Collins Judith: Vehicle Confiscation and Seizure Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Collins Judith: Vehicle Confiscation and Seizure Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 20 October 2009. Volume:658;Page:7256. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Police) 
: 
 I remind the member who has just resumed his seat and who is a new member Brendon Burns that the Supplementary Order Paper to which he refers was voted out last night. We are not debating it this morning. We are debating Part 2 of the Vehicle Confiscation and Seizure Bill. 
I will refer to a couple of main points in Part 2. There has been some discussion this morning about why warnings are to be given to people who have an interest in a car and why these cars are not simply seized and sold. That provision deals with the fact that some of the interests in the cars are those of finance companies banks and parents. When we are putting in place legislation like this which can be considered quite Draconian from some people’s points of view we need to have a balance of interests. There is no point having legislation that people do not believe is fair. We have one of the best police forces in the world. The New Zealand Police is in my opinion almost the best in the world if not the best. One of the reasons why the police have one of the most fantastic success records in terms of public confidence—and I saw just yesterday a release about yet another new high of public confidence in the police—is that the public expects the New Zealand Police to act fairly and within the law. It is very important when we are taking away nana’s car mum’s car or a finance company - owned car that we act fairly. 
I actually believe it is very important that a finance company knows exactly what is going on with its security so that when it gets its first written warning about what is being done with the car over which it has security and which it has lent a lot of money to secure it can take action. The company understands that when a car is lost—it is gone it is sold or it is crushed—it has lost its security. I believe that finance companies will start taking action. Certainly when I was growing up and when a lot of people in this Chamber were growing up young people could not get new cars. They could not borrow from finance companies to buy cars because basically those companies were much tougher about the ways in which they lent. Over the last 10 years or so there has been a great loosening up in that lending and one of the results has been that a lot of very high-powered cars have been sold to people who cannot control them or their own behaviour unfortunately. 
There has been a lot of talk about how much crushing there will be. Actually the point of the bill is stopping the behaviour. For a party that says it is opposed to the crushing part of the bill yet says it is opposed to the bill because it is not tough enough I think Labour really needs to get its rhetoric right. This bill is actually not about me. It is not about photo opportunities. It is actually about trying to take some action that means something because the previous Government despite its very best efforts frankly could not put a bill together on this issue that had any standing at all. 
One of the reasons that the judges do not under the current legislation use confiscation and surrender of vehicles as much as was expected is that the legislation has every sort of loophole available. Frankly judges have to be able to apply the law as presented by Parliament. We have made it perfectly plain in this legislation that we expect that the judges will apply the law because that is what they do. We are giving judges discretion in terms of what happens to the cars of the worst recidivist offenders. If judges feel that they cannot use that discretion we would like to know why. I actually think that judges will use it. We have to get the law right. We have always said that this legislation will not be a silver bullet. But it is a vast improvement on the previous Government’s pathetic attempt which I have to say anybody with a law degree could have seen had loopholes right through it. It was very very difficult legislation. Of course one has to give the previous Government credit for at least trying but it did not try hard enough. 
Part 2 of the bill I believe will deal with the issue of people who sell their cars before the court has been able to take action and confiscate them. That is one of the big loopholes. On the subject of what happens when people’s cars are put up for auction I have some news for Mr Burns. When one buys a car at auction one pays whatever is the highest price bid. That is how an auction works. People do not actually turn up to an auction and say that because a car is worth $20000 they are going to pay $20000. I tell Mr Burns that what happens at an auction is that a car might be worth $20000 but if the highest bid is $300 that is what is paid for it. That is how it works in the real world. I know that is not something that members opposite have a lot of experience in but that is what happens. 
As for the question about where the evidence is that boy racers send their friends along to buy up a car at $250 or $300 I ask the member why he does not ask the police when he is strutting around police stations. That is what they say. The police in Canterbury tell me that that is exactly what happens. When Sergeant Nigel Armstrong was attacked by boy racers earlier this year I went down to Christchurch and I asked them there why this behaviour was still going on. The police said that the boy racers’ mates turn up at the auction they buy the cars for $250 or $300 and they are laughing. The police say that they are laughing at them. They are laughing at the previous legislation. This part of the bill is one of the steps that we are taking to close that loophole. If they want to keep laughing they will end up with their cars crushed frankly. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: 10 a year—10 people. 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: The member calls out “10 a year”. Actually I hope that they get the message that we mean business and hopefully they will stop their behaviour. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: You said all the cars would be crushed. You said that all the cars would go to the crusher. 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: Unfortunately Mr Cosgrove consistently makes up these things in the Chamber. Frankly we know that the cars will be closer to the crusher. Mr Cosgrove really needs to consider that he has been so mean-spirited all year about this legislation asking earlier this year what will happen to poor grandad’s car. Now he is suddenly asking why we are giving grandad a chance to take some action about his grandchild. On one hand he said that we should not have the cars crushed because it is Draconian. Now he is complaining that we are crushing only 10. Well for goodness’ sake Mr Cosgrove really needs to get with the programme and understand that the people of Waimakariri who almost voted him out last time will definitely do it next time. 
It is very very important that we focus on behaviour. This is about public safety. It is not about media opportunities; it is about public safety. When those people decided to take on the New Zealand Police this year to threaten them and to shoot at them they took on more than they ever bargained for. This Government supports the New Zealand Police and it supports the law-abiding people of New Zealand. This Government will not stand by and say that it is all too hard and we cannot do it which is what the previous Government did .