Xu-Nan LawrenceDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green): Thank you Mr Chair. I don't know I feel like one of the reasons we kind of go back to all of these points—I just want to clarify for the Minister of Justice that it is because we have yet to get proper clarification from the Minister to answer some of these questions because the Minister kind of goes back and talks about what colour people are wearing as opposed to kind of addressing some of the questions.But just picking up on a couple of things the Minister said—before I go into my question as well—the Minister mentioned before in terms of greater authority for the District Court. I would like to just clarify to the Minister that it is not greater authority. The principle of comity states that it is already the rights of courts to be independent and for the judiciary and for the legislature not to impede on the independence of the judiciary. So I think that very much addresses what the Hon Doctor Duncan Webb before mentioned in terms of clause 8(a) on why do we need to mandate the court to do certain things which is one of the very core principles of law and the separation of power.Now when we are looking at one of the things that was also mentioned before by my colleague Hūhana Lyndon around knowing and if a parent is with a child—I think I'm more interested in knowing in terms of the impact that it will have on tamariki on the children when the family is being approached by the police. Again it's something that could happen because the police and the constable are within their right to go and identify if someone is wearing gang insignia.I want to again go back to the regulatory impact statement page 32 where it says People indirectly impacted by the prohibition of the gang insignia" And it states that the impact is high where there's an indirect impact on children and whānau of the person subject to arrest or court proceeding or even in this particular case I would extend it to the identification of the insignia. So I just wanted to know from the Minister if that has been a consideration and what kind of cultural competency training that the police—for their own wellbeing as well as the wellbeing of people they approach—will need to undertake in order for something to be properly and appropriately implemented.Now the question I have to the Minister goes back to my earlier question around clause 7(2) where I still haven't got a clarification from the Minister on whether the six-month term of imprisonment or fine not exceeding $5000—where did that sort of come from and what are some of the proportionality tests that have been conducted to determine those two particular convictions and whether they are going to be a part of the three-strike legislation later on as one of their strikes.But I want to extend on that to talk about a few other things. First of all how does this interact with the Sentencing Act? The first thing is in the context of what happens if the gang member is someone who is under the age of 18? What sort of precautions are there around that in terms of potential charges or potential sentencing? The second question I have around that is in terms of the definition of who is eligible for home detention under the Sentencing Act which suggests someone who has an imprisonment rate of less than 12 months. And in this particular case if the prison rate is six months does that mean that then the person is also entitled to potentially—I mean this is obviously up to the court because the court has independence in terms of what the judges may rule. But in terms of that I wondered if there's any modelling that's been done in terms of the potential impact it will have to the Department of Corrections around the way that they are able to monitor.Now the third part of my question comes down around what is again on page 32 of the regulatory impact statement—and this is still to do with the conviction and sentencing and fine—where it says for the Department of Correction the impact is slow "We expect most convictions will result in a fine (rather than a sentence such as imprisonment or community work)." If there is an expectation that most will be result in a fine why do we need to have a fine or sentencing? What is the rationale of having both of those sort of things?So I have three questions for the Minister in terms of clause 7(2). What happens if the gang member is under 18? Is there going to be any modelling being done around eligibility or resources that will be required for home detention if they have been sentenced? And have any considerations been given in terms of the proportionality around six months or the fine of $5000?"