Coddington Deborah: Land Transport (Unauthorised Street and Drag Racing) Amendment Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Coddington Deborah: Land Transport (Unauthorised Street and Drag Racing) Amendment Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:607;Page:4575] 
DEBORAH CODDINGTON (ACT NZ) 
: 
 We were questioned about the fact that the ACT party is opposed to this legislation. Let me reiterate that I am not at all opposed to the enforcement of legislation that already exists and that is what zero tolerance means. It means the enforcement of things that are already against the law. If people want to talk about support for the police why do they not talk about support for the police in terms of getting tough on bail conditions? What about support for the police in terms of getting tough on parole? 
We are hearing a lot of talk about the purpose of the bill being to outlaw things like as Stephen Franks said the perceived problem of wheel spinning and other stunts involving motor vehicles on the road. What on earth does that mean? “Other stunts involving motor vehicles on the road” is such a wide definition. It could mean absolutely anything. It could mean just driving along in a convertible with the top down singing and having a great time. That could be a stunt. It could be dressing up as a Father Christmas and putting one’s head out the car’s sunroof. That could be called a stunt. That is what I mean. This legislation is so loosely worded that it covers all sorts of people whom we classify as people whom we do not necessarily like whom we might not invite for dinner. We might not enjoy having people like boy racers or hoons or thugs on wheels to dinner but we should not herd them all into a category and then pass laws to ban their activities. 
With regard to getting tough on crime that already exists the National Party member talked about people being taken to court and being let off their fines. I agree with him that that is appalling; it is dreadful. Just a week ago a person in the Hawke’s Bay had $19000 worth of traffic fines wiped by the judge because he was unemployed and unable to pay the fines. Instead he was given 350 hours community service. That works out at $50 an hour. I would not mind a job like that. If we want to get tough on crime if we want to support the police we should be outraged at situations like that but the ACT party was the only party that commented on it. 
That is not the first time this has happened. Just recently a youth had $18000 worth of traffic fines wiped. What happened? He racked up another $6000 worth of traffic fines. As Stephen Franks said it is no wonder these people have an attitude of contempt of “up you” towards the police and towards society. They have been whacked on the back of the hand with a wet bus ticket and allowed to get away with it. Enforcing the law is all about upholding legislation—making sure people are accountable for their crimes and are held accountable. 
There is a difference between the powers to enforce legislation and having the resources to enforce legislation. A lot of people are confusing the two issues. Of course the police do not have the resources to enforce the legislation that we already have on our statute book. That is demonstrably shown every day. There is a severe shortage of front-line police in Auckland and all we need is four homicides in one area like south Auckland and the police cannot deal with other important urgent things that they need to send the target squad out to. 
If we are talking about increasing the powers of the police we should be talking about increasing the resources to the police and spending more of our taxpayers’ money on that. The State’s true and proper role is to uphold law uphold contract protect people’s property and protect their rights. It is not there to seize their property just because a police officer has reasonable grounds to believe that somebody has broken the law. Someone asked why it is not OK to do a burnout in a city suburb. Of course it is not OK to do a burnout in a city suburb. No one in this party is advocating that it is OK to do that.