Goldsmith PaulHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (National): I think Ginny Andersen the previous speaker was being a little too generous to her colleagues about being part of a Government that's responding effectively to a significant rise in violent crime. I don't see that in the same way because what we've seen over the past five years that this Government has been in power—five years. It's worth just remembering about that—five years. We've heard many speeches from the other side of the House going on about the National Party's record but for half a decade—Hon Member: What! Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: —this Government has been in place—Andrew Bayly: Half a decade. Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: —half a decade—and over that period we've moved from a situation where New Zealanders on the whole felt safe in their communities and in their homes and in their shopping centres and on their roads. Yeah there are always problems but there was a sense that the justice system in the broadest sense was working effectively. Over five years we've undermined that to a state that this country now feels that the situation is more or less out of control and you can't now feel confident in going to the local mall in Auckland—whether it's St Lukes mall or down to 277 in Newmarket—that there won't be some kind of smash-and-grab with a bunch of people turning up with hammers and crowbars causing mayhem and knowing that they'll get away with it and then you can't be sure that there won't be a large gang convoy driving past on motorbikes intimidating the countryside. We often think of New York and places like that where there's always sirens wailing in the background and the sound of a chopper overhead but that's what Auckland feels like at the moment. There's always the sound of a chopper overhead chasing somebody and there are always sirens wailing away and what we're seeing is a very significant increase in gun crime in our city and people are worried about that. This year there have been very significant numbers of shootings in our city and New Zealanders are rightly worried about whether this Government has the wherewithal to get on top of it. So what we see in this legislation—which we'll support. We'll support it at this first reading and it will go off to the select committee and we'll work our way through the issues raised by it. But essentially what we've got here is a grab bag of ideas and suggestions that enables the Government to look like it's doing something but without really having thought through the broader issues and having a clear and coherent response to violent crime and serious crime in our communities. If you look at the big issues in the justice sector broadly—if I was to characterise the four big issues that we think we should be focused on—first it's dealing more effectively with this serious and violent end of crime. What has the Government done so far on that? Well what it has done is it has repealed the three-strikes legislation. What it has done is it has looked at the situation seen the rise in gang violence seen the rise in gun crime and seen the rise in ram raids and smash-and-grabs and what's the conclusion that it has come to? The conclusion that it has come to is that we're too tough on our worst criminals—we're too tough on our worst repeat criminals in this country—and we need to reduce sentences for them because we're too tough on them. That's been the one conclusion that they've drawn and so they've repealed the three-strikes legislation. It's a very bizarre conclusion to come to. Then having done that they've come to the House and they've said We're really going to deal with this. We're tough on crime and we're going to introduce a bill which makes a new offence out of discharging a firearm with intent to intimidate in a public place." Well I don't know about you but I can't think of too many circumstances when you would discharge a firearm in a public place without intent to intimidate in a criminal setting—I mean most people would find that reasonably intimidating. I suppose if you were firing a cannon to commemorate the death of the Queen it might be one example but in the gang context I can't think of too many situations where a gang member would discharge a firearm in a public place which wouldn't be intimidating. But anyway they've repealed the three-strikes legislation. They've come to the conclusion that we need to be softer on our worst repeat violent criminals and that they need to be in prison for shorter periods of time—that's their broad conclusion—but at the same time in order to look tough they've rushed in this legislation here tonight with a couple of ideas that will enable them to say that they're doing something. But really their hearts aren't in it and that is the issue. So when we run through the issues that have been raised in this it's about this new problem of discharging a firearm with intent to intimidate—well OK. That sounds good. It also provides a new warrant for police to search and seize weapons—some little tweaks there. Yep OK we'll have a look at those. It expands the power of police power to seize and impound vehicles where we can expand the empowerment power to include dangerous and reckless driving where no injury or death has occurred—well OK that's fine. OK yep that's something we should look at. There's a new cash seizure power for police when they find $10000 in cash in suspicious circumstances so that they can seize that—well OK. Well that's good—OK we'll look at that. But the point is that you can just see what was going on in the Cabinet with Kiri Allan. She came in. We had Kris Faafoi as Minister of Justice who took the job and then decided that he didn't seem to really like it any more and he wasn't paying much attention and Kiri Allan has come in as the new Minister. You can see the sense of that: "Oh my goodness! We've been in power for 4½ years. Serious crime has gone like that gang membership has gone like that shootings in Auckland have gone like that ram raids have gone like that. Oh dear we've got a problem. There's a sense of disorder and we need to do something. What are we going to do? Oh that's right we've just reduced sentences for our worst repeat offenders. That's been the one thing we have done. Oh my goodness we need to come up with something. Officials come on find us something." and somebody came up with the idea of "Well we could make a new offence out of discharging a firearm in a public place in an intimidatory manner. That's one thing and then if we find $10000 worth of cash we can make a new seizure power for police." They cobbled together five things and said "There we've got a law and so we look like we're doing something." Well that I don't think is a very effective way to deal with what is a serious problem facing our communities and our streets and our cities and our towns and all of New Zealand where we're worried about what has been this breakdown in law and order. It's a rushed ad hoc approach to dealing with the problem. The second area is around youth crime which is clearly not being dealt with effectively at the serious end. When you're dealing with ram-raiders and smash-and-grabbers sending them off to a family conference patting them on the head and saying "You shouldn't be doing that. We'll see you next weekend when you'll do it again and we'll have another little family group session." is not an effective way of dealing with the problem. The thing on everybody's lips—all the dairy owners and the people working in the malls—is that there are no consequences for these kids and we need to actually use some of the tools that we have available to us whether it's in community service whether it's home detention or whether it's youth facilities and actually sheet home some actual responsibility for what are significant crimes. The third area is dealing with the efficiency of the court system. That's something that the Government hasn't been really focused on and needs to be focused on because taking months and years dealing with court cases is not helping anybody. It's putting lives on hold. The fourth area in the justice area—which is another topic entirely but I won't trifle with the Speaker by going too far in this direction—is dealing with our electoral laws and standing up for and asserting the equal voting rights for all New Zealanders. But coming back to this issue here around dealing more effectively with the rise in violent crime and gangs this is a modest and ill-thought-through and rapid step in the right direction. We don't know what the consequences of it will be yet and so it will be very important to go through this with a fine-tooth comb in the select committee process and to hear from people who are affected to make sure that this piece of legislation doesn't have unintended consequences of which there are very high risks therein. So we will be voting for this bill. But we do so cautiously and we just wish that the Government would actually come up with a clear coherent consistent and well-thought-through plan to deal with what are significant issues facing our communities and our streets and our cities."