Public views on policing: An overview of submissions on
Policing Directions in New Zealand for the 21st Century

Also available in PDF format

Contents

Introduction

Overview 

Analysis of submissions

Question 1: Key principles to guide policing

Question 2: Effective policing for New Zealanders

Question 3: People in policing

Question 4: Platforms for success

Question 5: Anticipating the future

Additional issues raised

Annex: List of submitters

Introduction

In March 2006, Cabinet agreed to a comprehensive review of the legislative arrangements for policing, leading to a rewrite of the 1958 Police Act and its accompanying set of Regulations.

Responsibility for leading the review was given to New Zealand Police, as the organisation most directly affected by the existing legislation, and with unique insights into its strengths and weaknesses.  The mandate for the review was broad-ranging, and signalled a desire for a national conversation with New Zealanders about policing.  A green light was given to go back to first principles, to challenge things taken-for-granted, and to encourage public debate.

About this report

This report sets out a range of comments made in response to the five key questions asked in the discussion paper, Policing Directions in New Zealand for the 21st Century, and highlights common themes which emerged from the submissions.

For ease of reference, it has been structured in the same order as the Policing Directions discussion document, with additional issues raised by submitters listed in the final section.

The report has been specifically consulted with members from Police's Office of Māori, Pacific and Ethnic Services who attended meetings within those communities.  The report has been supplemented by observations from those members.

Starting a conversation on policing

To allow New Zealanders to articulate what kind of police service they want, and to enable them to have a say in shaping legislation, three phases of public consultation were proposed.  The first of these consultation phases began in June 2006, with the release of eight Issues Papers.  These were designed to 'test the waters' and stimulate discussion on significant policing topics.  The themes selected were:

· Principles

· Governance and accountability

· Employment arrangements

· Community engagement

· Powers and protections

· Relationships

· Administration

· Conduct and integrity.

The Issues Papers were progressively released over a six month period, with copies available in printed form as well as online via a dedicated website (www.policeact.govt.nz).  The papers were widely publicised and distributed to a range of individuals, agencies and interest groups.

In parallel, a platform for debating some of the topics was created by convening four discussion fora, in conjunction with Victoria University of Wellington’s School of Law, School of Government and Institute of Criminology, and Auckland University of Technology’s School of Social Sciences.  These special roundtable events brought together key thinkers from around New Zealand and overseas to discuss principles of policing, governance and accountability, and community engagement.

An analysis of the Issues Papers was published in February 2007.  Approximately 230 unique responses to the papers were received.  Responses came from large sector agencies (e.g., the Department of Corrections), Crown entities (e.g., the Office of the Privacy Commissioner), stakeholder organisations (e.g., the Police Association), various groups (e.g., community law centres) and individual members of the public.

Research on New Zealanders’ expectations of policing was also commissioned, offering an insight into public views on the sort of police service people want and expect.  The research commenced in August 2006 and concluded in December that year.  The final report provided a wealth of information highlighting current perceptions of New Zealand Police, and aspirations for police of the future.  The summary of the research, What the New Zealand public want and expect from their police in the 21st century, was published in March 2007, and as with all the Police Act Review documents is available from the website [www.policeact.govt.nz].

Consulting on possible policing directions

The review's second main phase of public consultation commenced with the Minister of Police's release of Policing Directions in New Zealand for the 21st Century on 31 May 2007.  Public views on the discussion paper were invited over a two-month consultation period, with all submissions due by 31 July 2007.

Policing Directions drew on a similar range of topics from the first phase of consultation, but shifted the discussion to firmer proposals.  Policing Directions put forward close-to-final preferences to generate responses and reactions to future policing options.

Awareness of the consultation exercise was raised through multiple channels, including paid-for and free media coverage.  For example, advertisements ran multiple times on 180 different radio stations around the country, with print advertisements in 16 daily and a range of community newspapers.  A quarter-page advertisement was also placed in a prominent Sunday paper in the middle of the consultation period [see image above].

Innovative use was made of non-traditional media.  For instance, a 30 second item on the Police Act Review was screened via HealthTV in the waiting rooms of 85 GPs across the country, reaching an estimated 100,000 people.

