'1000 police' argument in Parliament

The New Zealand First and Labour deputy leaders were forced into talks yesterday amid confusion over a post-election deal for 1000 more police.

NZ First deputy leader Peter Brown told the Herald he was in discussions with Labour deputy Michael Cullen over whether the provision in the parties' agreement to provide "1000 police staff" in the next three years meant "frontline" police officers, "sworn" officers or "non-sworn" staff.

The confusion is the first glitch in the confidence and supply agreement the parties signed last month.

Mr Brown said they hoped the problem would be sorted out by early next week.

"We have recognised there is some confusion. Dr Cullen and myself have identified that and it is being worked on."

Both Winston Peters and Helen Clark are out of the country, but, if necessary, will join in the discussions on their return. The "1000 police staff" provision is central to the confidence and supply agreement and one NZ First has been touting as a success of the negotiations.

But confusion has arisen over the meaning of "police staff".

NZ First appears to believe it means sworn frontline police, while Labour has been more ambiguous and has not said if the 1000 staff will be frontline, sworn, or non-sworn.

NZ First law and order spokesman Ron Mark said in Parliament two weeks ago that the party had successfully negotiated with the Labour-led Government for the "introduction of an extra 1000 frontline police".

The Herald tried to contact Mr Mark for clarification yesterday, but he did not return calls.

National Party law and order spokesman Simon Power asked Police Minister Annette King in Parliament last week how many of the extra police staff would be sworn, frontline police. Ms King said it was yet to be decided.