Police Minister Mark Mitchell is defending the need to make another late amendment to the anti-gang legislation. Photo / Marty Melville
Police Minister Mark Mitchell is defending the need to make another late amendment to the anti-gang legislation. Photo / Marty Melville
Police Minister Mark Mitchell accepts the rushed, last-minute amendment to anti-gang legislation wasn’t ideal but he maintains it’s an important part of the Government’s efforts to reduce the public intimidation gangs cause.
The proposed legislation that includes the ban on displaying gang patches in public isset to go before the House today. MPs are expected to debate two last-minute amendments in the morning before the bill goes through its third reading.
It comes as Prime Minister Christopher Luxon is expected to continue his focus on law and order today after he celebrated the reduction of serious assaults in Auckland’s CBD.
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon is expected to continue his focus on law and order today. Photo / Alex Burton
Yesterday, the Herald revealed an amendment would be added to change the definition of a “public place” to include gang insignia displayed inside a private vehicle which is visible to the public.
It would effectively mean insignia inside a car would be treated the same as a patch worn by a person.
On Tuesday, Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith said there had been some debate about whether gang insignia being displayed from a car would be covered by the ban.
“We decided to clarify and make sure it was covered completely.”
It was the second late change to the law – the Government had also added powers that would allow police to search someone’s home for gang insignia if they breached the ban three times within five years.
Mitchell yesterday explained the addition relating to cars came about as police discussed how the ban could be enforced.
“When they actually looked at the law, it wasn’t clear whether or not a gang member could wear the patch inside a vehicle in a public place ... so we wanted to clarify 100%.”
Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith is comfortable with how the amendments were made. Photo / Mark Mitchell
He dismissed the suggestion the amendment was needed because the ban was complex to enforce.
“We could have just left the legislation like it was, but we felt that it may have been challenged and we wanted to avoid that.”
He accepted the way the amendments were added wasn’t ideal but argued it was necessary.
“We explained it and said, ‘Look, we could run with it the way it is, but this is the risk, [it] might be fine’.
“We don’t want to risk that, we want to make sure that it’s absolutely watertight.”
Goldsmith yesterday acknowledged the change was “very late in the piece”, but didn’t believe the bill needed to be sent back to the select committee phase.
He was also not concerned Attorney General Judith Collins had not assessed the updated bill for possible breaches of the Bill of Rights Act. Collins found the bill prior to the amendments did not align with some aspects of the Bill of Rights.
Goldsmith confirmed police had initially proposed specific search powers relating to private homes that Cabinet had not agreed to. Cabinet later agreed to the first of the late amendments concerning repeat offenders of the ban.
The ban on gang insignia was part of a suite of anti-gang measures that included giving police the power to disperse gang members from public places, and non-consorting orders banning certain gang members from associating with each other.
Adam Pearse is a political reporter in the NZ Herald Press Gallery team, based at Parliament. He has worked for NZME since 2018, covering sport and health for the Northern Advocate in Whangārei before moving to the NZ Herald in Auckland, covering Covid-19 and crime.
