7. SIMON POWER (National—Rangitikei) Link to this
to the Minister of Police
Does she stand by her statement that “You and I expect police to come straight away to us but there are some things with lower priority.”; if so, which crimes does she consider to be of lower priority for police investigation?
Hon ANNETTE KING (Minister of Police) Link to this
Yes, because the police have always prioritised incidents. New Zealanders expect the police to respond as quickly as possible to all incidents, but inevitably they have to give priority to the most urgent cases.
Why has crime been prioritised in the way set out in the Auckland district Investigations: Management Plan, whereby responding to ministerial correspondence is a mandatory priority but homicide and child abuse are lower priorities?
The police will always make homicide and child abuse a high priority indeed. However, they are required to respond to inane questions that come from the Opposition week after week, and if any blame needs to be sheeted home, I suggest it go to the Opposition, and maybe its members would like to stop asking such stupid questions.
Rodney HideI raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. The Minister is required to address the question. We heard a fair bit of bluff and bluster about the fact that the police respond to homicide etc., but the Minister of Police never addressed the question, which was why—not once. For question time to work, I suggest that Ministers must actually address the question that is asked.
Madam SPEAKERRuling on the point of order, I listened very carefully to the answer. The Minister did address the question.
Martin GallagherCan the Minister provide information on any specific recent cases where the police had to prioritise their resources?
Yes, I can. The recent double murder investigation in Tauranga meant that the police had to allocate up to 39 staff from four different districts. Those staff were involved in investigations over a number of different days, and they worked long hours. It is by no means unusual for the police to be faced with such demands on their resources. I congratulate those officers on the speedy apprehension of the alleged offenders.
Yes, it will. I made that comment because we are in the first substantive week of the session. If I picked up on every infraction, we would probably get little done. So some tolerance is being given in the first week. I ask the member to please ask his question.
Does the Minister support the non-assignment of files, as part of her prioritisation programme; if so, what does she have to say to the victims of the 600 unassigned cases—20 percent of the total case number—being held by the Auckland City Police District?
I would say to the victims of those 600 cases that the police will endeavour to get to their files as soon as possible. However, they will prioritise the most important cases first.
Why are police in the Auckland City Police District currently 50 investigators short in dealing with work in progress, and what does that shortage do for the prioritisation of crime-solving?
The police always face difficulties in recruiting police for Auckland. That has been a problem over many years. What they are doing about it, in fact, is what this Government, in conjunction with the agreement we have with New Zealand First, is doing about it. We are recruiting more. In fact, in the time we have been in Government we have recruited almost 1,400 more police. Thank goodness this Government did; that was not the track record of the National Government.
Ron MarkWhich of the following two does the Minister think will do more to resolve the problems in terms of the police being able to handle their workload and the resultant prioritisation task: New Zealand First successfully negotiating with the Labour-led Government for the introduction of an extra 1,000 frontline police, and New Zealand First having a re-evaluation of the possibility of de-merging traffic enforcement from the police; or our having to sit here and listen to Simon Power whingeing for another 3 years in Opposition?
I am having a great deal of difficulty hearing the reply. Would members please lower the tone. Everyone is entitled to hear the reply, as they are entitled to hear the question.
I would suggest to the member, who asked a very good question, that he actually direct it to the National Party, because those members would face a dilemma in answering it. But I suspect they will spend the next 3 years making 9 long years in Opposition, whingeing and moaning and coming up with nothing positive.
Is she aware of the number of victims who have practically handed the police their offenders on a plate—not the least of which are the number of stories that have come out via the New Zealand Herald over the last 2 weeks—yet the police have taken no action as they are too busy writing her correspondence and licking stamps for her envelopes, and what is she going to do about it?
I do not know what happened when the National Party was in Government, but the officers in Auckland are not writing my correspondence, licking my stamps, or anything else.
I seek leave of the House to table the Auckland City district Investigations Management Plan that outlines giving priority to dealing with the Minister’s correspondence ahead of crime solving.
Hon Tony RyallI seek leave to table the assembled answers to parliamentary questions of the Hon George Hawkins, in order to give the Minister a better guide.
Leave is sought to table those documents. Is there any objection? There is.
I just remind members that when points of order are taken, they are normally heard in silence, please.
Peter Brown