Awareness of the consultation process was aided by mainstream media pick-up.  For example, opinion editorial commentary by the Police Act Review team was printed in nearly 90 daily papers, with more than 50 stories featuring the consultation exercise in national and local newspapers.  In addition, several items on the Police Act Review ran on major television news programmes, boosted by numerous radio interviews and talkback coverage, including items on Te Waatea Māori news bulletin and Chinese community radio.

Particular efforts were made to raise awareness about the consultation exercise with 'hard to reach' and 'hard to hear' populations.  To allow maximum uptake of the opportunity to have a say on the discussion paper, a summary booklet version was translated into Māori, and a short pamphlet detailing key proposals was translated into 10 other languages (including Samoan, Tongan, Chinese and Korean).  To connect with older New Zealanders, the opportunity was taken to brief the Ministerial Advisory Council for Senior Citizens about the review.  And the perspectives of new migrant groups were sought through direct mail-out of the discussion paper to identified representative organisations.

In an effort to reach youth, and catalyse thinking about policing by tomorrow's leaders, a national essay competition for secondary school students was held.  More than 130 entries were received from throughout New Zealand, with the top essays being uploaded to the Police Act Review website.  Further awareness was promoted through co-sponsorship of the 2007 New Zealand Schools Debating Championship, and 2007 Joynt Scroll competition run by the New Zealand Universities Debating Council.  Work was also done with the Ministry of Youth Development to stimulate awareness of the review via its networks, and “Aotearoa youth voices” website [www.myd.govt.nz/ayv].

Direct engagement

Taking advantage of the fact Police is a nationally distributed organisation, with a human presence in towns and cities up and down the country, steps were also taken to directly consult the Policing Directions document with New Zealanders in their local communities.  More than 80 public meetings were held in June and July 2007 to outline the proposals in the paper.  The consultation process was generally well received; at some meetings there was standing room only, while at others turn-out was poor.  Overall, more than 1,200 people attended these events.  Key points from discussions at the meetings were noted down and fed back to the Police Act Review team.  Members of the public were encouraged to make written submissions on the proposals by post, fax, email, or by using an online response form available on the Police Act Review website.

As well as holding public meetings, Police managers in each District included discussion of the Police Act Review on the agendas of more than 40 regular partnership meetings they participate in.  Partner agencies were encouraged to follow up on the resulting roundtable discussions by making a submission on the Policing Directions document itself.  Additionally, briefings were given to key partner agencies and fora in Wellington (e.g., Local Government New Zealand's Chief Executives meeting).  Separate meetings were convened in each Police District to ensure Police staff had an opportunity to comment on the proposals in the Policing Directions discussion paper.  Members of Police were further encouraged to make a submission, either in a personal capacity or through their union groups.

Who responded?

Overall, 234 unique submissions were received on the discussion document, including seven consolidated responses from police service organisations and internal Police groups, 11 from Government departments and Crown entities, 54 from local government sector groups, 37 from non-government organisations, community groups and private companies, 101 from members of the public, and 24 submissions from respondents whose status is unknown.  Respondents were given the option to identify material in their response as confidential, although only one of the 234 submitters elected to remain anonymous.

The 24 submissions whose status is unknown made their submission either through the online form on the Police Act Review website or the Ministry of Youth Development “Aotearoa Youth Voices” website, and chose not to provide any personal details.

The names, details and content provided by submitters have been accepted in good faith.  A detailed list of submitters is provided in the Annex at the end of this report.

The nature of responses

Not all submitters answered every question in the discussion paper, although comprehensive responses were provided by a number of groups (notably, territorial local authorities).  A number of submissions expressed general support for the ideas in the document, rather than indicating support for specific proposals.  For example, many submitters simply answered ‘yes’ when asked “Do you endorse the suggested legislative proposals to support effective policing?”

In addition to this more general support, there were several organisational and individual responses which focused specifically on one issue (such as the possibility of Police recovering costs for special policing services).

In many cases very little opposition to proposals was articulated, making critical analysis of a position difficult.

