Plan to cash in on our gangs

A new police target to seize $500 million from gangs may serve only to further marginalise a hard-to-reach community, those on the inside say.

A Cabinet paper seen by Stuff shows Police Minister Stuart Nash and Police Commissioner Mike Bush have set four ‘‘highlevel outcome targets’’, while also retaining most of the previous government’s nine performance targets at an operational level.

The targets include $500m in cash and assets seized from gangs and criminals by 2021.

Nash said a small number of key targets would help focus police on priority areas. Since taking on the job, he has been clear about his plan to focus on gang-related crime.

He has also promised to recruit a further 1800 police officers by 2020, with 700 of them part of a dedicated organised-crime squad.

The Government’s aim of confiscating $500m in cash and assets from gangs is an extension of the former National government’s target – $400m by 2021.

In 2017, Nash said it was ‘‘time for real action required to smash gangs once and for all’’.

Last week, he told RNZ that it was unrealistic to say police would wipe out all gangs. ‘‘What we want to do is go incredibly hard against the gang leaders responsible for these meth rings, or drug rings.’’

Nash refused to talk to Stuff about this issue.

There is also the gang intelligence centre, set up under the previous government, which identifies those considered to be part of gangs or gang prospects.

According to the latest figures reported by RNZ, the database includes 5785 people, up 1500 from two years ago.

Former National Party MP and police detective Ross Meurant said focusing on gangs was ‘‘populist politics’’.

Gangs were an ‘‘easy scapegoat’’ when MPs were looking to win votes. The former policeman was not pro-gang; ‘‘a lot of them are s...heads’’.

Gang members comprise 0.1 per cent of the total population but 15 per cent of all general firearms charges.

But targeting people wearing patches did not differentiate between different gangs or different chapters, and did not necessarily target resources at those doing the most harm.

Harry Tam, a former Te Puni Ko¯ kiri policy manager who now works with hard-to-reach Ma¯ ori communities, also questioned the Government’s decision to focus on a group that it labelled as ‘‘gangs’’.

‘‘We built this profile that a gang member is synonymous to crime, so, therefore, when you want to talk about crime, you drag a patch out – any patch. You can then visibly see a demonised criminal.’’

Police Association president Chris Cahill said the vast majority of gangs did facilitate some sort of crime. ‘‘It’s fair to say gangs are part of the problem, and police should target them.’’

Tam said the strategy of setting gang-related targets had not worked in the past, and was unlikely to start working now.

The discussion around gangs and meth was frequently twodimensional, he said.

‘‘The discussion we’re not having is: what drives people using P to the extent that they do? What drives people marketing P to the point that they do? And it’s poverty.

‘‘Wherever there’s poverty is where there’s huge use of drugs . . . The discussion we haven’t had, is how do you change the dynamics to reduce impoverished people that are driven to using P and marketing, which serves organised criminals really well. We don’t talk about the causal effects of why this happens.’’

Cahill said targets like these could be a good motivator for police. But there was a risk of moving into the ‘‘revenuecollecting area’’.

In the past, these types of targets had not been achievable, partly due to influences outside police control – like alcohol laws – and a lack of resources.

But there was nothing wrong with having ‘‘aspirational targets’’, Cahill said. ‘‘We need to give the new targets a crack now we have the resources.’’

Meanwhile, National Party police spokesman Chris Bishop has had a bill drawn from the ballot that would widen police search-and-seizure powers, and stop gang members from possessing guns – though the bill may breach their human rights.

The bill aimed to crack down on dangerous gang members, and ensure they did not have access to firearms. ‘‘Too many firearms are ending up in the hands of violent, criminal gang members, and that’s got to change.

‘‘Under this bill, if you’re a gang member you won’t be allowed to own or possess firearms, period,’’ Bishop said.

The bill aimed to extend the search and seizure powers of police by including a firearms prohibition order.

This meant police would have the power to search the homes and cars of people they deemed to be threatening or violent gang members, without a warrant.

The provision would potentially breach people’s liberties – an issue raised during the 2017 election campaign, when former deputy prime minister and police minister Paula Bennett said gang members had ‘‘fewer’’ human rights.

Meurant was worried this proposed law, and others, could further open the door for the ‘‘rule of police’’ to take over from the ‘‘rule of law’’.

Setting targets could also put further pressure on police to get certain outcomes, he said, and, in the case of gangs, would further marginalise a sector of society.

If the Government was serious about changing behaviour and lifestyles of those in hard-toreach communities, it needed to change its approach, Tam said.

For some people, this was the only life they had ever known. Profiling them, and policing them harder, would lead to more crime being detected, rather than crime prevention.

‘‘If you want to reach them, you need to put in more resources and more effort . . . to focus on changing people’s behaviour, rather than their affiliations.’’