VIDEO CAMERA SURVEILLANCE (TEMPORARY MEASURES) BILL

First Reading

Tuesday 27 September

TE URUROA FLAVELL (Māori Party—Waiariki)245FLAVELL, TE URUROA20:07:39TE URUROA FLAVELL (Māori Party—Waiariki):

Tēnā koe, Mr Assistant Speaker Robertson. Kia ora tātou e te Whare kua hui mai i tēnei pō.

I will start by saying to the Hon Rodney Hide that his speech was pretty much right on the money with regard to the Māori Party’s concerns about the Video Camera Surveillance Temporary Measures Bill, in all aspects of his kōrero. I do not wish to go back over it because, along with other speakers, he has placed the issues fairly and squarely in front of the Parliament of this land. What I do want to do though is add to the theme, in a sense, around the police and say that as a young fellow growing up I was always brought up to understand and believe that if we need a hand we go to the police. If we need some guidance we should head to the police.

We should give them the respect they are due. I have been out on the road a couple of times with the police and I give them full respect for the mahi they have to do. I have been out at night-time and in daytime, on shifts, and I do not envy their tasks at times. There are those in the field who are doing a great job of keeping the country going in a lawful way. There have been a few times when I have doubted the responsibility of the policemen and policewomen throughout the country, and one of them was a few years ago. A young boy by the name of Rawiri Falwasser I believe, in Whakatāne was held by the police. There was a big court case. It was found unfortunately that a number of police members had dealt to that young man in a way that should never have happened.

TE URUROA FLAVELL245 The second time—to cut out a long period of time—is basically that one day that is well written into New Zealand history in respect of the arrival of the police in the Ruātoki Valley. Following that, I was fortunate, with a colleague of mine, Mr Hone Harawira, to go to the streets of Whakatāne one day when they organised a hīkoi through Whakatāne. So I have heard from nannies with their tamariki who were still shaking after that moment in time—and we are talking a week or so after it. They were crying and showing their anger and despair at what happened. I have been with the people in Whakatāne on that hīkoi. I have heard a draft report back from the Human Rights Commission. I have been at Tūhoe Ahurei, which is the biggest festival gathering of Tūhoe people in the Ruātoki Valley on at least two occasions—because it is run every two years. I have heard haka. I have heard poi. I have heard whaikōrero, or speech-making on the marae, which concludes absolutely that Tūhoe will never, ever forget that occasion. I know that Tūhoe, even their young people, as recently as about two months or a month ago, at their competitions had that day in mind when they did their haka.

I know that Tūhoe talk about the confiscation line. I know that Tūhoe talk about the invasion of Maungapōhatu. I remember, and was there, on the day the Waitangi Tribunal arrived at the Ruātoki Valley on the back of a cart, when there were about 20 young men on horses at least, and at every point and stop all the way in to the Ruātoki Valley, the tribunal was reminded about what Tūhoe believe is their history and what has happened to them—things such as confiscation and invasion. So there is a history of mistrust of the police by the Tūhoe people, not just on the back of one occasion, but—on the back of the State, I suppose, in a sense—on the back of a number of occasions over time. What is worse is that since that time those people still hang in limbo—not the ones who are in court necessarily or who have been released or otherwise, but the people who actually had their doors either smashed over or knocked on, those families who had their tamariki strip-searched, and the families who had members taken to other areas of the Bay of Plenty and outside.

I will not talk about the Auckland ones because I did not hear anything from them; I heard from the Tūhoe people. I have not heard anyone say: “I am sorry.” I have not heard anybody say: “We got it wrong.” I am talking about those people who were hurt on that day, those ones who had nothing, absolutely nothing to do with it, but they still suffer 4 years down the line. Those are the ones I feel sorry for. They are the ones I think about Even the ones who lived in Whakatāne said that the police came round and now people did not talk to them. It is down to that sort of detail that people still hurt about what happened there. There are those still who are waiting to go to court. Sure, one or two have taken some liberties by going overseas—good on them—but for the rest, I just want to make a plea that tonight in this Parliament we think about those people. Against all that background of waiting for 4 years and what happened, one would understand that for the people of Tūhoe, as I say, their feelings about the police are not all that great.

Finally, to find out, about a month or so ago, that a number of them got off—10 to 12 of them got off—because the evidence did not stack up or whatever, would have had some people laughing. To finally get the outcome of the Supreme Court ruling really, in a sense, rubbed salt into the wound, especially when we have a statement from a judge of the court, Chief Justice *Sian Elias. She made a statement and said this: “Parliament has provided many statutory powers of entry, search and seizure, including for the interception of conversations. It has not however provided any authority for secret surveillance of the type undertaken here, despite having had the absence of such powers drawn to its attention”—a point made by Mr Hide, of successive Parliaments—“by the Court of Appeal and the Law Commission.” That is what she said. She continues on: “I consider that the police act unlawfully if they do not have specifically statutory authority for intruding upon personal freedom. The conclusion is compelled in my view both by the common law and by the terms of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act.

It also meets rule of law values of certainty and predictability.” So against all of that, one would understand that not just Tūhoe indeed, but Māori across the country, are looking sideways now at that whole relationship in respect of the police, indeed about how it could be that the police of all people could go ahead into an action that was unlawful, as Mr Hide says. Now, this bill, I think, cuts to the very core of some deeply held concerns within our community. Mr Hide outlined most of them, but we are talking about transparency, we are talking about accountability, we are definitely talking about trust, and ultimately even the notion of corruption. What really worried me was in an interview with the Police Association where the head of the association said something along the lines of “It wasn’t written down that we couldn’t do it, so we did it.” I mean, we are talking about the head of the Police Association and if that is the rationale for going ahead with actions by the police, we have some serious problems—we have some serious problems.

So I agree absolutely with Mr Hide on all the points about retrospectivity, looking back, and about the whole notion of the short time frames. We would have like to have a little bit more time to work out, because clearly it has been identified that there is an issue there. But under the circumstances, clearly it is not going to happen. But I can say, and it would not be too much news to anybody, that the Māori Party will be voting against this legislation. We are going too fast. We have to take our time to get it right. I understood in discussions with various people that there is a worry about those people who are still out there, and what happens with them. As I understood it, and I tried to get some clarity around it, police simply need to go to court to get permission to be able to go about the work that still lies there. I think the Minister in this afternoon’s question time outlined the difference between the two terms, which were—

Hon Christopher FinlaysonHon Christopher Finlayson254: Unlawfulness and unreasonableness.

TE URUROA FLAVELLTE URUROA FLAVELL245: I thank the member. I am not a lawyer, but I like to think that that authority should still stay within the court. Finally, there is the question of whether people will get off. There are four people still held under charges at this point in time, so that might suggest that those people can still be held over, and indeed those other people charged with crimes. It is not going to go away. We will fight this legislation all the way through. Kia ora.

© Scoop Media