Methodology

A qualitative approach has been used to analyse the submissions.  Wherever possible, direct quotes from submissions have been linked to the specific questions in the discussion paper.  The use of direct quotes is to ensure a range of submitters’ voices are heard.  Some editing of quotes has taken place; however, efforts have been made to maintain the original intent of respondents.  All quotes have been anonymised to allow a more dispassionate reading.  However, they are referenced with a unique number and can be cross-referenced to the list of submitters in the Annex.  This style was chosen to illustrate the broad spectrum of views on each of the proposals in the discussion document.

Using a qualitative approach has meant a numerical count to express levels of support is neither useful nor possible.  As an alternative, indications of the approximate amount of support for each proposal have been given.  For example, the report uses the term ‘majority’ to indicate a far larger number of submissions were in support of a proposal than opposed it.

Next steps

This report will help to inform the preparation of a suite of policy papers to be presented to Cabinet by the Minister of Police during September 2007.  Following Cabinet decisions, drafting instructions for a Policing Bill will be issued.

Overview

As a high level summary of the submissions, the following tables provide an overview of the responses to proposals.

Principles

Issue	Current situation	Discussion paper	Submissions
Role statement and legal status Should a new Act say something about the role and functions of New Zealand Police?	The 1958 Police Act contains no purpose or role statement for Police.  It is also silent on Police's legal status as an instrument of the Crown.	Proposed introduction of a carefully-drafted function statement in a new Policing Act, and confirmation of Police's legal status.	General support for a function statement in new Act, with a broad, rather than a narrow, statement of Police's role.  Confirmation of Police's legal status in Act also endorsed.
Policing a shared responsibility Should a new Act reflect the reality that Police is not the sole contributor to safe and secure communities?	Current Act silent on the contribution of others to policing.	Suggested there be a clear statement that Police sits at the hub of a networked and co-operative policing environment, with key roles played by other enforcement agencies, local government, and ordinary citizens.	Little specific comment generated.  Several submissions endorsed the role the public can, and should, play in helping Police prevent and detect crime.  Also enthusiasm for the contribution of local government to be recognised.
Idea of principles Should a new Act establish principles to help guide how policing is done in New Zealand?	No principles of policing contained in 1958 Act.  (But the constabulary oath offers some hints).	Identifies several principles of policing which might be given statutory recognition.	A majority of submitters supported the inclusion of such principles in a new Act.  Strong endorsement of the policing principles included in the paper.

Effective policing for New Zealanders

Issue	Current situation	Discussion paper	Submissions
Command and control issues Should a new Act deal more directly with how the chain of command works within Police?	Arrangements for command and control currently set out in regulations.  Also not as definitive as they could be.	Proposes to elevate command and control features to statute, and deal more clearly with issues such as obedience to superior orders and working in multi-agency settings.	Few comments made on this issue.  Of the submissions which did address this point, most favoured a new Act bringing greater certainty to this area.

