NZ Politics

563 readers

1 users here now

Kia ora and welcome to the NZ Politics community!

This is a place for respectful discussions about everything that's political and kiwi

This is an inclusive space where diverse opinions are valued, but please don't be a dick

Other kiwi communities here

Banner image by Tom Ackroyd, CC-BY-SA

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

Dave

RaoulDuke

Stuart Nash claims Labour Cabinet softened its gang asset seizure policy (www.rnz.co.nz)

submitted 9 months ago by Ilovethebomb to c/politics

7 comments fedilink hide all child comments

This was a fascinating read, it sounds like he disagreed with his colleagues on a number of issues. And given the election result, I'd say he was right, as law and order was something Labour was perceived as being very weak on.

Also, there's this, about Kiri Allan

"She believed it was anti-Māori and I thought that was absolute rubbish, because this was not targeting Māori in any way, it was targeting gangs.

"It doesn't matter what ethnicity a gang member is, they need to be held to account by society," Nash said.

Isn't assuming gang members are Maori kinda racist?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Xcf456 4 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I can't say I buy his argument about asset seizure at any level being a reasonable departure from the bill of rights, just like how we have roadside breath tests and they violate the right against unreasonable search.

It rightly should be a much higher threshold imo. So many stories out of the US of the police legally robbing people using asset forfeiture and the onus being on the person to jump through hoops to get stuff back, often they don't.

[–] Ilovethebomb 1 points 9 months ago

A higher burden of proof, certainly, but less than 30k is still a large amount of money.