Paraone Pita: Manukau City Council (Control of Graffiti) Bill — Third Reading 
Paraone Pita: Manukau City Council (Control of Graffiti) Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:646;Page:15744] 
PITA PARAONE (NZ First) 
: 
 Tena koe Madam Assistant Speaker. Engari i mua i te haere tonu o tenei korero e tika ana kia tu tenei ki te tautoko i nga mihi i mihingia e etahi o tatou ki nga aitua i pa mai ki runga i etahi o nga whanau mai i taku hau kainga ara ko Pakuranga me Howick. Na reira koutou nga tauira ahakoa kua pa mai Te Ringa Kaha o Aitua ki runga i a koutou ka nui tenei te aroha te mihi hoki ki nga whanau. Kei runga i a koutou te kakahu taratara i tenei wa na reira e mihi tonu ki a koutou nga whanau. 
[An interpretation in English was given to the House.] 
[ 
Greetings to you Madam Assistant Speaker. But before I continue with this address it is appropriate that I rise in support of the condolences expressed by some of us in regard to the misfortunes suffered by some families in my locality of Pakuranga and Howick. So to you the students despite the fact that the mighty hand of misfortune has struck you there is much love and respect to the families. The barbed cloak is upon you at this time so a tribute to you in particular the families. 
]  
I am grateful for the opportunity to speak today to the third reading of the Manukau City Council (Control of Graffiti) Bill. First of all as I have always done during the course of the debate on this bill I declare a vested interest. I do so on the basis that I am a resident and a ratepayer of Manukau City so the consequences of the actions that this bill is all about in some way have an effect on me in terms of meeting the costs of removing the graffiti or the tagging as it is now commonly known. 
Graffiti has existed since ancient times with examples going back to ancient Greece and the Roman Empire. Graffiti can be anything from simple scratch marks to elaborate wall paintings. In modern times spray-paint and markers have become the most commonly used materials. In most countries defacing property with graffiti without the property owner’s consent is considered vandalism which is punishable by law and New Zealand is no exception. 
Sometimes graffiti is employed to communicate social and political messages. To some it is an art form worthy of display in galleries and exhibitions. The public generally frowns upon tags that deface bus stops trains buildings playgrounds and other public property and not least of all private property. The goal of taggers it seems is to have as many tags as possible. We have seen the level of graffiti reach epidemic proportions in Manukau City—hence the reason for this bill. 
People have commended a number of people for bringing this bill to this House. I want to commend especially the fortitude shown by the former Mayor of Manukau City Sir Barry Curtis and his council. But I also want to make the point that when they first initiated this particular kaupapa they notified every MP resident in Auckland at the time. But there was an exception and that exception is the present member on his feet. I recall during the first reading that I thought it was rather ironic that I seemed to be the only member other than the sponsor of this bill to be standing in support of it. However times have changed and obviously we will see this bill pass into law. 
New Zealand First has always called for more law and order and for that reason we give our support to this bill. We do not accept that tagging is a form of self-expression or art as some people would have us believe but rather it is a nuisance and a violation on private property and people’s lives. Time and time again it is ordinary New Zealanders who are expected to pick up the tab for antisocial behaviour. It affects not only property values but also the social well-being of those living in areas that are continually targeted. We have heard earlier speakers this afternoon refer to that. Graffiti once scrawled on walls in ancient Greece and Rome might have been considered art and have had historical significance but scrawled on someone’s garage or wall in Manukau City or any other city it is definitely vandalism and the perpetrators should be punished appropriately. 
Manukau City Council is one council that has decided to do something about this crime and I for one applaud it. As a consequence the Government announced in February a national strategy to fight tagging and graffiti vandalism. Some people might say that that is not a consequence of this bill but that is the view I have. I believe that the Manukau City Council (Control of Graffiti) Bill played a large part in the Government’s new strategy as the select committee hoped that the bill would be a catalyst for the implementation of a multifaceted national approach to graffiti. 
The purpose of this legislation is to minimise the graffiti problem in Manukau City to deter and penalise offenders and to provide the council and the police with additional powers to deal with graffiti-associated problems. The bill has been criticised for its inconsistencies with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act for being too piecemeal and for not being a national solution to this crime. Well the Government has seen sense and its Stop Tagging Our Place strategy shares similar penalties with those of the Manukau City bill. 
We in New Zealand First support this bill and welcome the hard-hitting approach taken by the Government in its national strategy. Just today the  
Dominion Post 
 has reported a story about a youth who has been locked up for 28 days for tagging and the judge in that case said that tagging was neither art nor culture but covert criminal behaviour. The previous speaker from ACT made reference to the fact that we already have legislation that could be applied. It seems to me that if the law is applied then the message the court has delivered to that particular offender perhaps will have some impact on those people who are considering making tagging or graffiti art a form of vandalism. 
New Zealand First welcomes this tough stance and commends the judge for taking this hard-line view. This case should send a clear message to other taggers and graffiti vandals that New Zealanders will no longer tolerate this criminal behaviour. The question now is whether other judges will follow suit and have the courage to reinforce this action. Apart from being an eyesore and a nuisance for those affected by this criminal behaviour graffiti and tagging are strongly associated with gangs. They are often used as a way of marking territory and therefore showing who is boss. Disaffected youth in lower socio-economic areas are likely to be drawn into this gang culture if graffiti is made to look cool and tough. A reason for this is that graffiti has become intertwined with and popularised by the hip-hop culture. Many kids are attracted to gangs because wrongly they see them as role models and a way out of their poor neighbourhoods. New Zealand First believes that gangs have become a blight on our society and should be outlawed. Certainly we view graffiti and tagging crime with the same disdain. 
I conclude by acknowledging the work of the member for Manurewa the Hon George Hawkins in bringing this bill to this House. The thing about this particular bill is that it comes to this House with every likelihood of its being passed against the recommendations of the select committee that considered it. I wonder whether in fact this is setting a precedent and giving some hope to those of us who bring bills as private members to reflect the demand the call of our constituents to have a bill put into law. In conclusion I reaffirm the position that New Zealand First will take on this bill; we will support it.