Keeping track of this Government’s policy preferences is giving me a sense of whiplash.
Over the past couple of days they yet again announced a crackdown on gangs. Patches will be banned in public, there will be the ability to issue dispersal notices and gang membership will be an aggravating feature in sentencing. The fact that the nature and extent of any connection between the offending and the offender’s participation in an organised criminal group is already an aggravating feature does not stop them from promising to make it one.
The gang patch ban is something they have been talking about for some time and last October they also announced that they would be banning gang insignia. Mark Mitchell also raised the possiblity of requiring gang members to wear makeup to cover facial tattoos, and to allow for warrantless search of gang members. I thought there could be an issue with this latter proposal. If Gang members are not wearing their patches how do the police know who they are allowed to search without warrant?
As I said previously when National was last in power they came up with a not dissimilar proposal which became the Prohibition of Gang Insignia in Government Premises Act 2013.
During the debate on the bill Andrew Little said this:
I appreciate the opportunity to speak on the Prohibition of Gang Insignia in Government Premises Bill and to add my voice to those who say this is a complete waste of our time. This is a bill for the inadequate and, frankly, the flaccid, and the armchair toughies who sit back in the comfort of places like this to talk at length about the horror of the gangs without actually wanting to do anything meaningful about it. This will do nothing. This does nothing. It is cosmetic. It is literally cosmetic. It is about dealing with the outward appearance of a gang member. It does nothing about the underlying issues and realities of gangs.”
His comments are just as relevant now.
I am sure that if enacted the legislation will find its way before the courts where it would be argued that these restrictions were in breach of rights of freedom of expression and that the restrictions could not be justified in a free and democratic society.
Because the Courts have already looked at a similar issue and held that a similar attempt by Whanganui District Council was too wide and a breach of the right to Freedom of expression. Like it or not freedom of expression affords considerable rights to be able to say and display what you want and like it or not gang patches are the same. When the High Court looked at the issue it decided the scope was too wide. Legilsators have to show that the restriction is the least amount required in the circumstances.
We already have patch bans in hospitals and courts. If the Government wanted to be more circumspect then a Bill of Rights consistent law may be possible, even if it is still a ridiculous waste of time, but it will have to be more limited in scope.
But clearly National do not care about this. They do not want a nuanced discussion about how far freedom of expression should be protected. They just want some frothing at the mouth from their base.
And you can see this by how many times in the past 2 years they have announced a getting tough on gangs policy. How about June 2022, December 2022 when Luxon wanted to ban South Auckland garages, during the election campaign, straight after the election when Mark Mitchell talked about Gang members applying makeup as well as not wearing their patches, or Luxon in his speech in the Address in Reply debate?
Never has so much noise been made about a nonsense policy that will achieve absolutely nothing.
The sense of whiplash has been caused by the announcement this morning by Nicole McKee that the Government is reviewing gun laws with the view of allowing semi automatic weapons back into the country so they can be used by competitive shooters. Clearly allowing shooters to relive their glory days in the services shooting at people is more important than preventing another mass shooting event.
McKee has been talking about wanting to achieve a sensible way of ensuring public safety. It is a shame that such thinking does not apply when gangs are being considered.
Powered by WPtouch Mobile Suite for WordPress