Issue	Current situation	Discussion paper	Submissions
Allocation of policing powers How might a new Act best allow for appropriate powers (and protections) to be assigned to different categories of Police staff?	Current Act enables some powers to be assigned by warrant, but not search and arrest.  Mainly relies on powers flowing to staff from being sworn as constables.	Suggests broad categories of Police employees who might receive targeted powers (including search and arrest) be set out in statute, and linked to skills and training.	General support for improving the system for allocating targeted powers to Police staff.  Some submitters emphasised the need to retain the office of constable.
Information sharing Should policing legislation enable, or speed up, the legitimate sharing of information?	Current Police Act does not separately provide for sharing information; mainly dealt with under the Privacy Act 1993.	Carefully-framed amendments to the Privacy Act noted as an option being looked at in other legislative reviews.	Strong support for effective information sharing between law enforcement agencies.
Identity checks Should new policing legislation enable faster identification of people being detained by police?	Provisions in the 1958 Act allow for people's identifying particulars to be taken, subject to some limitations (e.g., detainee must be "on a charge").	Suggested updating the existing provision, to remove reference to a person being "on a charge", potentially allow for particulars to be taken outside of police stations, and allow a wider range of biometric information to be used for checks.	Mixed views.  More submissions supported the proposals than opposed them.  But anxieties were voiced by some about identity checks being done at the roadside (although many concerns went well beyond what was proposed in the paper).
Searching visitors to police stations Should there be a specific power to search entrants to police-controlled buildings?	Current Police Act focussed solely on searches of people to be locked up in custody, rather than people visiting detainees, etc.	Noted assurances from legal advisors that adequate search powers can be exercised by consent.	Although public views were not specifically sought on this issue, a number of submitters nonetheless observed that a clarified search power would be useful.
'Move on' power Would a statutory dispersal power be a sensible addition to police's tool kit?	At present, there is no legislative basis for police to request a person to move away from danger, or from a scene.	Responses invited on whether New Zealand police should have access to a 'move on' power, similar to other jurisdictions.	No clear consensus among submitters, but majority support for such a power.  Strong opinions were voiced both for and against the proposal.
Handcuffing Should handcuffing by police be legally presumed to be a reasonable use of force, unless there is evidence to the contrary?	Currently no specific statutory authority for the use of handcuffs by police.  Handcuffing must be justified on a case-by-case basis.	Idea floated that police use of handcuffs might be legally presumed a reasonable use of force; but this legal presumption could always be rebutted on a case's specific facts.	Support shown for providing greater legal certainty for police's use of handcuffs.  But some anxiety that such a step may result in police using handcuffs more often.
Issue	Current situation	Discussion paper	Submissions
Police assisting the incapacitated Should the power to assist the drink- and drug-affected people be moved to the Policing Act?	The power to help incapacitated people is currently set out in the treatment-focussed Alcoholism and Drug Addiction Act, not Police Act.	Proposed to transfer the ADA Act power to a new Policing Act.  Suggestion also made to resolve difficulties with 12 hour maximum 'sobering up' time.	Majority support for proposals.  Some who voiced concern did so on the basis of not wanting to overburden police with a role others could (and should) perform.
International policing activity Should the new Act mandate Police's co-operation with enforcement agencies overseas?	The 1958 Act is silent on the role New Zealand Police plays internationally and does not give express support to information sharing.	Idea floated that new Act might expressly enable appropriate co-operation between New Zealand Police and enforcement agencies overseas.	Very few comments made in submissions on this possibility, but none opposed the idea.
Covert policing Might the new Act give clearer recognition and support to covert policing activities?	No provisions in the 1958 Act address covert police work (although there is some mention in other legislation, e.g. Evidence Act 2006).	Suggestion made to formalise the use of assumed identities by authorised Police staff.	Did not attract a lot of comment.  Of those who submitted on this, most welcomed the prospect of greater legislative support in this area.
Legal protections for tactical staff Should the work of Police's tactical groups be given greater protection?	Generic hazardous substances laws create doubt about aspects of the work of Police's tactical groups (e.g. use of distraction devices).	Proposal to replicate exemptions which apply to New Zealand Defence Forces re: the storage/ deployment of explosive material.	No opposition to this scenario raised in the submissions, although very few responses on this issue were made.
Identifying police Might the new Act provide greater assurances about the status of people who present as Police employees?	No basis in 1958 Act for a formal ID card or warrant system.	Proposal to implement a warrant card system for all staff entitled to exercise policing powers.  Also, warrant card to be linked to employment status.	Strong support for proposals.
Protecting against impersonation How might the new Act best protect against misuse of the Police name, uniform, and other branded items?	Current Act contains offences relating to personation of police (albeit with relatively low penalties).  Little ability to protect against misuse of the name Police.	Recommendation that penalties for relevant offences be increased, reinforcing the gravity of such offences.  Also proposal for a consent system to manage use of the name "Police".	Proposals supported by most submissions addressing this issue.

