Jones Shane: Gangs and Organised Crime Bill — Second Reading 
Jones Shane: Gangs and Organised Crime Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:657;Page:6297] 
Hon SHANE JONES (Labour) 
: 
 Kia ora ano tatou e te Kaihautu o te Whare. Te tuatahi kei te tautoko te Ropu Reipa i tenei pire. 
[An interpretation in English was given to the House.] 
[ 
Greetings to us once again Mr Deputy Speaker of the House. In the first instance the Labour Party supports this bill 
.]  
First I wanted to greet you Mr Deputy Speaker in te reo Maori and make sure that every single Maori voter in New Zealand with all their relations knows that Labour opposes gangs and supports the Gangs and Organised Crime Bill. We have heard from the Government of the day supported by the Maori Party and the ACT Party about the issue of gangs but the Government of the day has not told us that if it had wanted to act expeditiously on gangs then all it really needed to do was pass the bill entitled the Organised Crime (Penalties and Sentencing) Bill which has already been through the select committee process. That bill effects the same purpose as the Organised Crime (Penalties and Sentencing) Bill and has already been through an exhaustive set of deliberations but because of short-term petty politics the Government of the day chose not to join with this side of the House and work on that particular legislation. 
We have come to expect politics loud voices apologists and extremists over the gang questions. We have heard from the ACT Party an extreme view and we have heard from the Maori Party the predicable apologetic view. Labour will support the Gangs and Organised Crime Bill because gangs are a menace to the families daughters and sons of the communities gangs infest. Those people will never take a blind bit of notice of the sad apologies from the Maori Party or the declamations of the ACT Party and they know that the National Party is simply hyping up the issue as it is with Michael Laws. They know that it is only ringa kaha only the strong arm—hopefully countenanced by the House—that will make them change their behaviour if they are associated with individuals who profit not only from menacing individual relatives but from threats intimidation thuggery violence and murder—for example the murder of the policeman who was killed in South Auckland when he was trying to do something quite lawful and plant a device to track down those involved in the P trade. That particular incident became a trophy to the gang culture. That particular incident did not bring any shame into the minds of those who killed the policeman; it has actually been exploited by them as a recruitment device. 
Every single thing that we as parliamentarians can do to make gang members’ lives miserable we should agree to because their stock-in-trade their raison d’être is to make their neighbours communities schools and clubs a source of money-making mayhem thuggery and violence. We must not shy away from the reason why such people exist. They exist because while the vast majority of us are soldiering on in “Strugglers’ Gully”—trying to earn a living; maintain our various lifestyles; and care for families partners parents and grandparents—they have another approach. They want to be on “Easy Street” and when they are caught out they will serve up innocent wandering and unsuspecting families as sacrificial lambs. 
The reason why the association test in the bill is fantastic is that the very people who lie behind the gangs use every trick in the book to ensure that they escape from either detection scrutiny or accountability. At the end of the day it is only the police working with the community who can stop this rot. The onus will be on the police to use their resources wisely break down gang associations and take no prisoners. They should not bother going to Khandallah to belt students in the back of the neck so they end up with a brace when just 15 minutes down the road gang-related people are either cooking P distributing P or boasting about how rich they are getting from their P trade. The police themselves need to be absolutely dedicated to using wisely the amount of resources they have to give effect to legislation such as the bill. 
Some in the Labour Party and our leader with a host of others have recently been over to South Australia. Despite congenital differences we can learn quite a bit from the Aussies. South Australia has taken a hard line on gangs. Admittedly their approach has been tested in the courts as going a step too far and being an invasion of liberties but people cannot enjoy the rights of citizenship unless they are going to observe some of its obligations and duties. The only duty that gang members have is to make our lives a misery. The only right they recognise is the unfettered ability to carry on their illicit trade. 
The fear we have on this side of the House—and I certainly have this fear—is that the Maori community will think as they listen to the Maori Party that bills of this nature are a punitive response directed disproportionately at Maori or perhaps Pacific Island families. The bill is colour-blind. The bill is dedicated to rooting out irrespective of ethnicity gangs’ criminal murdering and villainous ways and if there is any doubt as to just how frightened people are one needs only to wander around the provincial cities and communities and quietly talk to people about what they really think about gangs. People can trust only the police to address the problem and we as MPs have an obligation to back the police provided that they themselves are using the resources wisely. 
As I wind up my speech I will isolate some of the things that Labour has been involved in over more recent times in terms of trying to bring the gang scourge to a head. I am referring to 6134 arrests and 26000 charges. There was such a sustained effort to highlight the issue over that period of time that the police were very busy. But has the effort actually changed the behaviour of people who flock like locusts to the gang community? No unfortunately not. Admittedly the families who are under threat feel empowered. 
The bill serves further notice on advisers if not individuals that once gang members have wealth irrespective of how ill-gotten it is the first thing they do is get a QC and a couple of other flash lawyers bamboozle the High Court and the District Court judges and stretch the resources the police have at their disposal to run a decent case. The bill changes the evidential standards that will be required to be met by the police in trying to bring cases to a head. 
I know that there are a host of rationalisations as to how different pockets of the community are disproportionately afflicted by the gang culture. But with every day that goes by that culture spawns a new generation of young people who do not look to Corporal Apiata Buck Shelford or Temepara George as their role models; they look to Mossy Hines who now joins his ancestors in Hawaiki no doubt making Horowhenua a safer place. They do not look to those heroes who are better role models for our rangatahi; unfortunately they are condemned to look at the faces of menace disharmony and quite frankly violence. 
It might be said that the association test could cause people to get wrapped up in a drag and I have no doubt in my mind that there will be the occasional case where such egregious errors come to pass. But at the end of the day if people focus on the wrongdoing and the characters who are perpetuating the wrongdoing then the bill will serve a great purpose. Kia ora tatou.