According to the Standard blog only 8% of us are actually property investors – which means that a small percentage of croakers will be mighty happy right now. As for those frogs paying off student loans, bringing up tadpoles and without a spare couple of hundred thousand to participate in the housing market – well we will end up paying those great letting fees.

I wonder how many Government MPs are renting – besides the swanky Wellington residence close to the Hive? – I’m guessing not too many. Instead this rewrite will be written by those who don’t know what it’s like to get a letter around Xmas telling you the land-person are moving back in and you’ve got six weeks to find somewhere else for the family. And say your rental property has dodgy drains – well you won’t be able to go to a tribunal with a professional support person.

This is a difficult enough task at the best of times. Imagine what this will mean for those people who have just lost their jobs and there struggling with English or people.

As Green MP Sue Bradford points out ‘this issue affects many New Zealanders there were 24,297 tenancy tribunal hearings held in the 2006/2007 years.’ C’mon Phil ‘Let’s keep it fair not return to Dicken’s days of yesteryear.’

The Clerk of the House advises that urgency be accorded the introduction and first reading of the Taxation (Business Tax Measures) Bill, the Gangs and Organised Crime Bill, the Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Amendment Bill, and the Sentencing (Offender Levy) Amendment Bill.

So this week we’re going to tax the crims, create curb-appeal police to clean up Wanganui’s ill dressed households on top of Chester Burrow’s fashion police, and we are going to take DNA samples from everyone arrested for an imprisonable offence to profile them against a database, all without proper parliamentary scrutiny. I seem to recall a certain Hon Dr Nick Smith bludgeoning the last government for “rushing” legislation (which had, in fact, gone through a proper select committee process) and calling it un-democratic. It seems the new government is no better.

Tumeke has an interesting take on the DNA bill and an “exclusive” on police profiling here.

NoRightTurn blasts the DNA Bill as a violation of the Bill of Rights Act, here.

RadioNZ has a brief summary here.

What I would like to know is; How the law will differentiate between a law-abiding person  with a gated driveway and a suspected gang house with the same? Are we not about to criminalise both? And what are the enhanced surveillance powers being given to police, ostensibly to fight the gangs? Will they be turned upon other groups that the police think are threatening? Just how are we going to define “gangs”?

The report on the first reading debate can be heard here. (audio)

And as far a taxing the crims, well, populist an idea that it is, is it even remotely practical in the real world? Are criminals as likely to pay their fines on time as anyone else?

I will stop short of damning it all outright, but I wonder if we haven’t traded in the nanny state for Big Brother.

The Waste Minimisation Bill provides a comprehensive system for minimising and managing waste, and means producers will need to take much more responsibility for the waste created over the life of their products, including the end-of-life impacts.

Meanwhile Sue says that the Corrections (Mothers with Babies) Amendment Bill does three simple things:

First, once it comes into force, some mothers in prison will be able to keep their babies with them for up to two years, rather than the six months currently allowed. At the moment there is also at times a grace period of up to nine months for some mothers – this three month grace period may also in future be extended on top of the two years, in certain circumstances.

Secondly, mothers who are on remand or who are sentenced prisoners with a high security classification will, for the first time, in some cases have the option to have their babies live with them in prison.

And thirdly, the new law will provide more of a mandate to prison authorities to ensure that if a child in a mother’s care is being breastfed, she will be given opportunity and space to do so. At the same time, the Bill does not discriminate against mothers who cannot or are not breastfeeding – they will have the same option of keeping the baby with them where circumstances allow.

Also passing today was the Public Transport Amendment Bill which, thanks to Jeanette’s amendment is likely to be one of the more revolutionary and important pieces of transport legislation in the country. It only just got there by a one vote majority but it got there. So that’s a seriously good day for Green Party supporters.

Judith Collins would be screaming about the nanny state if we tried to tell her that she had to keep her Chardonnay under lock and key. But alcohol, which really does have a direct link to violence, would never face such a prohibition. This Bill is about being seen to do something about tagging, not actually doing something about it!