Mapp Wayne: Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
Mapp Wayne: Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:612;Page:9446] 
Dr WAYNE MAPP (National—North Shore) 
: 
 One would think listening to the Minister that we are embarking on a bold new strategy to defeat crime. Certainly that is how he has portrayed it. It is sort of up there with the Sentencing Act and is one of the great measures in response to the referendum in which 92 percent of New Zealanders voted to deal with crime. Certainly the Minister is focused on burglary but it seems to me that he needs to be reminded of some facts—matters that he has scarcely touched upon. 
Members will be interested to know that on the North Shore alone drug offences are up by 44 percent—not 4.4 percent but 44 percent. That is a huge increase in the space of just 1 year and the Minister’s response to it is a concern about extending laws to deal with burglary. Perhaps that is the one area where the offending rate has gone down somewhat and no doubt that is not due to the Government but largely to people installing burglar alarms. 
Even if one considered this legislation a reasonable proposition which the Government proclaims and National supports the reality is that it is only a small step. Why for instance has the Minister not taken a bold step? A bold step would be to say that modern DNA technology is essentially the same as old fingerprint technology. DNA is intended to identify suspects just as fingerprints are. DNA is the modern fingerprint so a truly innovative approach would have been say that for everyone arrested DNA samples would be taken. The old arguments that used to be run—that we could not do so because the taking of blood samples was too intrusive—do not work any more. The select committee report itself revealed that the mouth swab essentially a swab between the lips takes 10 to 20 seconds. I can guarantee that to take a fingerprint is a much more laborious process than that and is more intrusive upon the individual. 
So I say to the Government that it should get with modern technology. It should be forward-looking and provide real tools to the police so that they can deal with crime. The Government should not be bringing in a half-hearted measure like this. We in our interjections mentioned that we have had 4 long years of this Government and this is the best that it can do in providing new tools for crime fighting. The Government has taken a minor step forward and that is the best way we can describe it. There has been a complete failure to recognise the increase in violent crime right across the board. [ 
Interruption 
] The Minister of Police who obviously needs to be educated should know that crime across the nation is up 2.5 percent. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: Is the member in favour of the bill? 
Dr WAYNE MAPP 
: I have said I am in favour of the bill. I have also said that the Government has a responsibility to put measures before this House that would go further much further and it has failed to take that step. Because this is such an important issue it is necessary to record in  
Hansard 
 the increase in crime in the last 12 months. Overall the crime rate is up by 2. 5 percent but it is worse because violent crime is up by 3.6 percent. Sexual offences went down and drug offences went up by 4.9 percent. The crime rate at the more serious end of the scale went up 14 percent and overall crime is up on the North Shore. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: Homicides are down about 20 percent aren’t they? 
Dr WAYNE MAPP 
: As the Minister will know that is susceptible to the law of small figures—that we can get large variations because of the relative scarcity of the crime. But when we look at the huge sweep of the large scale we see that the rate of the number of grievous assaults is up 8.5 percent and group assemblies are up 35.5 percent. 
On this side of the Chamber we have been reflecting our concern about methamphetamine. That is one of the great scourges. The gangs control crime in our country. Everyone will tell us that the bulk of crime comes from a relatively small number of gang-related families. Has this Government introduced into this Parliament any measures that would deal with gang behaviour? 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Yeah. It’s got them on the dole. 
Dr WAYNE MAPP 
: It has them on the dole committing crime. That is what is happening. Gang members are on the dole committing crime but where are the measures that would deal with association? 
Hon Phil Goff 
: Lowest numbers on the dole for 15 years. 
Dr WAYNE MAPP 
: What about the huge increase in the number of gang members generally? The Minister needs to evaluate his own department’s statistics which show that the number of gang members is now 20000. A few years ago that number was only 15000. That is a 25 percent increase and when the Minister wonders why it is that drug offences are up so much he need look only at gang numbers. 
 It is not enough for the Government to bring these kinds of measures to the House after 4 years but not take the serious steps—the urgent steps—that would deal with crime on a much more substantive basis. It is not just a question of the law; it is also a question of police resourcing. Why is it that we have only just over 7000 police officers in this nation—a nation that has a population of 4 million? That is a ratio of less than one police officer for every 500 people which is a ratio worse than that of Australia Canada Britain and every single state in the United States—then we wonder why our crime is increasing. We should be taking the serious steps that are needed to make a real difference not just doing minor tinkering around the edges of criminal law. 
Another point I wish to make is that yesterday the Minister presented a 23-page Supplementary Order Paper. I find it extraordinary that the extensive provisions on that Supplementary Order Paper—on a bill that was introduced years ago and that was before the Law and Order Committee for an extensive period of time with plenty of opportunity being given to make submissions—were not put before the select committee where it could have been debated and considered and the necessary extensions made. The Minister might go on about all the great measures he has made but this bill is an indictment. It is an indictment on the Government and its minor trivial and pathetic efforts to deal with crime. We do not have enough police. We do not have sufficient tools in the criminal kit. The sentencing laws are still deficient. United Future has not been able to put the necessary pressure on the Government to change the Sentencing Act. Violent offenders are still getting out of prison at one-third of their sentences. People on home detention are committing crimes almost on a daily basis. The reality is that we have an indictment of failure. 
Just on Sunday of this week I went to a public meeting on the North Shore and I can tell the Minister—I know I cannot draw the Speaker into the debate—that the member for Northcote was present. It was the first sunny day in Auckland for weeks and weeks and the meeting was well attended. There was a deep anger— 
Hon Phil Goff 
: How many were there? 
Dr WAYNE MAPP 
: There were 50 people there all demonstrating their concerns. I want to close by saying that the people at that meeting were family members of victims of murder but what is the Minister’s response? He laughs at that. He laughs at their pain and does not change the Sentencing Act which would deal directly with their concerns. That is what they want. They want action and they have not got it.