McLellan Tracey; Upston LouiseDr TRACEY McLELLAN (Labour): Thank you Madam Chair. Again going through in a systematic way so that we don't miss any clauses: clause 30 as the Minister's just alluded to provides the opportunity on the recommendation of the Minister of Police to add to or to take away from that list of gangs that appears in Schedule 2. I think we just need a little bit more clarity on how that happens because when we look at Schedule 2 we can see as the Minister's just pointed out that some gangs have been removed some gangs appear to have had their names slightly updated and some gangs we can only assume have been added. But because it's on the recommendation of the Minister of Police—and you alluded to the fact that there was some criteria but I'm not entirely sure that that's not as ad hoc as we would not hope it to be.It says under clause 30(1) that the Governor-General on the advice of the Minister can (a) add the name of an organisation association or group of persons identified as a gang for the purposes of this Act to the schedule:" or "(b) remove the name of an organisation association or group of persons identified as a gang for the purposes of this Act from the schedule." I'm wondering firstly if the Minister can give us a few more details about what that specific or specified sort of criteria that she alluded to was and how robust that was or at least walk us through that process so that we can determine. We've certainly heard stories whether it be anecdotal whether it be evidence through select committee various fora about the difficulty in identifying you know what is a gang whether the gang is still relevant in the New Zealand context.We know that with any kind of activity that involves human beings let alone human beings that have a lot at stake in so far as their organised crime activities or whatever involvement they have with each other it's a particularly fluid environment out there and it becomes a little bit of an arms race. So one can only imagine that as soon as some specified and specific criteria that you alluded to—not you Madam Chair—is defined there needs to be a much more robust process behind the service to make sure that that is up to date that we can trust it and that the Minister of Police is making those recommendations particularly to add to that list in a well-formed and meaningful way that doesn't overstep those marks. So that's my first question and I will allude to the second one but I would like an answer to that one.Just in so far as giving the Minister a bit of time clause 30(2) "The Minister of Police may not make a recommendation under subsection 1(a) unless satisfied on reasonable grounds that the organisation association or group … (a) has a common name or common identifying signs symbols or representations;"—that's just that (a) and that kind of brings us full circle round to what is you know the theme of several things we've heard tonight with regard to how we decide that. How do we know that it's real? And more importantly given the nature of this piece of legislation and the impact that it has on people which is significant how do we know that the people involved know that these are the criteria under which they're being judged?We heard earlier tonight about prospects for instance not even knowing that they're in the process of being a prospect. And yet you can imagine several scenarios where young people in particular could be associating with a group of people who are in the process of being repatched or in the process of doing something different. How do they know if this new formation is going to constitute a gang and therefore end up on Schedule 2 and then end up being subject to all of the measures that are in this piece of legislation?I've got a couple more questions just relating to Part 2 but I'll leave that for now.Hon LOUISE UPSTON (Minister for Social Development and Employment): Thank you Madam Chair. The member Dr Tracey McLellan asks questions about clause 30. She goes on to ask about the criteria which is clearly stated in the bill—she started reading from it. I'm not going to waste the committee's time by repeating things that are done and have been traversed in the Justice Committee or written in the bill."