Webb DuncanHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour—Christchurch Central): Kia ora Madam Chair. Thank you for that. Three things: one is the nature of these orders. The Minister the Hon Nicole McKee made a comparison of these and community detention or community-based sentences—home detention for example. I think it's really important just to ground this discussion in what this is. The Minister may want to comment on it and contradict me but if we can agree that this is a protective order and not a punitive one—it's not a sentence at all—it's quite unusual in that sense; it sits in this kind of grey area. All of the burdens of proof for example are the civil standard—on the balance of probabilities" not "beyond reasonable doubt"—which points to it being a civil order of some sort which is of a protective nature much more akin to a bail order than a home detention order. I think that's important because if we're starting to say that it's some sort of punitive order the whole complexion of this discussion changes because whilst these people have been convicted of an offence—that's one of the triggers—this isn't part of the punishment; it's just something put in place to make our community safer.That I guess brings me to my second two related points which is the kind of gang trigger. Under the Gangs Legislation Amendment Bill we had a long discussion and quite a useful one about what a gang was and tidying up that area of the law in some respects but we've got a couple of funny things going on. One is what an associate of a gang or organised criminal group is. The Parliamentary Counsel Office have done an amazing thing and they've said an associate of a gang is someone who associates with a gang which is just a mindless reordering of words to my mind. Now previously it said that it's not a mere acquaintance of a gang member which is meaningful because I can associate but not be associated in a criminal way; I could be a social worker associating with a gang for very important and pro-social purposes. But at the moment it looks like I'm a gang associate if I associate with a gang or organised criminal group and that's just too loose. So I'm really concerned. Once again it's about the breadth of this bill. We're doing something a little bit later on in the bill which we'll get to which is quite significant.The other one is: a member of a gang is someone who demonstrates affiliation with a gang by wearing gang insignia. We've talked about insignia in another forum. But my question essentially is this because you could have conceivably people who are wearing gang insignia but aren't actually affiliated. So is it simply the wearing of the gang insignia that makes them a gang member or do they actually have to be affiliated? It's almost presumptive evidence but not conclusive. So is the wearing of gang insignia absolutely conclusive that they're a gang member for the purpose of this Act or is it just evidence which is useful to prove that and which the judge can say "Well you're wearing it. You can't disprove it therefore you are a gang associate"—or a member? Actually that makes them a member of the gang.So the two questions really are: the nature of Firearms Prohibition Orders as being a civil and protective or criminal and punitive; and secondly what it means to be part of this gang—the associates question and the affiliation question."