Mark Ron: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Mark Ron: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:618;Page:13974] 
9.  
RON MARK (NZ First) 
 to the  
Minister of Police 
: Is he confident that police staffing numbers are adequate; if so why? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Acting Minister of Police) 
: 
 Generally yes because there are record numbers of police officers crime rates continue to fall and New Zealand has a crime-resolution rate that is amongst the best in the world. Part of the improvement in resolution rates is due to using non-sworn specialist forensic evidence - gathering teams such as those traditionally used in serious crimes including murder for a much wider range of crime. 
Ron Mark 
: If the Minister is accepting that the police are so over-worked and under-staffed that they need to hire civilians to do police work—civilians who dress like police and drive police cars but who are not police—why does he not simply recruit more police? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I think the first and shorter answer is that there are more police being recruited. The second answer is that any sane person would not send two sworn officers to a crime scene when they could be out arresting criminals and when there could be someone who is a trained forensic expert picking up the material that is more likely to result in convictions. It would take a nutter to promote something else. 
Martin Gallagher 
: Further to the Minister’s answers to both the primary and supplementary questions what recent scientific advances are police using to solve more crime? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: Police use of new technology is making life harder for criminals although some people appear to want to be able to protect them. For example over 9000 samples have been added to the DNA database in the 12 months to March this year. Police now identify people from crime scenes where DNA is collected in nearly 50 percent of cases. There have also been 280000 palm prints added to the police computer-matching system with the projection that that will result in the resolution of from 7000 to 10000 cases. There are some people who are Neanderthals and who do not believe in that approach but this Government is tough on criminals—unlike members opposite. [ 
Interruption 
] 
Ron Mark 
: Even you Mr Speaker laughed at that answer. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I laughed at the fact that there was laughter on all sides. 
Ron Mark 
: Why does the Minister not accept that given the escalation in violent crime methamphetamine production immigrant crime and the number of dishonesty offences and emergency calls to communication centres rather than increasing the use of civilian staff he should just accept that the police are grossly under-staffed and commit to doubling the size of the police force—as New Zealand First would? 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Between 1999 and 2003 on a population basis overall the number of dishonesty offences fell by 9.2 percent of reported burglaries by 20.9 percent of car conversions by 14.2 percent of fraud cases by 13.2 percent of receiving cases by 9.6 percent and of sexual assaults by 14.5 percent. There are some people who would have police officers put their size 12 shoes all over crime scenes but some of us want the evidence collected. 
Peter Brown 
: Mr Speaker. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I ask Mr Brown whether this a supplementary question. 
Peter Brown 
: No it is not a supplementary question. I simply ask the Minister: what happened to violent crime—because he left that one out. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No. That was a supplementary question and of course it has to be counted as one by the member’s side because it is about an extra area. I will allow the member that supplementary question. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: The figure I have on assaults shows a falling of 3.1 percent. People will also be interested that given the very good work that police are doing out and about on the roads in April and May we had the lowest road toll for decades— 
Gerry Brownlee 
: Violent crime he said. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: Well it might be that Opposition members do not like the police stopping members of the Mongrel Mob and Black Power in their cars. Opposition members do not like that approach. They say that they want to set up— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: —the traffic cop service again— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: —but they are soft on crims— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: When I tell the Minister to sit down he sits down. He had his say and he went overboard. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. My colleague Peter Brown distinctly asked for the figures on violent crime. He got one snippet of that but a whole range of other violent crimes were left out. The Minister has provisioned himself with every fact in respect of his own answer that makes the Government look good. How about the facts that make the Government look as it really is—quite bad? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Let me say that the member asked a question and the Minister addressed it. 
Ron Mark 
: In light of the Minister’s comments I seek leave to table pages 18 and 19 of the Police statement of intent 2004-05 with the two graphs showing that since Labour came to Government crime in all categories has gone up. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave has been sought to table that. Is there any objection? There is. 
Ron Mark 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Whilst you were putting the leave the Minister of Finance and Deputy Prime Minister stated to the House that that statement of intent was fiction. If that is fiction then the Government has clearly misled the House. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I heard what was said. The word “conviction” not “fiction” was used. 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: Mr Mark was just questioning your statement in that respect. He was mouthing at you I think “incredible”—I think that that was the word he was using. He is in no position to question your statement in that regard which I can confirm in every respect. It never occurs to people to work it out that convictions can go up when crimes are going down if we are catching more crims and prosecuting them successfully. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I do not need any assistance. I heard the interjection which strictly speaking during a point of order was out of order. I heard the interjection; I put what the member asked. There was objection to it being tabled but the interjection certainly was not what the member said it was.