Mark Ron: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Mark Ron: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:623;Page:18582] 
5.  
RON MARK (NZ First) 
 to the  
Minister of Police 
: What policy determines how police are prioritised to solve crime? 
Hon GEORGE HAWKINS (Minister of Police) 
: 
 The Government’s crime reduction strategy set seven priority areas aimed at particular at-risk groups of victims. This strategy is then reflected in the statement of intent which records the annual agreement between the Minister and the Commissioner of Police. 
Ron Mark 
: Can the Minister confirm to the House and the public that the sole purpose of the Criminal Investigation Bureau (CIB) is to investigate serious crime and that its officers are not expected to fulfil traffic quotas? 
Hon GEORGE HAWKINS 
: The Commissioner of Police has told all his staff that with priority one calls the nearest staff member should respond. 
Ron Mark 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I appreciate the Minister’s answer but I did not ask about emergency services or priority one calls. I simply asked the Minister whether the CIB’s sole purpose is to investigate serious crime and whether its officers are not expected to fulfil traffic quotas. It was a question about traffic quotas not about emergency response. Can he answer it? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I ask the Minister to respond. 
Hon GEORGE HAWKINS 
: The police do not have specific quotas. 
Tim Barnett 
: How does the Government quantify the success of its crime reduction policies? 
Hon GEORGE HAWKINS 
: The statistics show that recorded crime is at its lowest rate in 21 years. Crime resolution is up to 45.1 percent. In addition we have reduced the road toll to its second-lowest annual rate since the 1960s. 
Hon Tony Ryall 
: Has the Minister ever asked the Commissioner of Police whether he has enough resources to provide a safe 111 service; if so when and what was said? 
Hon GEORGE HAWKINS 
: The commissioner and I often talk about resources and he is very pleased with what I get him. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The Minister will now answer the specific question that the member asked. 
Hon GEORGE HAWKINS 
: I remind the member that this Government has provided resources for 111 calls over the last year since we talked about providing another 18 staff for the control rooms. 
Rodney Hide 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The Minister in no way addressed the question—it was not my particular question but I know that the public and the members of this House certainly have an interest in it—which asked whether the Minister himself has done his job and has raised the question of adequate resources for the 111 emergency service. The Minister studiously avoided addressing that. I know that you are not responsible for his answer but he certainly has to address the question and I took from what the Minister said that he did not address the question at all. I can only conclude that that was because the true answer would be embarrassing. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No he did address the question. 
Nandor Tanczos 
: Can the Minister confirm that the police would have the equivalent of 50 extra front-line officers to respond to 111 emergencies if they copied the British police policy of not charging people with cannabis offences—[ 
Interruption 
] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Every member in this House who has been properly elected in the democratic system has the right to ask a question. I will not warn anyone again. Mr Tanczos has just as much right as anyone else. 
Nandor Tanczos 
: Can the Minister confirm that the police would have the equivalent of 50 extra front-line officers to respond to 111 emergencies if they copied the UK police policy of not charging people with cannabis offences and if he cannot confirm that can he tell the House how many front-line officers it would free up? 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. You have admonished members of the House for making noise during that question. I point out to you that the questioner invited the Minister to accept a breach of the law—charging people who are caught in respect of such offences is clearly enough stated in our current law—and therefore the question is ridiculous and should be ruled out of order. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No I do not need any assistance. The question was in order. 
Hon GEORGE HAWKINS 
: Police police all offences across the board and make sure they are even-handed in the way they apply that policing. 
Nandor Tanczos 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. My question— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No the Minister addressed the question. I heard him. 
Ron Mark 
: Is the Minister willing to defend the categorical statement from a detective sergeant that it is police policy to contract a certain number of hours for the traffic police that that is non-negotiable and that if there is a shortage due to staff holidays sickness etc. then police are pulled from criminal investigations and used for traffic duties? 
Hon GEORGE HAWKINS 
: I will not comment on that individual case because I know that last week when the member brought cases to the House they were proved to be wrong. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: If everything is fine in the Minister’s portfolio and if as he claims he is on top of his job why did he go to the Prime Minister and complain that Ron Mark was bullying him and what did the Prime Minister say to him? 
Hon GEORGE HAWKINS 
: I did not go to the Prime Minister about Ron Mark. Everyone knows what he is like. 
Ron Mark 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I understand that the Minister is under extreme pressure and I know— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Please come to the point of order. What is the point of order? 
Ron Mark 
: My point of order is this: is that member implying in this Chamber that Ron Mark NZ First MP is a bully? That is serious. I would have expected you to be first on your feet to bring the Minister back into line for casting aspersions. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No I thought the question and the reply were within the Standing Orders.