Having mentioned Don Brash for the first time recently, and have copied my letter to him on this site, I seem now to be possessed by the man. I heard him on TV the other day berating the police for putting so many resources into traffic policing and not into fighting crime - this has become a point of public contention since it was revealed that many criminal files are waiting to be assigned in south Auckland, including serious crimes like rape. It follows too problems with answering 111 calls, and known shortages of staff in many areas. Of course, crime and punishment issues have always been a large part of any right wing agenda, in any country, and with an election looming, there is always going to be an appeal to the "lock them up and throw away the key" sort of constituents.
This concern, traffic vs. regular policing, was raised at the time of the amalgamation of the previously separated traffic and regular police forces in the early '90s. Generally I don't think there have been major issues following this amalgamation, in fact the process went better than many expected, but of course when the police are being stretched, then we are likely to hear the sort of calls being made by Don Brash.
But for me, I can't help but be impressed by the results of the crack-down on antisocial, drunken and speeding driving in New Zealand. When I immigrated here in 1986, I was perpetually horrified by the standard of driving here. Hoons, causing all sorts of mayhem, would be met on any significant journey. This would be a load of youngsters (boys) in some beaten up old Holden, driving aggressively, forcing others off the road, throwing bottles out of windows, yahooing etc. Drunken driving was commonplace, speeding so common that travelling at the legal limit was like driving in the slow lane. My wife, a New Zealander, and my children, got rather fed up by my constant criticism of New Zealand drivers. But it was a justified criticism. Fatalities on the roads were over 750 per year in the mid '80s, much more than double the rate in the UK, representing about 350 unnecessary deaths every year. Over the years though, policies promoted by the police and those concerned to improve safety on the road have gradually come to the fore and have managed to reduce deaths to 436 last year, a vast improvement. The incidence of obvious hooning and antisocial driving has much decreased. Speeding has lessened, but not enough, far too many drivers are proceeding at speeds well above the limit. Drunken driving has lessened too, but still accounts for a large number of deaths.
This didn't happen by itself
For those that don't live in or haven't visited New Zealand, I should explain that we have very few motorways here, probably less than 100 km in total. Even the main roads between major cities are winding, hilly and narrow two way roads, a function of the mountainous terrain of this country. There are some three lane roads (very dangerous, as we know from the UK, where they were removed years ago) and some dual carriageways, but only in short sections. At the sides of these roads are strips of unsealed road called hard shoulders, they are surfaced by what is called metal here, and are designed to allow cars to pull off if they break down, or wish to turn. Many roads too have deep drainage ditches either side, designed to cause maximum damage to any car that just wanders off the road, and don't mention the power poles, an item of road furniture implicated in many deaths annually. In addition the more rural areas of New Zealand are still served by non-sealed roads, which get quite rutted, and can also cause dust problems in the summer. They are not at all easy to drive on yet the speed limit on these roads is still 100 kph (this is absurd, you can't drive this fast on these roads except in a rally). Many rural roads that are sealed still have 100 kph when the limit, for safety, should be 70 kph.
The speed limit on the open road is 100kph. but fortunately many busy and dangerous lengths of road now have lower limits. For instance the main road out of Wellington includes a stretch of highway along the coast to Paraparaumu, about 12 kms long, This is one of the most dangerous roads in New Zealand, and until recently had a 100 kph speed limit. Due to the understandable fuss about the number of deaths and casualties here the speed limit was reduced to 80 kph and there is now a stretch of wire barrier between the two opposing lanes. Hopefully the money will be found very soon to extend this barrier along the whole road.
So it comes as a shock to hear Don Brash going on about the roads again. I have recently roundly criticised him for his promise to increase road funding. But then I heard him on TV saying he thought the police paid far too much attention to traffic policing, and issuing tickets to speeding drivers; as part of his policy for getting them back into criminal duties he would reduce the numbers of police on the roads. He went on to say that he saw nothing wrong with driving at 111 kph on the open road in dry weather when conditions were safe. (He actually said "at 10 to 11 kph more than the limit.) I was flabbergasted. Firstly this is a man who is endeavouring to become our prime minister - he would appear to be giving approval to speeding motoring, which is illegal and dangerous. Secondly he is a hypocrite as his party certainly gave Helen Clark some stick when her police escorted motorcade travelled at excessive speeds to get to a rugby match. Thirdly, this is a country where it has taken literally a generation to start getting some of these safe motoring messages across to the general public, and an acceptance, or toleration at least, that strong policing of traffic is a necessary part of cutting down an intolerably high road toll. Fourthly, cars travelling at 111 kph use much more fuel than those travel at the legal speed limit or slower, and that this speeding is just wasting yet more of our irreplaceable natural resources and, fifthly, I would point out to Don that apart from the drinking motorist, the speeding motorist is the most dangerous and murderous criminal in New Zealand.
In fact it has always been my impression that there are no roads in New Zealand that are safe even at 100 kph, other than the motorways. Apart from their two-way, winding, hilly character, mentioned above, often there is loose metal at the sides, and they sometimes have an inappropriate camber. There is a lot of rain in here, so they are often wet. Most of New Zealand is rural with farm tractors, sheep, milk tankers etc. making use of the same road network. It would be much better and would save a good many lives to reduce the the countrywide speed limit to 90 kph, it would also save fuel. It may come about in the next year or two that the limits will be reduced in such a way because of the likely crisis in oil supplies.
