise. People have told me they have had to vacate their homes and leave them empty simply to escape the noise and the accompanying intimidation. Earlier this year I visited the residents of Edgeware Road which is well outside the four avenues area who were being intimidated by a group of boy racers doing burnouts as they did their circuit around the four avenues. I personally was kept awake many nights through the summer before last and I was living hundreds of metres away from Fitzgerald Avenue. It is not just the cars that are making the noise. There is the incessant shouting and also the people who park up and drink in the lay-bys. One of the resulting issues is the broken glass which was a huge problem on mornings when I made my way on foot to the nearby gym. I would often have to pick my way through the glass that was left during the previous weekend. Cyclists in inner-city Christchurch know they face never-ending problems with punctures because of the glass left by the boy-racer problem. 
So I say with all due respect to Jeanette Fitzsimons that we need to attempt to close some of the loopholes in the legislation introduced by Clayton Cosgrove. The Minister has acknowledged that this bill builds on the past measures from the previous Labour Government. She acknowledges and so do I that the police are doing their best with 1800 offence notices issued in the year to date. But obviously if 1800 offence notices have been issued we have issues that we need to address. 
We have to acknowledge that this bill is full of rhetoric in respect of what it intends to do. Taking 10 cars a year off the road will simply not do the business. We will inevitably have a photo opportunity with the first few cars that are taken off the road and with the Minister right on the spot glowing and grinning for the cameras— 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: She might do it herself. 
BRENDON BURNS 
: She might; she might push the button. But that will not deal with the problem. We come back to the point that the bill will have an effect only on the third offence and then it is still a matter of discretion. The amendment that Labour will be proposing before the third reading will deal with that issue. It will propose that a warning be sent to the owner of the car whoever it is for a first offence and that a second offence will see the car summarily confiscated and disposed of. Surely that makes much more sense. I think that will send a very clear message to anybody who is having his or her car driven and for whom one offence notice has emerged. We can imagine if it is a mum and dad. Most often it is not; most often it is the mate of the boy racer and they do a swap of the registration to avoid the impacts of the current legislation. The message will get through loud and clear that if someone is caught on a second offence the car is gone; it is history. That is the sort of message that changes behaviour. Three strikes and a maybe as this bill proposes will certainly not have that sort of impact upon behaviour. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: It’s tough eh! 
BRENDON BURNS 
: It is weakening the current position. It is unfortunate that there are loopholes that people are exploiting. Some of the boy-racer fraternity are cunning and devious. They know how to bend the rules and they know how to avoid getting caught. If the Government adopts the proposal that we will put up I think this bill will have the potential to start shaping and curbing some of the behaviour that is being exhibited on a weekend evening in my electorate and in many other electorates around the country most notably—[ 
Interruption 
] That is even on the North Shore I tell Mr Mapp. I ask Government members whether they really think that if they say to their constituents that nothing will be done until the third offence when maybe the offender’s car might go that will change behaviour. I do not think it will do anything whatsoever. 
Nicky Wagner 
: That’s only part of the measure; you know that. 
BRENDON BURNS 
: We are hearing noise again from Ms Wagner but I made the comment earlier that noise is not being touched on in this bill after many repeated promises that this issue would be resolved by that member. 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: She was going to fix it. 
BRENDON BURNS 
: She was going to fix it. In fact there were even promises made that there would be a reduction to 90 decibels yet there is not a squeak or a whisper about that in this bill or in its accompanying measure. So it is very clear that there is much noise and no traction on that issue from that member. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: She’s very quiet now though. 
BRENDON BURNS 
: She was very loud in Opposition but now she is very soft in Government. We have to be very clear that Ms Collins took very much to the title of “Crusher” in respect of this bill when it first emerged but I really think the epithet is now more like “Cruiser” on this issue. There will be a lot of cruising going on because no boy racer will be put off by the fact that perhaps his car could be one of the 10 that will be taken on the third offence—maybe if the court decides to do that. That is not tough; that is weakening the current provisions. Labour is proposing an amendment to toughen this bill because at the moment we think that that provision is really just window dressing and a photo opportunity. I think the Government really needs to take account of what Labour will put in front of it. 
As Labour has said very clearly this bill will be supported by the Labour Opposition but we will be proposing that amendment because we want to make this bill as effective as possible. Members should make no mistake: the Labour Party wants to deal with the issue of boy racers. We have passed legislation on it in the past. We have made very clear that we want to support the closing of the loopholes. Some measures of this bill are going in that direction but on the key issue of the confiscation of cars we say that it would be much better to give an indication to the owners of the cars on the first offence that they will see their cars go on a second offence. That would make it very very clear to the owners of those cars that their cars would be gone by lunchtime on the day of the second offence. That is how it has to be. We believe that the loopholes in the law need to be closed we will support this bill through the process and we will be putting forward a proposal to this House before the third reading. I hope that if the Government is truly interested in a bipartisan approach to dealing with this issue it will listen to that amendment and not dismiss it out of hand because the potential is there for Parliament to deal with this issue on a serious and rational basis and to make sure this legislation delivers what has been promised—that is an attempt to close the loopholes to toughen up the legislation and to make sure we reduce the menace that boy racers present in electorates like mine and in others around the country.