Cosgrove Clayton: Gangs and Organised Crime Bill — First Reading 
Cosgrove Clayton: Gangs and Organised Crime Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:652;Page:1099] 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Labour—Waimakariri) 
: 
 Let me say from the outset that on this side of the House we share many of the Minister of Justice’s views in respect of the insidious nature of gangs. They are repugnant their activities are repugnant and the negative impact they put upon families young people and innocent members of our community needs to be dealt with. 
That being said we will support the referral of the Gangs and Organised Crime Bill to the Law and Order Committee and give it close scrutiny. I have to say though as an aside that there is an opportunity during a first reading debate which we are now engaged in to actually debate a bill. That is predicated on the fact that all members of Parliament in Government and in Opposition have access to the legislation so that they can read chew over discuss and analyse it and then make a constructive contribution on it to this House. 
Phil Goff and others on this side of the House have said that as an Opposition in respect of this bill we will be constructive where things work and are appropriate because it does a number of positive things. But I say to the Minister through you Mr Assistant Speaker that to drop a bill on the Table—and I think this is the fourth or fifth bill since this Government has been elected—an hour or less before a debate gives no one the opportunity to actually analyse it. I suspect that maybe the National Party members have had a chance to look at this bill—and Mr Borrows might be able to confirm or deny this—but no one else in the House has. 
Hon Simon Power 
: That’s not true. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: The Minister says that is not true. Mr Borrows might be able to confirm that. The best we have been able to get after a couple of phone conversations in the last 24 hours is for the Minister to produce a weighty document of one page and about three lines. 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: That was for Gerry. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: Quite possibly. No it is not in big print. A summary of one page and three lines has been distributed to members of the Opposition and it is exceptionally vague. 
The summary talks about how in this gangs legislation there will be additional powers as the Minister has illustrated to have gang fortifications removed if they are intimidating in nature but the summary the Minister delivered to us this morning does not even define what intimidating means. I have read it. I had a quick look at it as soon as it came out as have my colleagues. 
I ask the Minister through you Mr Assistant Speaker if this is such a big issue within the community—and it is—and if this is such flagship legislation for the Government why on earth he did not do what is normal: put it on the Table for 3 days and allow all members of Parliament to actually have a number of statutory days as they are entitled to to read and analyse the bill so that we could make a contribution on it. He says his own caucus has not even seen the legislation. I am sure Mr Borrows has a particular view about that. He will not articulate it tonight I am sure. 
The question is why the Minister dropped the bill on the Table with an hour’s notice unless he himself is not convinced that it will work unless there is something hidden in it that we do not know about—but that will be unveiled at the select committee; he can take my word for that—or unless it is a case of a rushed “tweak a bit here tweak a bit there” draft of a political pamphlet to try to convince the people that the Government is getting tough on crime as it did with the Bail Act when actually there is not a lot to this bill. The select committee will examine all those issues. 
I say to the Minister that he is making a habit of doing this. He has two other bills on the Table tonight—the DNA bill and the $50 an offence bill—that members of Parliament have been given no time to scrutinise. I think 60 minutes is what we have had. And we have to ask why that is if these are such critical issues to the community—and they are. Maybe the Government does not want the scrutiny but the public will get the chance to scrutinise the bill. We are assured of that because Opposition members will— 
Hon Dr Wayne Mapp 
: It’s going to a select committee. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: I am sorry I could not hear the interjection from “Paris Hilton” over there but he did interject on me. We on this side of the House will ensure that the public get the right to have input on this bill. 
The Minister talked about Labour’s record in Government. Well I will give the Minister a few statistics. In 2007 police made 6134 arrests of persons with identified gang connections and brought over 26000 charges against them. That was in 2007. 
The Minister said there are a number of complex issues in this bill. For instance he said there is complexity in many of the provisions. He said quite rightly that legislating for association is exceptionally difficult. Yet he will not give anybody any time within this House in this first reading to actually scrutinise it. One wonders whether he was drafting in the dead of night last night to try to cobble the bill together. This is not the way to make decent law. For urgency to be called on the first reading of a bill that is being sent to a select committee is quite remarkable and strange. 
I will give the Minister another couple of items on the last Government’s record in power. It was the Labour Government of course that was increasing prison sentence lengths for those belonging to criminal gangs and was improving police surveillance powers over those gangs through the Organised Crime (Penalties and Sentencing) Bill which was awaiting its second reading. It was when Labour was in power that the police announced that the Organised and Financial Crime Agency of New Zealand would receive 35 more staffing positions bringing it up to a total of 58. During the last parliamentary term 1250 additional police staff were added. The police now have 234 dedicated staff in organised crime units made up of 40 squads around New Zealand. The Minister might deride and try to put the boot in to the last Government’s record—I suppose that is his job as he sees it—but the increase in resources and staffing on the ground with 40 squads to deal with organised crime has had a real and practical effect. It is at the coalface not in this Chamber where one actually fights crime. 
In Government we introduced the Search and Surveillance Powers Bill to allow for more explicit powers for enforcement agencies to search computers and seize electronic data and streamlined examination orders for law enforcement agencies. We know that gangs are not what they were 20 or 30 years ago. In some cases the baseball bats have been replaced by computers cellphones and text messaging P and other drugs and the use of young people to traffic those drugs and substances. Through organised crime and money-laundering there are now more sophisticated ways to attempt to mask and dispose of those funds. 
I say to the Minister that we will be constructive in respect of this bill but he is getting a reputation. I invite him or one of his colleagues to give us an explanation. Somebody may correct me but I do not think there has been a Government or a Minister that has dropped more bills in the House with zero notice to members of Parliament—including now he tells us his own caucus. There have been three bills tonight and there were two before Christmas—that makes five. 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: His nickname used to be “Due Process”. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: Yes well he is a lawyer. I believe that he probably agrees with due process but I would be very interested to know— 
Sandra Goudie 
: We’ve got to catch up on 9 years—9 years of nothing. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: Ms Goudie is chair of the Law and Order Committee which this bill will proceed to. I would be very interested to get an explanation. I say to Mr Power that I think the House is owed an explanation as to why these bills have been dropped on all members of Parliament with zero notice. If he wants an Opposition to be constructive then he has to play the game and be fair and he has to allow for due process in this House. 
I conclude by saying that I agree that gangs as with all organised crime are a scourge on our society. I agree that if we can toughen up and use new measures then we should implement those as long as they work and are practical. Before Christmas my leader Annette King—the deputy leader—and I had interaction with the South Australian Government and we have been looking very carefully at its gang legislation. The Attorney-General of South Australia has worked for 3 years with the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General—which is the Commonwealth Attorney-General’s group—in formulating that anti-gang legislation. It appears from initial reports and from having talked to the Premier as recently as last week that it is working and working well. So we are looking at innovative ideas that have been developed very recently across the Tasman. 
I think even Mike Rann the Premier of South Australia and his Attorney-General whom I know well gave the Opposition in their Parliament the courtesy and respect of due process to examine that legislation which indeed is quite controversial in Australia. It deals very heavily with anti-association issues in that non-association orders can be put upon individuals who are in deemed organisations. 
We will support this bill but I say to the Minister that it would be nice and it would be appropriate to give members an explanation—and I am sure the community listening would also like an explanation—as to why these bills have been dropped on the Table with no notice.