So Don Brash, you won't be getting my vote (well, you wouldn't anyway) but anyone concerned for road safety, and the safety of their families and friends, and this includes National supporters, should make it perfectly clear to Don that his attitude to speeding is mischievous and dangerous, and if he were as concerned as much about his family and friends as his constituents were likely to be about theirs, then he will retract and apologise for his comments now.
Police Numbers
Of course that does bring us back to policing in New Zealand, and funding for policing. Whilst New Zealand is as safe, or as unsafe, as any other modern western nation, we certainly do have our fair share of criminality. If there is any impression arising that this is not being dealt with adequately or that police resources are not adequate to deal with criminal behaviour or complaints from the public, then this is a dangerous signal to send out to those parts of society who might be tempted to crime. The police are having to deal with some really horrifying violence related to drug abuse, especially methamphetamine, and the police have stated their alarm at the increasing use of this nasty drug. So Don may have a reasonable point here, is there an adequate number and resourcing of police at the coal face of crime?
I remembered reading somewhere last year that police numbers in New Zealand were low in comparison to many other countries. But of course I didn't keep the reference or remember where I read it. I thought I'd best find out for myself and this is what I found from my internet searches for information.
Obtaining figures from the internet isn't always easy but in this case I have found this document - International comparisons of criminal justice statistics 2001 produce by the UK Home Office. But for some reason they are missing the figures for New Zealand. I was able to find the figure for here in the NZ Yearbook for 2004, they are quoted as one police officer for every 537 people and also from the internet I have found that we have 7436 sworn police officers, which is about 186 police officers per 100,000 population. This figure also agrees with a figure of international police numbers provided in answer to a parliamentary question in 2003 in the UK. So I think we can accept the UK figures as being reasonably accurate. To see the original document click here (This is a pdf file and is difficult to edit to put on this page) - I select a few figures below. So in answer to the question, on international comparisons, do we have enough police officers, the answer will be who do you compare New Zealand with:
If we compare our police numbers to the English speaking world we are understaffed, to the Continental European countries very understaffed, and to the Nordic countries about right. My feeling is that the New Zealand police force is understaffed compared with many comparable countries. If we had just 200 police officers per 100,000 population (which is still on the lower side of the international average) this would mean we would require an extra 600 police officers. To have the same number of police as Australia, a country that Don Brash regularly makes use of in comparison to New Zealand, we would have to increase our police numbers by about 1,000. It does seem to me that our police staff are stretched, the symptoms being the problems with 111 calls, known major shortages in many metropolitan areas, and difficulties getting more "minor" crimes investigated.
Our police chief, Mr Rob Robinson, is an able and good man, but I think perhaps he is guilty of not pushing this government harder for the resources and manpower that this country needs for its policing. That way we can have good coverage of traffic policing AND the more serious crime that concerns so many people. I don't know what the cost would be but perhaps some of the extra taxation that I would impose on petrol (at least 50c per litre) could go to help pay for this. It would be worthwhile investment. If I were able to do something about policing and police numbers, that is what I would do. Extra police would alleviate some of the very high stress levels that this job entails, and would allow the police to rotate constables to different duties, to give them a break from the most stressful front-line policing. I would anticipate that this would also help to reduce the incidence of "perfing" (early retirement on medical grounds). I would add that the likely changes coming to all advanced nations over the next few years could mean some social unrest and we need to be prepared for this. Mma Ramotswe and the Mercedes car.
My political ethics are these - there are certain important things that any society should be funding adequately and if there is any money left over, then this can go on the fripperies. I think that our present society has forgotten the important things. We don't fund education system adequately, and we expect our children to take on large debt, which our generation never had to do. We don't fund our health system adequately either, and I should deal with this in a separate article. Our police force numbers and funding I have discussed. Public transport has been discussed elsewhere on my site. Our Department of Conservation has been underfunded for many years. Some increase in funding recently is very welcome, but still only enough to keep pace with inflation. We are constantly being told we cannot afford to fund these agencies any more than they are presently. Yet this same society last year imported nearly 2000 BMWs, over 1000 Mercedes and over 36,000 gas guzzling 4WD vehicles. There is obviously more than enough wealth to continue the despoliation of our beautiful coastline and are so-called iconic areas. Tens of thousands of people take overseas holidays each year, and can afford to fly to Australia for a weekend. Don't get me wrong, I am not some sort of puritan or extreme socialist railing against this ostentation, and I love Mercedes cars as much as anyone, but at the same time there is something morally and ethically out of kilter with our society when we penny pinch such important agencies as education and housing, yet can afford to import without difficulty so many luxury and inefficient vehicles. 
If you have read Alexander McCall Smith's delightful stories set in Botswana, you may well recall our heroine, Mma Precious Ramotswe, of the No 1 Ladies' Detective Agency, sometimes observe that a Mercedes car does not make a country any happier. We don't live in Botswana, fortunately we live in a vastly more wealthy country in comparison, but I think too many of us can, unlike Mma Ramotswe, make the mistake of equating visible wealth and ostentation with a successful society, or accepting this as a natural state of things. In some ways the impending loss of cheap oil and concerns with global warming are going to benefit our society if they force us to make more sensible and productive use of the wealth that we have.
