Bridges Simon: Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Bill — In Committee 
Bridges Simon: Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:652;Page:1824] 
SIMON BRIDGES (National—Tauranga) 
: 
 It is good to take a call at this stage of the progress of the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Bill and to speak on Part 1 and on the purposes of the bill. I agree with the Hon Clayton Cosgrove that really its purposes are summed up by the words “Crime does not pay and it should not pay.” I also agree with the member that gangs these days are no longer just the gangs that we see wearing patches or the gangs that we talked about when we debated the Wanganui District Council (Prohibition of Gang Insignia) Bill. They are often much more sophisticated than that and it is important that we have a strong response to those gangs as we do through this bill. 
Where I suppose I part company from the Hon Clayton Cosgrove is that although Labour has talked the talk on this issue it was sad to see that in 2005 and the years following it the previous Labour Government did not walk the walk. I note that at the election in 2005 the previous Government promised to pass into law a civil forfeiture regime to allow gangs to be stripped of the proceeds of crime. It did not do that; the bill languished on the Order Paper. Over Labour’s time in Government we had a situation where in fact although crime went up the proceeds of crime that were seized went down. Since 2002-03 the total value of proceeds that were seized was one-third of what it had been dropping from $3.6 million to $1 million and at the same time the average value of each seizure dropped from $183000 to approximately $24000. That was a shame indeed when anecdotally any police officer or prosecutor on the street could tell us that the amount of crime committed by gangs and in relation to P has gone up. So it is a shame that this bill has languished but it is here now. It is good to see that the Opposition is in support of the bill. 
I say to the Committee that the law on the proceeds of crime has been seen as a bit of a poor cousin in the criminal law arena. It should not have been; it is vitally important that we do more than send a message but actually make sure that crime does not pay. That is vital in the war on gangs and P. As I said at the first reading of this bill it is quite clear to me—and a case in Mount Maunganui in my home electorate made this clear when police swooped in over Christmas time and seized multimillion dollars worth of ingredients for the illicit manufacture of P—that the money that can be made in crime really does go not just into one or two million dollars but into tens of million dollars. As I said I agree with the Hon Clayton Cosgrove that as the criminals and the gangs have become more sophisticated then so must we. This bill here does that. It hurts the gangs to take their assets—not just to lock the gang members up but to make sure their Harley Davidsons their motorbikes and so on are taken. This bill goes towards that. 
What does this bill and Part 1 achieve? As the Hon Clayton Cosgrove said it repeals effectively parts of the confiscation regime we had previously whereby it was only when we had the owner convicted that we would see the proceeds of crime seized. 
Progress reported. 
Report adopted.