People in policing

Issue	Current situation	Discussion paper	Submissions
Good employer Should a new Act clearly state the Commissioner will act as a "good employer"?	Under the 1958 Act, the Commissioner is only obliged to follow the good employer principle "as closely as possible".	Proposes to remove the qualification to the full good employer principle.	Majority support for the Commissioner of Police to be held to the same standard as all other state sector employers.
Employee vetting Should a new Act allow for enhanced pre-employment vetting of aspiring Police staff?	Present Act does not contain provisions on vetting.  Criminal Records (Clean Slate) Act 2004 applies to non-sworn employees, but not constables.	Strengthened checks proposed in relation to scope of Clean Slate Act, routine collection of biometric data from all Police staff, and use of new financial/ integrity statements.	Support for enhanced vetting processes, but questions whether they would need to be legislated for.  Some concerns about wider collection of biometric information from staff.
'One Police' idea Should a new Act, as far as possible, unify all Police staff under a single workforce model?	Current Act divides employees into two categories - sworn and non-sworn staff.  Approach impacts in various ways (e.g. different systems for managing conduct).	Proposes to create a single employment framework for all staff, supported by a solemn undertaking all staff would take, and introduction of one Code of Conduct.	Support for a more unified approach in a new Act, so long as office of constable not 'muddied'.  Also general level of comfort with Police being covered by the Employment Relations Act in most cases.
Role of constable How might a new Act strengthen the office of constable?	Constables dealt with often indirectly in 1958 Act.  Ability to appoint "casual" and "temporary" constables (used for roles like jailers and prisoner escorts).	Proposes to reserve the office of constable to fully qualified staff, with targeted powers able to be assigned to staff for defined roles (instead of swearing them in as constables).	Solid support received for greater assurance about who holds the office of constable, and for limited powers roles to be enabled by new policing legislation.
Registration Should a new Act build on Police's existing certification system, and pave the way for a full professional registration model?	Virtually no detail in 1958 Act about need for prior training etc. before staff may undertake certain functions (with the sole exception of Police dog handlers).	Views sought on the possibility of making future provision for a Policing Registration Board, to support a system of registered practitioners who are certified in key skills.	General endorsement of taking steps to lift recognition of policing as a profession, underpinned by more robust training.

Issue	Current situation		Discussion paper		Submissions
Lateral entry Should a new Act contain provisions enabling for inward and outward staff movements?		Secondments to and from Police not a feature of 1958 Act.		Suggests there might be value in a new Act expressly allowing for secondments to and from Police.	Little specific comment generated, but general support in submissions which addressed this issue.  Some questioned the need for legislation.
Leadership Should a new Act explicitly encourage the development of leaders/managers?		Development of senior staff not a feature of 1958 Act.		Suggests there might be value in confirming the Commissioner's responsibility to develop senior staff.	General support for the proposed provision, but again little specific comment generated.  Need for legislation was again questioned.

Platforms for success

Issue	Current situation	Discussion paper	Submissions
Details relating to Commissioner and Deputies How should a new Act deal with the appointment, tenure etc. of the top office holders?  Should there be a fuller description of the Commissioner's role in a new Act?	Under the 1958 Act, the Commissioner and any Deputies are appointed by the Governor-General, serve 'at pleasure', and may delegate functions.  Default rule for when Acting Commissioner is required.  Only limited role statement for Commissioner.	Proposes to be much clearer in legislation about details relating to the Commissioner and Deputies.  Basic approach to lift up the current conventions into statute, or bring across provisions from the 1992 Regulations up to the primary Act.	Few submissions dealt with these issues in detail.  Most seemed to be comfortable with specific proposals in discussion paper.  Some support evident for prior policing experience to be a statutory pre-requisite for appointment as Commissioner or Deputy.
Commissioner/ Minister relationship Should a new Act define parameters of the relationship between Minister and Commissioner?	Virtually no guidance on the relationship between the Minister and Commissioner in the 1958 Act.	Proposes a new Act reflect conventional understandings of the relationship, including the Commissioner's independence on operational matters.	Strong endorsement of clear statement in Act about freedom from political direction on operational matters.
Accountability for performance How might a new Act provide greater support for Police to be accountable for performance?	Standard supports not available to Police under State Sector Act 1988 (e.g. advice on machinery of government issues).  Subject to various ad hoc reporting rules.	Proposes to allow Police to benefit from greater State Services Commission support.  Questions whether a comprehensive Police Annual Report might be better than one-off reporting obligations.	Many supportive submissions, but little commentary.  Seemed to be general support for reinforcing a strong culture of accountability for performance, especially to local communities.

