Robertson Grant: Wanganui District Council (Prohibition of Gang Insignia) Bill — In Committee 
Robertson Grant: Wanganui District Council (Prohibition of Gang Insignia) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:653;Page:2122] 
GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central) 
: 
 It is a delight to speak very specifically to clause 5A “Signposting of specified places”. Earlier in the debate we discussed what a specified place is. A specified place “means a public place designated as a specified place for the purpose of this Act …”. In turn a public place as we have already discussed is “a place—that is under the control of the Council; and that is open to or being used by the public …”. It includes roads—and we have already heard from Metiria Turei tonight about the dangers of such a wide definition of a public place—and indeed any part of a public place controlled by the Wanganui District Council. We have in clause 5A specified places within the definition of public places— 
Sandra Goudie 
: Specified. 
GRANT ROBERTSON 
: I thank Mrs Goudie for her commentary. It is a very broad ambit for the Wanganui District Council and now it is asking what the specified places are. 
Clause 5A states that specified places have to be signposted. Well what do we in this Chamber think will become the badge of honour in any gang headquarters in the Wanganui District? It will be one of these signposts. The moment that gang members in Wanganui come across a place where there is a sign that states and directs that they cannot wear their gang patch the sign will automatically become a badge of honour. In fact I expect that many gangs around Wanganui will begin a contest to see who can get the greatest number of signposts. That is the problem with this bill: it creates a badge of honour for and increases the status and mana of gangs by making their patches something they can choose to use in competition with one another to show their pride in being a gang member. The signposts will just become an image of that. I can see that the Wanganui District Council will have to budget an enormous amount of money to constantly replace the signposts that will be torn down taken into gang headquarters right around the Wanganui area and used as badges of honour. 
The signposting of specified places really serves just to emphasise why this bill simply will not work. We have already said that the intent of the bill is a good one and Chester Borrows deserves to be congratulated on bringing the will of the Wanganui District Council to us today. But this particular clause shows us why this bill will not work. The very thing that the bill aims to do will be undermined because straight away the signposts will become badges of honour to be ripped down and away we go again. Under this well-intentioned but poorly-thought-out bill the Wanganui District Council and the good ratepayers of the Wanganui area will be forced to shell out time and time again for signposts. 
Subclause (2) states: “No prosecution … and no arrest or seizure under section 7 may be challenged on the ground that a notice was not affixed in accordance with subsection (1).” 
Paul Quinn 
: Problem dealt with. 
GRANT ROBERTSON 
: No I say to Mr Quinn that the problem is not dealt with. All that provision will do is increase the desire of the gangs to play cat and mouse with the police. 
Unfortunately none of this legislation will change the behaviour of those gangs. This bill is about reducing intimidation but the intimidation is committed by the people not the patch. Unfortunately in this symbolic and cosmetic bill this is the most cosmetic moment. The signposts will point gang members to where they can go to prove themselves. That will be where they can go to tear down a sign that tells them they cannot be in a place and to challenge the authority of the Wanganui District Council and the police. This clause is symbolic of the problem with this bill. 
I return briefly to the question of a specified place because I think this is the provision that Labour members are particularly concerned about. The Wanganui District Council will be making decisions about specified places on the basis of the wide definition of “public place”. We know where the specified places will be: they will be in the central city because we know that that area is partly behind the intent of this bill and we also know they will be in the rich areas. We definitely know that the poorer areas of Wanganui will not be places where this law will apply. We know that the gang problem will simply be shifted out of the central city area and into the poorer areas of the city. The notion of a specified place under this bill effectively shows the people of Wanganui which areas the Wanganui District Council cares about today and which other areas it does not mind the gang problem continuing in. 
Clause 5A should not be passed; it is in fact just a signpost for gangs.