3 July 2009
Transport and Industrial Relations Committee Parliament House WELLINGTON
Attention: By fax:
Clerk of the Committee 04 499 0486
Submission of YouthLaw Tino Rangatiratanga Taitamariki on the Land Transport (Enforcement Powers) Amendment Bill and the Vehicle Confiscation and Seizure Bill INTRODUCTION
1. YouthLaw Tino Rangatiratanga Taitamariki is a community law centre vested under the Legal Services Act 2000. We provide a free, national legal service for children and young people aged below 25 years.
2. Our service includes the provision of free legal advice and advocacy, law-related education and outreach work, development and publication of legal resources (including books, flick-cards and a website) and law reform and policy work.
OUR POSITION ON THE BILLS
3. We are supportive of measures designed to make New Zealand roads safer by addressing illegal car racing. However, we also consider that young drivers are likely to be disproportionately targeted in the enforcement of these laws with
1
potentially significant financial consequences for them. Accordingly, the Bill raises some important issues for consideration.
VEHICLE CONFISCATION AND SEIZURE BILL
4. Our submission will focus on Part 1 of the Bill which amends the Sentencing Act 2002 establishing a new confiscation and destruction order that can be imposed by courts for repeat illegal street racing offences; and Part 2 of the Bill, which amends the Summary Proceedings Act 1957 by allowing vehicles repeatedly used by offenders with overdue traffic fines to be seized and sold to pay those fines. Part 1 – Amendments to the Sentencing Act 2002
Clause 8
5. Clause 8 of the Bill inserts new sections 129A to 129E into the Sentencing Act 2002. New Section 129A “enables courts to order the destruction of motor vehicles where an offender who is convicted of a street racing offence has 2 previous convictions for similar offences committed within the last 4 years. The court may order the destruction of a motor vehicle if the offender was driving it, or was in charge of it, at the material time and if it is owned by the offender or by a substitute for the offender.” The offences do not have been of the same kind, but do have to arise from different incidents.
6. We are concerned, despite the proposed limitations on the discretionary power, that this order represents an unreasonable intrusion by the state into private property.
7. We also have a particular concern regarding the destruction of vehicles that have been purchased using credit facilities, loans or through finance companies and the
2
significant financial implications for the offender. We note that the “court must not order the destruction of the motor vehicle if it will result in extreme
8. Clause
Land Transport (Enforcement Powers) Amendment Bill 9. …..
CONCLUSION
10. We
Contact:
John Hancock Senior Solicitor YouthLaw (Inc) PO Box 7657 Wellesley Street AUCKLAND john@youthlaw.co.nz Ph: 09 306 7596 Fx: 09 307 5243
3