9. Question No. 9—JusticeRAWIRI WAITITI (Co-Leader—Te Pāti Māori) to the Minister of JusticeQuestion No. 9—Justice9. RAWIRI WAITITI (Co-Leader—Te Pāti Māori) to the Minister of Justice: Does he stand by all of his statements and policies?Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH (Minister of Justice): Yes in the context in which they were made particularly my statement on Sunday that for too long gangs have been allowed to behave as if they are above the law. They are not and this Government is determined to restore law and order. Rawiri Waititi: What evidence and research does the Minister have that shows banning gang patches will reduce crime in our communities? Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: Well look the evidence that I'm most interested in is the 50 percent increase in gang membership in the last five years under the previous Government which has led to a sense of disorder on our streets. That's the evidence I'm most interested in. Rawiri Waititi: Point of order Mr Speaker. The question was clear: what evidence and research does the Minister have that shows banning gang patches will reduce crime in our communities? He didn't address it nor did he answer it. SPEAKER: Yeah I think you could probably have another crack at that. Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: Well the evidence I see and that we've received is the intimidation that people have seen right across the country and we've also seen the progress that similar gang patch bans have had in Western Australia and in other countries. Rawiri Waititi: Point of order Mr Speaker. Once again he has evaded answering the question. The question is simple: what evidence and research does the Minister have that shows banning gang patches will reduce crime in our communities? He hasn't addressed it nor answered it. SPEAKER: He actually did answer because he also referred to evidence he had from Western Australia. Now he doesn't have to expand on what that is but that's what he said in his answer. He also—[Interruption] Well you can all wobble your heads as much as you like. This is how I heard it and this is how I'm ruling it. Tākuta Ferris: Look given this Government seems fixated on gangs with high Māori membership will his proposed legislation to ban gang members from gathering mean their whānau who have multiple members accused of being in a gang will not be able to meet or even talk to each other for up to three years? Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: There will be an exclusion for family members. Tākuta Ferris: How can he justify targeting gang members when the tribunal has found that 80 to 90 percent of Mongrel Mob and Black Power members have come from State wards and therefore both gangs are largely a creation of the State? Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: We absolutely agree that the background of offenders is relevant to sentencing. But also we are a party that believes in personal responsibility and I should note that the Long-term Insights Briefing on imprisonment states that Most people serving sentences in prison [in New Zealand] have been convicted of serious sexual or violent offending." and no society can function if people are not held personally responsible for their actions. Tākuta Ferris: Does he deem it appropriate for a Minister of Justice to say he does not care about the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act?Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: I never made such a statement.Tākuta Ferris: Are you sure? Supplementary.SPEAKER: Hang on hang on. Was that a question or was that—Tākuta Ferris: Nah nah nah; I just said something out loud.SPEAKER: Yeah. Well don't make those comments. Leave those to Rawiri!Rt Hon Winston Peters: Point of order. Mr Speaker that member in his question made an allegation of a statement made by the Minister. The Minister said that statement's not true. That requires that member who made the allegation by way of the question to apologise for it. You can't just fly by like that in this House Mr Speaker. That's a fact.SPEAKER: It is a fact that your comment did question the answer of a Minister which is not appropriate. So I suggest you withdraw and apologise for that and then ask your supplementary.Tākuta Ferris: I withdraw and apologise. Does he agree that banning patches and whānau with alleged gang ties from attending tangihanga is a blatant dismissal of the Māori right to mana motuhake and a gross breach of Te Tiriti o Waitangi?Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: People will be perfectly entitled to attend a tangi if they're not wearing a gang patch and they are not subject to a dispersal order. That is ultimately in the police's discretion. So I don't agree with his assertion.Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: Point of order. Seeking clarity: is the Minister of Justice implying that the police make the rules for marae?SPEAKER: No that's not what he said.Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: Sorry we just heard that it is up to the police to decide if marae have patched members there. We're just seeking clarity.SPEAKER: Sorry what you heard him say is—Hon Member: Sit down.Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: No I'm not sitting down. You're not the Speaker and you never will be at your age.SPEAKER: That would apply to everyone in the House as it happens. What you heard him say is that police have always had that discretion; in relation to what is not a concern for me.Tākuta Ferris: What risk analysis has he undertaken to ensure that Government polices such as unbanning pseudoephedrine unbanning semi-automatic weapons and increasing benefit sanctions will not lead to more crime?Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: Again I would emphasise that there's all sorts of excuses that can be offered for crime but people need to be personally responsible for their actions. This Government is determined to restore consequences for crime and to restore law and order in this country.Tākuta Ferris: Point of order. The question was: what risk analysis has been undertaken? Not merely a point of view.SPEAKER: I don't think that's a reasonable point of order. In actual fact it's not a point of order; it is a concern that you've got about an answer. That's quite a different matter. Do you have another supplementary?Tākuta Ferris: Just speaking to the point of order then. The question was around the implication—SPEAKER: No no. Look the place functions on some pretty basic rules and you're working outside that rule at the present time.Hon Simeon Brown: Point of order. I just want to ask a quick question in regards to assertions being put at the front of questions. There were a number of supplementaries just in that question where there was an assertion being put at the start without a question actually being put first. I just ask your guidance on that issue for the House.SPEAKER: I have already today said that assumptions are not appropriate and nor are assertions and nor are they actually permissible under the Standing Orders. But there is also a degree of understanding of how the intent of the question is meant to be taken."