Benson-Pope David: Policing Bill — In Committee 
Benson-Pope David: Policing Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:649;Page:17919] 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE (Labour—Dunedin South) 
: 
 I will take a brief call because unlike the previous speaker I think common sense has prevailed on the issue. In general the discussion by the Law and Order Committee and the public process around this bill was a commendable process. I think that many select committees and many agencies of the Government in the community would be well advised to follow that process in terms of how this really substantial legislation was put together and consulted on in the community. Indeed if people were to follow the same process used in this comparatively small but important matter then that would also be the case. 
I am interested to note there are two matters in respect of the clause under discussion which the Opposition tellingly has not referred to. The first has been alluded to by the Minister but is in fact the argument made by legal professionals including academics. The argument was very strongly made and was echoed by the Legislation Advisory Committee. They said it was most important that we make decisions on the basis of legal and constitutional principle and they argued for the separation of powers between those who make laws and by-laws and those who enforce them. 
It is true to say that what has been alluded to by Opposition speakers is the fact that this issue has ebbed and flowed a little and that is often the way it should be. The views of the select committee as far as I could tell as a member of that committee were not fixed during hearings and that is also as that should be. I cannot say on behalf of the National members on the committee what their response was to the eminent academics who argued around this important constitutional principle but I happen to take that point. 
The other issue that is germane in this respect and has not been mentioned relates to the huge change that has taken place in local government in this country in the last 15 or 20 years in particular. Local government now is not the creature that many people remember it was two decades ago. The powers and breadth of activity and involvement of local government—as indeed some of the members of Opposition are only too aware—have increased immensely and given that change it is an entirely sensible and principled position to take the decision that is reflected in the Government’s position and the Minister’s Supplementary Order Paper. 
Equally like people in this House or others in the community who previously have been involved as an elected member in local government I welcome the involvement of all members of the community in the activity of local government. But if as Mr Borrows would have it it is a matter of people on the ground giving good advice to elected members or to councillors then I say that that is available anyway. I had better not go into whether that advice was any good in respect of some of the recent policing decisions in Dunedin but we could discuss that at another time! That advice and front-line experience is of course available on a contracted basis or otherwise at all times to local government. 
I think the decision to encourage continued involvement at community board level—where there is a much less likelihood of conflict of any kind or a much less likelihood it would be more difficult to avoid—and also the grandparenting of the involvement and services of those people who are currently involved in this way is a fair decision. I am somewhat saddened that the National Party has taken no notice of or made no comment on the very powerful legal argument about the separation of powers that needs to happen given the changing environment in this country—particularly the changing environment in local government—in the context of such a substantial rewrite of policing law.