KEY POINTS:
What is the cheapest and best way to stop criminals? Before they even get to the womb of course.
This is not a draconian ban controlling who should have children.
It is the early-intervention law and order policy of Jim Anderton's left-wing Progressives Party.
An at-risk mother will already be in the justice and welfare system and easy to identify. Teach her about contraception and the advantages of delaying childbirth until she is settled and mature.
The cost? $500. Obviously a fraction of having the kid in jail in 18 years' time. The same formula applies when a child gets to school, and teachers have long been able to identify who will end up adult offenders. Dealing with the aggressive and defiant child then will work better and cost less.
It's not that easy of course. But the policy is at least a relatively novel stab at tackling law and order problems.
Public opinion polls consistently find widespread unease about law and order. It is a perennial electoral battleground, and most of the policies and argument feel familiar.
The slogans and ideas stay the same: Three strikes. Life means life. Zero tolerance. Stripping gangs of assets. Rehabilitation. Doing what works rather than what sounds good.
Victims' names change: Karl Kuchenbecker, Liam Ashley, Navtej Singh and Sergeant Don Wilkinson are those seared on our consciousness this term.
Crime changes too. Street gangs were not on the agenda last election - they are now. Tagging and youth crime are now up there as concerns.
Labour, after nine years in Government, is on the defensive. It has to roll with (and take) the punches, defending departmental cock-ups and its own policies and record.
It cannot run with headline-grabbing policies because it might have to implement them.
Labour law and order spokesman Phil Goff points to "four new prisons, full of inmates", unprecedented numbers of police, and long sentences for the most serious crimes. Legislation that will finally make it easier to strip criminals of their assets is ready to go.
Mr Goff also defends the much-maligned Department of Corrections, saying National spokesman Simon Power's "constant carping criticism" of those on the shop floor is "debilitating for people, most of whom do a good job". He rates National's law and order policy, such as abolishing parole for serious repeat offenders, as "spending dollars on things that are ineffective, rather than those that are less politically flamboyant [but] good at keeping the community safe."
Mr Goff, once an opposition law and order spokesman himself, said: "I could go back and find a thousand examples of opposition parties that promised the silver bullets and never delivered."
But having to "manage" law and order does not excuse Labour from having fresh ideas. Mr Goff got kudos for musing about banning gangs - even though it was South Australia's idea and a New Zealand First policy.
National stole a march with its "boot camp" initiative this year. Little has come out since, although its plans to abolish parole will satisfy hardliners. Like Labour, its policy is pragmatic: tough enough but not unrealistic. Its plan to take DNA samples upon arrest for imprisonable offences would have a real and immediate effect on crimefighting.
Mr Power indicates National will manage law and order differently, with one minister having oversight of its interlocking departments. He says Labour is committed to reducing the ever-growing prison population but National is less so.
National will need one new prison for starters. Mr Power did not know where this would go.
Of the hardliners, NZ First's Ron Mark has an achievable approach. He fronted the deal for 1000 more police after the last election and can be expected to take the ban on gangs to the line with either major party should NZ First be in a position to negotiate.
Mr Mark also targets other achievable areas, such as dropping the age of criminal responsibility, separating traffic and police or repatriating immigrant offenders to their homeland.
He pitches himself as the man who can twist the arm of the major parties to get the tough things done.
For the "big-bang" hardline approach, Act has a third-strike-and-out policy that will put such offenders in jail for 25 years to life. It wants broken-windows policing too. So how will it pay for it?
By pouring "one billion dollars" into law and order until it is fixed, says its spokesman, Sensible Sentencing Trust's David Garrett.
While unrealistic, it at least recognises people's concerns.
The Greens and the Maori Party hold the counterpoint. They want compulsory rehabilitation and to expand restorative justice, both of which are effective and have a place. The Maori Party wants to eventually close prisons.
United Future wants a multi-party accord on crime with the aim of shifting political debate to issues of fact - which anybody who's listened to the crime debate would surely agree with.
The parties have some good policies, some decent gimmicks. But where are the really fresh ideas?
IN A NUTSHELL
The shooting of Sergeant Don Wilkinson had links to gangs and drugs. What would you do to fight the P trade and how important is this?
SIMON POWER, NATIONAL
It is extremely important. Methamphetamine is an undeniable link to the increase of violent crime in the past nine years. We will make it easier for police to get interception warrants on gangs, to remove barriers and gang fortifications around gang houses, and put in gang membership as a factor to take into account at sentencing.
RON MARK, NZ FIRST
Outlaw gangs. Neither Labour nor National is prepared to do what is required to crack down on organised crime and particularly on gangs. NZ First's plan deals with the mindless thuggery of gangs. We need to label these gangs as domestic terrorists, give police the resources and power to go after them.
PHIL GOFF, LABOUR
Labour has given top priority to cracking down on P and criminal gangs. With 2000 extra staff, last year the police targeted gangs, bringing 26,000 charges and busting 190 drug labs. The law has been toughened, allowing a life sentence for trafficking P. New legislation doubles the penalty for participating in a criminal gang to 10 years and courts will soon be able to confiscate assets of gang members.
