Flavell Te Ururoa: Video Camera Surveillance (Temporary Measures) Bill — First Reading 
Flavell Te Ururoa: Video Camera Surveillance (Temporary Measures) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:676;Page:21460] 
TE URUROA FLAVELL (Maori Party—Waiariki) 
: 
 Tena koe Mr Assistant Speaker Robertson. Kia ora tatou e te Whare kua hui mai i tenei po. I will start by saying to the Hon Rodney Hide that his speech was pretty much right on the money in respect of the Maori Party’s concerns about the Video Camera Surveillance (Temporary Measures) Bill in all aspects of his korero. I do not wish to go back over it because along with other speakers he has placed the issues fairly and squarely in front of the Parliament of this land. What I do want to do though is add to the theme in a sense around the police. 
As a young fellow growing up I was always brought up to understand and believe that if we need a hand we should go to the police; that if we need some guidance we should head to the police; and that we should give them the respect that they are due. I have been out on the road a couple of times with the police and I give them full respect for the mahi that they have to do. I have been out at night-time and in daytime on shifts and I do not envy their tasks at times. There are those in the field who are doing a great job of keeping the country going in a lawful way. There have been a few times when I have doubted the responsibility of policemen and policewomen throughout the country. One of them was a few years ago when a young boy by the name of Rawiri Falwasser I believe was held by the police in Whakatane. There was a big court case. It was found unfortunately that a number of police members had dealt to that young man in a way that should never have happened. The second time—to cut out a long period of time—was basically the result of that one day that is well written into New Zealand history in respect of the arrival of the police in the Ruatoki Valley. 
Following that day I was fortunate to be able to go with a colleague of mine Mr Hone Harawira to the streets of Whakatane one day when people organised a hikoi through Whakatane. I heard from nannies with their tamariki who were still shaking after that moment in time—and we are talking about a week or so after it. They were crying and showing their anger and despair at what had happened. I was with the people in Whakatane on that hikoi. I have heard a draft report back from the Human Rights Commission. I have been at the Tuhoe Ahurea which is the biggest festival gathering of Tuhoe people in the Ruatoki Valley on at least two occasions—because it is run every two years. I have heard haka; I have heard poi. I have heard whaikorero or speech-making on the marae which concluded absolutely that Tuhoe would never ever forget that occasion. I know that Tuhoe even their young people as recently as about two months or a month ago at their competitions had that day in mind when they did their haka. 
I know that Tuhoe talk about the confiscation line. I know that Tuhoe talk about the invasion of Maungapohatu. I remember and was there on the day that the Waitangi Tribunal arrived at the Ruatoki Valley on the back of a cart when there were about 20 young men on horses at least and at every point and stop all the way in to the Ruatoki Valley the tribunal was reminded about what Tuhoe believe is their history and what has happened to them—things such as confiscation and invasion. So there is a history of mistrust of the police by the Tuhoe people not just on the back of one occasion but—on the back of the State I suppose in a sense—on the back of a number of occasions over time. 
What is worse is that since that time those people still hang in limbo—not the ones who are in court necessarily or those who have been released or otherwise but the people who actually had their doors either smashed open or knocked on the families who had their tamariki strip-searched and the families who had members taken to other areas of the Bay of Plenty and outside the region. I will not talk about the Auckland ones because I did not hear anything from them; I heard from the Tuhoe people. I have not heard anyone say “I am sorry.” I have not heard anybody say “We got it wrong.” I am talking about the people who were hurt on that day the ones who had nothing absolutely nothing to do with it but who still suffer 4 years down the line. Those are the ones whom I feel sorry for. They are the ones whom I think about. Even the ones who lived in Whakatane said the police came around and now people do not talk to them. It is down to that sort of detail that people still hurt about what happened there. There are those who are still waiting to go to court. Sure one or two have taken some liberties by going overseas—good on them—but for the rest I just want to make a plea that tonight in this Parliament we think about those people. 
Against all that background of waiting for 4 years and of what happened one would understand that for the people of Tuhoe as I say their feelings about the police are not very great. Finally to find out about a month or so ago that a number of them have got off their charges—10 to 12 of them got off—because the evidence did not stack up or whatever would have had some people laughing. To finally get the outcome of the Supreme Court ruling really in a sense rubbed salt into the wound especially when we had a statement from a judge of the court Chief Justice Sian Elias that said this: “Parliament has provided many statutory powers of entry search and seizure including for the interception of conversations. It has not however provided any authority for secret surveillance of the type undertaken here despite having had the absence of such powers drawn to its attention”—a point made by Mr Hide in terms of successive Parliaments—“by the Court of Appeal and the Law Commission.” That is what she said. She continued on: “I consider that the police act unlawfully if they do not have specific statutory authority for intruding upon personal freedom. That conclusion is compelled in my view both by the common law and by the terms of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. It also meets rule of law values of certainty and predictability.” 
So against all of that one would understand that not just Tuhoe but indeed Maori across the country are looking sideways now at the whole relationship in respect of the police and indeed wondering about how it could be that the police of all people could go ahead into an action that was unlawful as Mr Hide said. 
This bill I think cuts to the very core of some deeply held concerns within our community. Mr Hide outlined most of them but we are talking about transparency we are talking about accountability we are definitely talking about trust and ultimately maybe even about the notion of corruption. What really worried me was an interview with the Police Association in which the head of the association said something along the lines of “It wasn’t written down that we couldn’t do it so we did it.” I mean we are talking about the head of the Police Association and if that is the rationale for going ahead with actions by the police we have some serious problems—we have some serious problems. So I agree absolutely with Mr Hide on all the points about retrospectivity looking back and the whole notion of the short time frames. We would have liked to have a little more time to work things out because clearly it has been identified that there is an issue there. But under the circumstances clearly it is not going to happen. 
I can say and this will not be too much news to anybody that the Maori Party will be voting against this legislation. We are going too fast. We have to take our time to get it right. I understood from discussions with various people that there is a worry about those people who are still out there and what happens with regard to them. As I understand it—and I tried to get some clarity around this—the police simply need to go to court to get permission to be able to go about the work that still lies there. I think the Minister in this afternoon’s question time outlined the difference between the two terms which were— 
Hon Christopher Finlayson 
: Unlawfulness and unreasonableness. 
TE URUROA FLAVELL 
: I thank the member. I am not a lawyer but I like to think that that authority should still stay within the court. 
Finally there is the question of whether people will get off. There are four people still held under charges at this point in time so that might suggest that those people can still be held over and indeed those other people charged with crimes. The issue is not going to go away. We will fight this legislation all the way through. Kia ora.