Make your mind up

Police Minister Stuart Nash - some illegal checkpoints are fine, some aren't. Picture / Hawke's Bay Today

It would be churlish to have expected an absolutely flawless display by the government and its civil service over the last few weeks. Covid-19 and the lockdown have been a totally new experience for everyone, and it was inevitable that there would be some stumbles along the way as the people who lead us strived to minimise the danger to our collective health and damage to the economy that sustains us all.

It was inevitable too that there would be moments of confusion, as we adjusted to rules governing what we can and cannot do until the threat of mass infection is over, or at least less devastating than the experience of some other countries. We should forgive some of the more ridiculous restrictions, such as those prohibiting the maintenance of golf and bowling club greens, as long as common sense is allowed to prevail, with minimal delay.

The prohibiting of golf and bowling club maintenance cannot be said to have been lifted with minimal delay, but better late than never. And it seems that that decision has been reversed in time to avoid the potential demise of some clubs. The focus, somewhat belatedly, seems to be shifting from what is essential to what is safe.

Part of the problem, perhaps, in devising rules that will hopefully beat this virus, is that common sense, which is not always especially common, could not be factored in. It was never going to work if we were to be allowed to exercise our discretion; some people really do need black and white. Telling people they could go fishing, for example, providing they did so without running the risk of needing rescuing, was never going to work. Hence we should not bear grudges against those who some see as having needlessly removed some of our fundamental liberties. As long as they give them back.

The same goes for severely restricting travel. Anyone who climbs into their car and drives a significant distance poses no threat to themselves or anyone else, providing they don't leave the car until they get home, but allowing unlimited freedom would have been a shambles.

It is probably fair to assume, too, that the delaying of the easing of the Level 4 lockdown to Level 3 until midnight Monday was at least partly predicated on the fear that if travel and other restrictions were lifted before a long weekend, some people would have gone mad.

It's going to be hard enough to make some people understand that in many ways Level 3 isn't much different from Level 4 without offering what some would have seen as a free pass for Anzac weekend.

Even as the lockdown has been structured there has been confusion, however, partly no doubt thanks to variations in individual comprehension skills, but also in part thanks to confusion at the highest level. Too often those who have fronted the lockdown, including the Prime Minister and now former Police Commissioner Mike Bush, have been singing from different song sheets.

We saw another example of that on Tuesday, when Police Minister Stuart Nash stated his aversion for gangs setting up illegal roadblocks.

It might have escaped Mr Nash's attention that many New Zealanders, and opposition MPs, have been calling on him to put an end to illegal roadblocks, or checkpoints as they have come to be known, for weeks. Whatever the motivation, and whoever was setting up these checkpoints, they were, are, and will continue to be illegal. The Minister's estimation of the gang members who have now joined the campaign as "ratbags and renegades" is irrelevant.

Mr Nash displayed a strange degree of flexibility when he told Parliament's Epidemic Response Committee that the police would take roadblocks set up by those "ratbags and renegades," without the support of the local community or the police, very seriously. Presumably that means that the police role will now include some sort of character assessment of those who are manning the checkpoints. Perhaps they should be required to submit to the police vetting process that is now a non-negotiable requirement for those engaged in all sorts of roles involving contact with other people.

Alternatively, he could accept that illegal checkpoints have possibly contributed to preventing the spread of Covid-19 to some communities, and allow them to continue as a community response to unprecedented circumstances, or he could declare them all to be illegal, and have them dismantled. He can't have it both ways.

Mr Nash expressed his new-found distaste for 'community-led' checkpoints after Opposition MPs made him aware of an incident where an "older" man, who had set out to buy milk, had been stopped by a member of the Mongrel Mob. The man, who was reportedly very distressed, contacted his local MP, National's Anne Tolley, who said the man had complained to the police, but he had been left with the impression that they were saying they could do nothing about it.

Ms Tolley said she understood that people wanted to protect their communities, but people should have the basic right of passage. She was worried that if the situation was not not managed well, it could get out of hand.

The Minister's response was that "gang-run" roadblocks were not appropriate, but there were instances where it was okay for community groups and organisations to set up checkpoints, as long as they were working with the police, who, he added, were very keen to ensure that everyone was obeying the law, that communities were kept safe, and that people were held to account if they broke the rules. How on Earth does that square with the (almost) universally accepted fact that the stopping of traffic on any public road by any person or agency not specifically permitted by law to do so is illegal?

It might be of some consolation to add the rider that those who are setting up these checkpoints are being permitted to do so if they are working with the police, which seems to be the case in the Far North, but it is odd, is it not, that the Minister is prepared to allow an illegal activity in the process of upholding the law?

Perhaps we need a list of those who are acceptable to Mr Nash, who for all we know might regard Rotarians as ratbags and renegades, and another of those who are not. One assumes that the Mongrel Mob need not apply.

Given the Mob's well earned reputation, it would be a good idea for any of its members who now feel an overwhelming urge to protect people who they have hitherto treated with contempt, to leave their patches and other insignia at home, but that's not likely to happen.

It seems that Tai Tokerau Border Control, and others who have established checkpoints in the Far North, pass the Minister's character test, but this seems to be a very ad hoc way of doing things. The horse is clearly halfway out of the stable, and Mr Nash needs to shoo it back in or let it out completely. He needs to make his mind up.

By the way, it would be nice if someone could organise some PPE for staff at old folks' homes around the country. And tell us why it still hasn't been done.