Cosgrove Clayton: Land Transport (Enforcement Powers) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Cosgrove Clayton: Land Transport (Enforcement Powers) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:658;Page:6971] 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Labour—Waimakariri) 
: 
 Tonight we have heard an interesting debate and a bit of jocularity which I suppose is not unhelpful in these circumstances but I will bring us back to earth a little bit by quoting the Police Association which made a submission on the Land Transport (Enforcement Powers) Amendment Bill. I agree with one thing that the previous genius of a speaker Tau Henare said; this is a serious issue even though he behaved like the local court jester. When making a submission before the select committee the Police Association said that between 2004 and 2008 illegal street racing was implicated in the following figures: 49 fatal crashes 160 serious-injury crashes and 376 minor-injury crashes resulting in 56 fatalities 247 serious injuries and 762 minor injuries. 
I note that when I introduced a bill on this issue Mr Garrett and his party dealt with their principles as that party always does—I think there was one other party but I particularly remember Mr Garrett’s party—and vehemently voted against it. As the debate goes on I will quote to him his former colleague Deborah Coddington but I will not waste a lot of time on that party. Its principles wave in the breeze like a piece of dry straw. I will say that I struggled with trying to assess the mentality of those people. One would think that after so many times of going out on a Friday night and coming back less one friend because he or she is dead or having lost a mate or mates because they are dead the average human being under normal circumstances would say as young people generally did with drunk-driving through Students Against Drunk Driving: “We’ve had a gutsful. This is silly. We’re losing too many friends.” At a very basic level one would think that that is what some of those people would do. 
I have heard people talk about civil liberties and I have heard the old tried-and-true arguments rolled out. Having been directly on the sharp end of behaviour by these people I say that in my view they do not reflect 95 or 99 percent of young people. They are a small but growing group who are intimidatory. Many of them like a bit of violence. I remember doing a live TV interview with a young guy called Hemi who was beatified by the Christchurch  
Press 
 because he wrote a few slick letters to the editor and everybody thought this young fellow was a genius. I believe that he was then done for violent crime. The police told me his rap sheet but he behaved as if he did not give a damn about anybody else including his mates. He took the view as many of these people do—reflecting badly therefore on young people per se—that it would not matter what we did whether by giving him facilities for free or passing any laws because he did not give a damn. 
In my own electorate Waimakariri I attended a meeting out at Mandeville with a really good group of people. Out there they had had 400 boy-racers or girl-racers call them what you will leering it up. A police senior sergeant Peter Cooper a fine gentleman was there and there were a couple of the hoons. They were two thugs. I was publicly criticised for calling them thugs. Well to hell with that; they were thugs and they are. A woman stood up and said that the night those guys came around—and they mostly were guys—leering it up kicking the letterboxes over and creating merry hell she was nursing her mum who has since died of cancer. That is a factual story. This woman asked this young guy a reasonable question. I paraphrase but she basically said “Come on mate fair go.” She said that it was a terrible night for her and that she did not need the leer up—I am using my words not hers—and she asked him what he thought of that. I will not repeat the four-letter word that was used in response to that but let me put it in more parliamentary language. He said “Well I don’t really give a damn.” 
If we think about the person we might hate in our lives the most or the person we think might be most disreputable in our lives I suspect even that person may have had a pang of guilt or compassion in that situation. But I have to say that some of these people do not. They are intimidators. They are violent. Some people call them hot-rodders and some call them hoons and say that we all did it generation to generation. Maybe that is true but these people are not car enthusiasts. I support car enthusiasts. Young people who were car enthusiasts came to me. They act legally putting a lot of dough into their cars—some people collect stamps. I do not have a problem with that. They act legally showing off to their mates and parking the car across the road but acting legally. I support them in their hobby; it is a good thing. But let us be very very clear that people have died violent acts have occurred as perpetrated against the police and innocent folk and we in the Opposition support acts by this Government against that behaviour. 
I will show the Government the same courtesy that some of its members showed me—I think Gerry Brownlee was one—when I tried to do my bit. I said it was not a utopia and that the legislation I was introducing was not a silver bullet but I was the only person in this House including members of the Opposition of the time who brought legislation on this as a private member to this Chamber in 9 years. Members opposite criticised me for years after but they never got up and brought legislation as a member’s bill. Of course Stephen Joyce was not in the House then but neither the current Minister of Police nor others got up and said “Cosgrove we do not think it is working we will put our own legislation up.” They never did that. In this robust way I ask them to reflect on some of those issues. 
We will not vote against this bill. We will show the same courtesy that I was shown but I say to the Opposition— 
Hon Judith Collins 
: We are not the Opposition. We are the Government. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: I say to the Government that is and I will say it in greater terms in the debate on the companion legislation that although Government members are concerned about the parliamentary niceties people out there are concerned about the substance. 
I say to Government members that I do not think this bill will have the effect they intend. If the Government had brought this bill and the companion legislation in a mild way to this House and said that in its best endeavours it wanted to do something then OK we would have had a closer look at it. There has been a lot of hot air. I am not allowed to use the word “crusher” in conjunction with the name of a member of this House so I will not. Although the testosterone has flowed although it will be all on once these bills are passed and although a certain Minister considers this legislation a cause celebre for her we will see. 
There are problems in respect of the definition of “cruising”. I know some commentators have said that cruising is called “trying to find a park in Christchurch”. Looking at the definition we could argue that it defines a vintage car club. I do not know how the police will enforce that and I suspect that a boy or girl racer may well test that particular definition in a court and a court through case law will be required to rule on it. When I passed my bill I thought that some little smart person would have a go— 
Hon Judith Collins 
: You didn’t pass your bill; Parliament did. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: —my Government passed it I say to the Minister—test the law and a judge would weaken it. I was thankful that they did not. 
Hon Judith Collins 
: We helped you. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: Now the Minister is taking credit for our legislation as well. That Minister is good I must say. 
Hon Judith Collins 
: I know she is. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: “I know she is.” the Minister says. That woman is a legend in her own lifetime. She is so good. What is the old saying that Shane Jones says? A kumara does not say how sweet it is. Well my word that Minister says she is full of sugar; she is full of it. We know that. I look forward to the next bill but I say that we will allow this bill to go through because we believe it is worth a crack to try to sort this issue out. 
Looking at what has been put up I say that I like the demerit point stuff. I think that has merit—excuse the pun. There are a number of provisions that are catered for in existing legislation but we will not stand in the way of those who wish to pass the legislation. I argue that this bill and the companion legislation are more about sloganeering about being seen to be tough and about winning a headline than they are about the substance of the issue. That is less so in the case of this bill than in the next bill the Vehicle Confiscation and Seizure Bill that we will address. It is less about substance and more about desperation on the part of a certain Minister to be seen as “tougher than tough” as I think she said in the article in  
North and South.  
I invite members to read it. 
Hon Judith Collins 
: Oh you’ve read it! 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: Oh yes I read it. It was another eye-opener into how modest that Minister is. I have to say that that Minister makes Tim Groser look quite modest in many respects. 
This is a serious issue. I know people in Christchurch and I say to Mr Bennett that he should get a life. He should go and walk through the crowds in Christchurch like I and other politicians have. I do not think the kids in Christchurch are much different from those in Auckland. David Bennett orbits a different stratosphere from most of us but I tell the member that this is a serious issue. It is a serious issue in Hamilton where I launched the bill that we passed. It is a serious issue in Auckland and Christchurch. It goes beyond nuisance. It goes beyond physical intimidation to violence and sadly as the police has said to the worst of all consequences: young people and other people dying on the roads.