Bindra MaheshMAHESH BINDRA (NZ First): I rise on behalf of New Zealand First to speak to the second reading of the Policing (Cost Recovery) Amendment Bill. The three pillars of our democracy are the Parliament the judiciary and the police. These three pillars are independent of each other with specific responsibilities and they are all fundamental to providing a safe free democratic society where people are free to raise their families and go about their lawful business—running their lives and raising their children with the security that if their right to exist safely in society is impeded by anybody then the State through the police will protect them. Policing is a service it is a duty and it is a responsibility of the State. It is not a charitable commodity from which the State should derive a revenue stream. It is not a service that can in any way be equated to the services provided by the Department of Internal Affairs or the Customs Service—providing such things as passports and charging people for them. The police force is a police force. It is there to protect and serve. It is there to provide protection to all New Zealanders regardless of one's race ethnicity religion socio-economic status or indeed the size of their wallet.New Zealand First believes that keeping a community safe through policing is the core responsibility of the State and that police vetting is inseparable from these basic policing functions. The police force and the services it provides are funded from our main tax revenue and we believe that it should stay that way. We believe that police should carry out vetting as part of their core police work. We see this amendment which asks New Zealanders to pay for a vetting service with a separate fee as the thin edge of a very very fat National Government wedge which will be steadily and quietly tapped into extracting at every tap of the hammer money from New Zealanders who are seeking help from the police force. We believe that this bill will provide the impetus for the police to start charging for other services that they currently provide as core business such as attending to emergencies family violence incidents property crime or child abuse. Where does this stop? Will we be charging for emergency services such as attending to burglaries or thefts or violence? That cannot happen. We cannot support any kick-start to our police being a pay-as-you-go or a user-pays system. That is not the Kiwi thing to do. The Vulnerable Children Act 2014 requires standard screening and vetting of all central government staff and Government-funded contractors working with children. This is a voluntary regime for business. NGOs and volunteer organisations are covered under these amendments and it will be reviewed in 2 years. Community groups non-governmental organisations and other community organisations that rely on volunteers and are not resourced financially may well be prevented from going through the vetting process because of this amendment. The cost will not be bearable for them because they do not have the resources to fund these activities which are currently being provided by the police. When that happens children women the elderly and other vulnerable members of our society may well be put at risk due to caregivers and others working with these vulnerable citizens not being vetted. I am sure this Government was not intending to put our vulnerable members of society at such risk. Finally it is the State that requires all paid and unpaid staff in schools to undergo a police check. Paying for the service will increase compliance costs for those schools which will have a negative impact on the operational budget of the schools particularly small schools. This Government is wanting to tighten the funding belts of its public schools and now it is adding more financial constraints with this bill—that is criminal. New Zealand First does not support this bill because New Zealand First does not support the police charging for any of its core services. Kia ora.