Anderton Jim: Gangs and Organised Crime Bill — First Reading 
Anderton Jim: Gangs and Organised Crime Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:652;Page:1112] 
Hon JIM ANDERTON (Leader—Progressive) 
: 
 I observe the irony of the Gangs and Organised Crime Bill being rushed through the House when the member responsible for it has indicated that it is to go to a select committee for the full period of 6 months. One might wonder why we had to wait until just before the House came together tonight to get a copy of the bill. One would think that he is trying to impress somebody; I do not know who. 
If I could sum up this bill in one sentence it would be that the National Government has wildly raised expectations on the issue of dealing with violent crime in New Zealand. The Labour-Progressive Opposition will support this bill but it is not the silver bullet that National has promised it will be. It will not significantly reduce violent crime in New Zealand as National has promised. It will not make a huge dent in crime as National has promised most New Zealanders. The previous Government was already promoting this kind of legislation and would have passed something similar to this bill but we would not have pretended—as National has—that this was a major part of what we needed to do. 
I have no trouble in declaring that the major factors involved in crime should be on the wrong end of tough law. Gangs are a cause of crime so we should be tough with them. We should be tough on all the causes of crime as well. But there is one factor linked to crime that this Government does not mention in this bill and does not talk about. One factor is linked to 60 percent of all the people who are arrested for criminal acts. Can Government members tell us what that factor is or even say the word that is common to the majority of all crime in New Zealand? It is not gangs and it is not methamphetamine or P. Both of those are serious threats that need to be dealt with of course. But if a party is serious about them then logically it should be much more serious about a much more common cause of crime. What is that common factor? It is alcohol abuse and 60 percent of all those arrested in New Zealand are under the influence of alcohol at the time when the offence for which they have been arrested was committed—60 percent. No other factor comes even close to that. Because the Government will not even mention that alcohol is involved in the committing of most crime it will not do anything about 60 percent of those who are offending. 
If this bill is passed before the National members have dealt with the low-hanging fruit before the biggest factor in crime is dealt with then they are not serious about crime. They are joking. They have raised expectations which will ultimately disappoint people and those members will be held up to ridicule. The National members made a big issue out of crime when they were in Opposition. I am not going to quickly forget their pledges to seriously reduce the rate of violent crime. I remember John Banks coming in as the Minister of Police and saying he would end all violent crime within 3 weeks of the Aramoana massacre; we did not hear much more from John as the Minister of Police after that. The National Party promised that if elected a National Government would put an immediate end to the kind of violent crime that terrorised shopkeepers in South Auckland. I ask members to remember those shopkeepers and the Indian community being terrorised by attacks in those neighbourhoods. How much neighbourhood crime is linked to the sudden proliferation of liquor outlets there? How much is linked to the low drinking age which lets teenagers buy as much alcohol as they want in nearly every corner of those suburbs? This bill will not tackle that. Alcohol abuse is not even mentioned in it. 
The National Party made promises such as the one about significantly reducing violent crime. Having raised expectations this Government is now accountable if it does not deliver on them. The Government should not necessarily be culpable for all violent crime of course but the National Party has made it that way. It promised the New Zealand public that it would make a difference. Here is item No. 4 in National’s blueprint for change from August last year: “National knows New Zealanders are sick of worrying about the surging levels of violent crime in this country. We are not going to put up with it. So National will launch a full-frontal attack on gangs and the ‘P’ trade they support.” OK so National is passing the law that it said it would pass. I say “Good on its members for doing that.” but now the acid is on Simon Power and John Key. This is National’s full-frontal assault on gangs and the P trade and if it does not deal effectively to the surging levels of crime that National knows New Zealanders are sick of then National will be held accountable for that failure. 
Mr Key said over and over again on stages and in TV debates that the major problem is the gangs because the gangs make P and P is the major cause of crime. He said that when his party took office it would pass this bill and violent crime would be significantly reduced. It is remotely possible that he may be right. I hope the bill really does make a huge difference—who would not? That is why I and the Opposition are voting for this bill. We absolutely want any bill of this kind to be successful but I am not actually naive enough to make the promise Mr Key and his National candidates made up and down the country that they would significantly reduce violent crime. Mr Key said in his speech on 29 January last year “Violent youth crime is at an all-time high. Robbery is up. Grievous assaults are up. Aggravated robbery is up. Youth criminals are graduating from petty crime to more serious crime; unexploded time-bombs on a fast-track to Paremoremo.” Will this bill make a major difference to that? I tell members not to hold their breath. Mr Key wildly over-promised and now National is under-delivering. 
I ask Government members here in the Chamber whether violent crime will be significantly reduced as from the date of the passing of this bill. Will that be virtually the end of it being in the headlines? I suggest that the answer is an unequivocal no. Are those members confident that they have fixed crime? Do they still want to tell New Zealanders that they will significantly reduce violent crime as they promised on the hustings? I wish this bill could have that effect; I do not believe it will. Every violent crime from now on will show the failure of this key promise of National’s members that they could stamp out violent crime by targeting gangs. They have raised expectations far beyond what they can deliver on never mentioning in the bill the key drug abuse that causes and is associated with the overwhelming majority of crime in New Zealand. Alcohol abuse is not mentioned. Are those members really serious? It seems to me that they have raised expectations far beyond what they can deliver on and thus they have failed and will fail the communities that they promised to protect.