The Police Minister says new powers to search gang members' homes for patches have been added to the toolkit after advice firearms and drugs are often found in the process.
The coalition government has come under fire from officials, the Law Society and the opposition for adding a clause into the Gangs Legislation Amendment Bill, which is expected to pass its third reading this week.
Those who repeatedly break the ban on gang patches in public will be stopped from having any insignia - including in a private home, even if the insignia belongs to someone else.
The request from police for the powers was initially rejected by Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith. He has now changed his mind, meaning there will not be any public consultation or opportunity for feedback on it as the select committee process is already complete.
Police Minister Mark Mitchell said the gang legislation was modelled on Western Australia's, but "we have improved it and made it stronger".
Paul Goldsmith and Mark Mitchell. Photo: RNZ / Angus Dreaver
"The police advice to me is that gang members don't like having their homes searched, because often there's other contraband in there - firearms or drugs - and it's quite simply a matter of, if gangs want to ignore the law, if they don't want to adhere to it and do that three times, then police have the option to go retrieve that gang insignia," he told reporters on Tuesday morning.
Mitchell said "enough is enough" on gangs and their intimidation with patches.
Those opposed to the last-minute clause say the powers would unjustifiably restrict protections in the Bill of Rights Act.
Both Mitchell and the prime minister were unapologetic, however. Christopher Luxon told Morning Report on Tuesday gangs had forfeited their rights.
"When you've got a quarter of 1 percent causing almost a fifth or a quarter of all the serious crime, that's a problem.
"And that says to me you don't care about the responsibilities of being a Kiwi, you don't want to have the duties of being a New Zealander, you're happy to cause pain and suffering and pedal misery and suffering on your fellow New Zealanders. That's not on."
Labour justice spokesperson Duncan Webb described the last-minute addition of police powers as "extraordinary".
"That kind of goes into that last bastion and invades someone's private and personal home - I think it's deeply concerning."
He said Ministry of Justice officials had raised concerns it was a "sideways way to make a search, to harass people".
"What's the harm of a gang patch in someone's cupboard or top drawer? The answer is absolutely none."
Webb did not believe the change would have any impact or provide any deterrence, and questioned why the coalition was pursuing it.
Labour leader Chris Hipkins described the government's decision-making as "very inconsistent".
"I don't think they've given a robust explanation about why they've suddenly changed their position that says you can't wear a gang patch in a private home, but you can wear a swastika - I don't think that's particularly consistent."
Goldsmith was asked on Monday about his rationale for making the change, and said it was "very easy to avoid" happening.
"Just don't get caught three times within five years," he told reporters.
'Pretty intrusive' but justified - Seymour
Mitchell said he had been advocating for search powers to find gang insignia in private homes since March, but was rejected. He said he provided advice to Cabinet that police wanted the tool, but Goldsmith only agreed to it recently.
Mitchell was not concerned the change would not go to select committee for consultation, telling reporters the additional clause went through a Cabinet process and the whole committee of the House stage in Parliament.
ACT leader David Seymour said he was concerned about rights breaches, but he would support police searches of gang members' homes in this case.
"The ACT Party's always nervous about anything that infringes civil liberties. We're prepared to support this because gangs have been a real scourge - they do intimidate people, they do make life harder for law-abiding citizens.
David Seymour. Photo: RNZ / Marika Khabazi
"So yes, it is pretty intrusive - but it only applies to someone who's a recidivist lawbreaker in the gang space."
Asked whether he had any insight on Goldsmith's change of mind, Seymour said he was "prepared to take the tough questions, but insights into the mind of Paul Goldsmith? That's pretty tough."
He pushed back when questioned about the Bill of Rights, saying Section 5 of the act allowed breaches where it was justified in a free and democratic society.
"I think a free and democratic society where other people's rights are being violated by gang violence and behaviour is one of those times."
NZ First leader Winston Peters said he did not think a select committee process was needed.
"Well, we'll just see how we go as we go forward, but why would you need a select committee process to change the law? ... I don't think it's required to have a select committee process on something that's urgently needed now."
He also thought some of what he was reading in the newspapers was a misinterpretation.
"My understanding is that there are all the grounds that you could use because the person is a serious suspect, they have a long record and therefore it's the right thing to do."
