Goff Phil: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
Goff Phil: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:640;Page:10424] 
Hon PHIL GOFF (Minister of Defence) 
: 
 There is a real trap that new members of Parliament fall into when they are given portfolio responsibilities they are not ready for and that is to knock the organisations they are spokespersons for. Here is Chester Borrows having spent many years in the police now taking cheap shots at the police and not just at the police hierarchy but in fact— 
Chester Borrows 
: Name one cheap shot. 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: He wants me to name one cheap shot. OK I have a cheap shot right in my hand here. It says: “Police recruiting more criminals” says Borrows. We recruited last year—[ 
Interruption 
] One thing about an ex-policeman is that he should know something about law and order and order in this House instead of shriek from his seat in the way he is. I want him to listen to what I am saying because then he has the right to reply if he chooses. 
Last year we recruited 773 people into the Police College. Twenty three of those people—2.9 percent—had been given diversion or a conviction. Of that 23 17 got diversion. Mr Borrows might want to tell the country that the police are busy recruiting criminals but I wonder whether Mr Borrows has looked at that list of 23. 
Let me give the member examples of what some of those people did. One recruit had been convicted of an assault. What had he done? He had confronted an offender who had burgled his house three times and he had hit him while waiting for the police to arrive after the offender laughed at him when he asked for his personal belongings back. That happened 11 years ago when the guy was 20 but Mr Borrows says that this man 11 years later is not a fit person to be recruited into the police. Then there is another case of a young student who had stolen a garden gnome one night after a pub crawl. Mr Borrows may be perfect and may not have done anything wrong in his long and prestigious history but I say that somebody who committed a minor offence like that 11 years ago— 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I am sorry to interrupt the Minister but the member on my left should look at Speakers’ rulings 58/4 and 59/1. You must not move to facilitate interjection. If you want to interject Mr Borrows you can go back to your own seat. 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: I could go through the full list of these 23. Here is one—this man when he was 16 broke off a car aerial. I do not condone that; I think that is a stupid irresponsible thing to do. He paid the price and did his diversion. But I do not believe that 11 or 12 years later that should be held against the man and that he should be told that on that ground and that ground alone he should not be recruited into the police. Here is another one. A person damaged a bus stop sign. He paid the damages and court costs. Yes he was convicted—he was one of seven who were convicted. Is that something that should be held against that man forever so that he can never join the police force when he has grown up and developed some maturity? 
I say that it is a cheap shot for Chester Borrows to label the police as recruiting criminals and to tar everybody with that brush when most of those 23 people received only diversion. They did stupid things because of their youth. So that was a cheap political shot. He asked for an example; I have given him an example. 
Chester Borrows 
: Tell us about the burglaries. 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: Now he talks about the burglaries. Where are the burglaries on this list? 
Chester Borrows 
: No because you haven’t disclosed them. 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: I can read the whole list. There are a couple of careless driving charges here. Somebody hit a child who ran in front of his car. Maybe we should hold that against that person forever. What Mr Borrows did was quite wrong. He saw a chance to score a political point or so he thought—a cheap shot. He is the man who came into this Chamber before the tea break and said that people would accuse him of defecating on the police force. I say he is absolutely right. That is all he has ever done since he came to this House in relation to the police force. If the member wants to be a spokesperson for the Opposition he should find the real issues and not make cheap shots. He should not invent things and pretend that the police are there recruiting criminals when the only evidence he can find is a small group of guys who when they were quite young—in their teens—did something wrong that should not be held against them forever. 
I say that the quality of the people we take into the police is at least as good as it was in the days when that member was recruited into the police force. I say that if the member is really worried about the quality of the police force he should look at some of the people like Brad Shipton who were recruited into the police force when National was in Government. 
Chester Borrows 
: Oh oh! 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: Yes I know—he is hopefully the exception and I will say that he is hopefully the exception. But I am telling the member that he should not smear those 773 young people who have come into the police force to do the best job they can for New Zealand. 
That member’s party of course voted against the clean-slate legislation because its members are all so perfect. They have never done anything wrong in their lives so they believe that if people make mistakes when they are young kids it should be held against them forever. That is simply a nonsense. I say that the quality of the people—[ 
Interruption 
] There he is Mr Chairman the man who wants to be responsible for holding up the principles of law and order. You have told him once he is not allowed to move seats to interject. He has done nothing but interject ever since you made that call on him Mr Chairman. 
Chester Borrows 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I have not moved seats in order to facilitate interjections. I was here to speak. I have not moved for any purpose other than to speak from this particular seat and I have not moved forward from here to facilitate interjection. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Thank you. I would like the member to look at the Speakers’ rulings I mentioned because although the member may have moved to that seat to speak there comes a time during any debate when that situation is passed over. The member has now completed his speaking rights in this debate and if he continues to interject then he can be seen to have moved to facilitate interjection. 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: I say that it is a very good thing that we are recruiting 1250 additional police officers to provide for the safety and security of New Zealanders. I say that that is a good thing and I contrast that with the actions of the National Government when Bill English was Treasurer. Contrary to the promise of giving 500 additional police officers National slashed nearly 400 police officers. That is National in action not National rhetoric in Opposition. National slashed the police force at that time and it made the most fundamental errors and caused the most wastage of public funding that anyone could imagine. 
I ask Mr Borrows whether he had an INCIS computer in his police station. Can he tell me what was achieved by that $132 million? The member talks about stab-proof vests that might not be the right colour but the National Party spent $132 million on a computer system that was 4 years overdue before it was scrapped and that $132 million was simply wasted public funds. It was money that should have gone into providing security for New Zealanders and it was wasted because of the sheer incompetence of the National Government Ministers of those days who made fundamental errors in what they did. 
I am very pleased that we now have a police force that is growing and that the worst accusation that an Opposition spokesperson can make is not that we are not recruiting more police officers but rather that 23 of those police officers when they were young committed minor infringements against the law. I think that accusation is pathetic. 
What has been achieved through the New Zealand police force is something that all New Zealanders should be proud of. Investment has been made in personnel. Investment has been made into equipment. Police cars are at least modern and not years out of date as they were under the National Government. When the judgment comes people will judge this Government’s actions and the increase in the number of police officers on the ground against the actions of the last National Government that slashed the police force broke its promises and arrogantly assumed that it could get away with that to its great cost. 
Vote agreed to.