Issue	Current situation	Discussion paper	Submissions
Inquiry power Should a new Act contain an inquiry-calling power?	Section 56 of current Act provides a power for the Minister to convene an inquiry.	Notes this power has never been used, and questions whether it remains necessary.	Support to roll-over the existing power, as long as the Commissioner is also able to set up an independent inquiry.
Regulations Can more technical issues be put into regulations, rather than a new Act?	Broad empowerment in the 1958 Act to pass regulations, but only one current set of regulations issued.	Suggests updating current regulation-making power in Act, and transferring more detail to regulations.	Broad agreement on proposed approach.
Industrial options Should a new Act continue to prohibit the right to strike for sworn police, balanced by special wage bargaining arrangements?	Prohibition against strikes and lockouts set out in 1958 Act.  Legislated approach to wage bargaining, using compulsory conciliation and final offer arbitration.	Proposes a new Act extend the limitations on industrial action to all Police employees, retention of final offer arbitration system, but additional balance in arbitration criteria.	Most welcomed assurances about the continuity of policing, but did not go into detail.  Some opposed any limit on the right to strike, or widening the ban to all Police staff.
Decisive action to remove staff Might a new Act allow employment action to be taken against Police staff, despite any parallel legal proceedings?	Present Act allows for dismissals due to "incompatible behaviour", linked to disciplinary process.  But no equivalent to powers in overseas legislation re: loss of confidence removals.	Proposes the new Act allow a Commissioner to dismiss staff if, due to their competence, integrity, performance or conduct, they are not suitable to remain in Police.  This would be separate to the Code of Conduct processes.	Some strong opposition to aspects of the proposal, based on perceived natural justice concerns, but also some support for the Commissioner to be able to take decisive action to maintain confidence in Police.

Anticipating the future

Issue	Current situation	Discussion paper		Submissions
Reducing bureaucracy Could a Bill leading to a new Policing Act be a vehicle to allow infringement notices to be used to deal with more low-level offences?	The ticket option is typically listed in the legislation creating offences (e.g. Sale of Liquor Act 1989).  Not all lower-level offences can be dealt with by 'on the spot' tickets at present.	Notes parallel reviews are examining the infringement system.  Asks whether there might still be value in adding to police's tool kit ahead of these reviews (e.g. for liquor ban bylaw breaches).		Submissions gave cautious support to greater use of infringement notices.  Some worried it could skew police towards less-serious offending, or result in unfair police practices.
Issue	Current situation	Discussion paper	Submissions
Integrity testing Should a new Act explicitly mandate integrity testing of Police employees?	Current legislation does not permit integrity testing of Police staff (but does not prohibit it either).	Invites views on whether legislation to enable police integrity testing is necessary and/or desirable.		Divided opinions on this issue amongst submissions.  Many see it as a 'solution in search of a problem'.
New policing oversight agency Would there be benefit in providing a statutory basis for a new policing oversight agency?	No equivalent body enabled by legislation at present in New Zealand (although there are overseas).  Existing Police Complaints Authority (PCA) focuses solely on Police.	Floats idea a new Policing Oversight and Improvement Agency, to work alongside the PCA.  Would have a broader coverage across all groups involved in policing.		Mixed support.  Viewed as a way of providing heightened assurances about the delivery of policing services, but some confused the proposed new entity with work of the PCA.
Cost recovery Should a new Act allow for costs to be recovered for 'over and above' policing at large public events?	Current Act does not enable cost recovery for special policing services (unlike the situation in most other jurisdictions).	Invites views on whether new policing legislation should enable the future development of a cost recovery system, if and when appropriate.		Mixed views.  Strong opposition from some quarters (e.g. national sporting organisations), but cautious support given to the idea by a majority of submitters.

Question 1: Key principles to guide policing

Should a new Policing Act establish principles to help guide how policing is done in New Zealand?  If so, what guiding principles would you like to see included?

Legislation could establish principles to help guide how policing is done in New Zealand.  Guiding principles for policing might include:

· acting impartially, so policing occurs free from improper influence or direction