Baillie Chris; McKee Nicole; Mitchell Mark; Andersen GinnyCHRIS BAILLIE (ACT): Thank you Mr Chair. Just continuing the more fiscally restrained environment theme—just this week teachers got a 14.5 percent pay increase and I'm just wondering what sort of advocacy the Minister is taking to her Cabinet to maybe secure police a 14.5 percent increase?CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): Could you repeat the question please? The Minister had difficulty hearing it.CHRIS BAILLIE: Just this week the schoolteachers got an increase of 14.5 percent approved by Cabinet I understand. And I'm just wondering what sort of advocacy the Minister is taking to Cabinet for police officers and whether she is also asking for a 14.5 percent increase.NICOLE McKEE (ACT): Thank you Mr Chair. Minister I'll ask two questions on two different topics—just to give you some time to be able to answer them. The first one is looking at the Budget. In 2017 Police were given $1.8 billion in their Vote Police budget. This year they've been given $2.6 billion. We're seeing an increase in crime and as such we've seen money allocated to crime prevention drop from $564 million to $537 million; investigations and case resolution from $819 million to $808 million; primary response management from $702 million to $662 million—at a time when crime is increasing. So Minister I'm wondering why it is that with the actual overall increase in Police budget there is a decrease in some of the areas that actually need more input and improvement so that police can get out there and tackle crime. That's my first question.My second question is around the $200-plus million that has been given to establish the Firearms Safety Authority and how when we have allocated that much money to the authority we are in a position where emails are being sent out. I have to wonder Minister whether there has been no input into the ability to have a secure email facility because this is the second time that this has happened in four years. It's not acceptable. It doesn't help with the registry. I also just want to know whether or not there is going to be improvement in that—what sort of improvement are we looking for?—because the firearm owners out there are telling us that they are sick and tired of being at the end of data breaches by New Zealand Police and no one being held accountable for it.So Minister when we're looking at this massive amount—over $200 million—going into the firearms sector why are we having such fundamental silly mistakes occur? And before I sit down I'd also just like to acknowledge Deputy Commissioner Jevon McSkimming and also policy people that are here. I look forward to your answer. Thank you.Hon MARK MITCHELL (National—Whangaparāoa): Thank you Mr Chair. The Minister got up and she spoke for five minutes on family harm. By the way this Government's got an awful record on family harm especially when you consider that they have a dedicated Minister for that role. But she is not here to answer our questions or respond to that.CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): Mr Mitchell you know you don't comment on the absence of people from the House. So just carry on. You've been around long enough.Hon MARK MITCHELL: Thank you Mr Chair. So I am going to ask the Minister again to rather than talk about family harm please address these issues that are very specific and very direct. How is the fiscal constraint that has now been introduced and is having to be dealt with by the Police actually going to impact and affect the day-to-day operations? Please stand up and explain to us and let us know and give us some confidence that this is not going to impact on districts—that if someone leaves a position it is going to be filled even if it may not be a sworn constable position—and please explain delaying recruitment for specific non non-constabulary roles. What does that mean and what impact is that going to have?And by the way the most important one for all of our 9000-plus front-line serving police officers out there today doing the job that are prepared to put in the hard yards work longer hours to try and respond to what they've had to deal with—and that is a massive increase in violent crime and offending—is a proposal here that's looking at minimising the collection of time off in lieu annual leave and the appointment of any new non-constabulary role. I would ask the Minister to get up and actually show some respect to those front-line officers and respond to the question and explain what the implications of this are and what her expectations are as the Minister. Thank you Mr Chair.Hon GINNY ANDERSEN (Minister of Police): Thank you very much Mr Chair. In terms of Nicole McKee look I straightaway acknowledged that I was really not happy at all with the fact that that email was sent. I've made that really clear. I met with the commissioner that very day within hours of me finding that out and I've asked specifically what happened and what steps have been taken to make sure that what I understand is a human error will not occur again. So the Privacy Commissioner's office has been advised and also a rapid review has determined what steps we can do in the future to make sure that that never happens again. And so I've been assured by the commissioner that the process when sending emails internally has now subsequently been changed in order for that never to be able to happen again.Look I think it's important to state that there's been contact back with all of those people who the email was sent out to. And the mistake was that instead of them being bcc-ed they were sent in the send so they received the email addresses of other people. So each of those individuals has been contacted and liaised with. Look I've made it clear I'm not happy with that but I think it's also important to note that that email itself is separate to the integrity of the firearms registry and the data that is kept within that registry. It in no way compromises the data that's held in there and the way that that has been managed.In terms of the member's question in terms of—I don't have the same figures you were talking to in terms of where the breakdowns of spending occurred. So police projects can fluctuate and that can depend on things such as proceeds of crime what money comes in from that process of restraining those illegal items from gangs and organised crime and also being able to put that into and resource new types of streams. So there are fluctuations in that space—that does occur. Regarding the huge investment in front-line capability my understanding is that that enables crime prevention to take place because we have more police officers who are able to establish relationships who are able to do that work in the community and that means when they call upon that or when they go and investigate a crime then those issues are resolved more quickly if there is that ability to already have had a relationship in place.You know that is very much of the policing with the consent of the community the model that has been developed over time. And it's that trust and confidence and investment in the front line that enables good information to come back from the community in that tight relationship with police.In terms of the other member's question in relation to that email—I think I did answer that. My view was that it was prudent the way that is spent. There is no impact on front-line resources; we have a 1:480 ratio that remains funded. We have had a 50 percent increase in the amount of funding since 2017 to now a 50 percent increase in funding of Police. A big part of that has been increasing those police ratios from the mid-500s to now 480. So that is unchanged and the email that was sent was simply stipulating the prudent management of existing funding. In no way shape or form did it erode or cut from what funding has been secured for this Budget. And that also means that that 1:480 ratio will be maintained.