Street Maryan: Harmful Digital Communications Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeStreet Maryan: Harmful Digital Communications Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 14 November 2013. Volume:694;Page:14751. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon MARYAN STREET (Labour): It gives me some pleasure to rise to speak to the Harmful Digital Communications Bill. Although it may have been a long time coming that does not alter the fact that it is here now and I welcome that. We are supporting it on this side of the House with some reservations. They are only reservations that anybody would have around this kind of issue I think. I want to outline three areas in particular that will need careful scrutiny on the part of the Justice and Electoral Committee which the previous speaker Scott Simpson chairs so adeptly.It is true as Scott Simpson said that there was a Law Commission issues paper that came out in 2011 but also last year the Law Commission’s ministerial briefing calledHarmful Digital Communications: The adequacy of the current sanctions and remedies came out. I think that that is a significant contribution to how we might get legislation todeal with issues that a decade ago people had not envisaged arising. Because of new technologies it is incumbent on this House to make sure that we keep our laws up to date. I think that my colleague Andrew Little put it well when he referred to the law chasing or having to keep up some pace with some technological developments.It puts me in mind of the time when I was serving on the Commerce Committee and we dealt with copyright legislation. It was very difficult to get copyright legislation that did not put people out of business and yet protected the rights of artists and creative people in particular to their work. With every exposure through digital media the copyright problem became more pronounced. It did not matter whether it was music or writing; it became more and more difficult to get the law to fit.This issue is not dissimilar. There is a sense of the horse having bolted already but it is appropriate that this House turn its mind to it. We are all acutely sensitised to this issue because of recent revelations about Facebook behaviour that has been nothing short of despicable. Whether or not crimes end up proven to have been committed the behaviour is despicable. I think that some young people will find their reputations and their career prospects destroyed because of what they have indulged in by way of Facebook revelations. That is a lesson to all young people or will be in time I think.There are three things I want to cover. First of all I am particularly interested in Part 2 of the bill which refers to the number of Acts that need to be amended by the passage of this legislation. First of all there is the Crimes Act and that is almost self-explanatory. There are three other pieces of legislation that will be amended simply by the insertion of words that are to do with electronic communication or electronic media or words like “participation in fora for the exchange of ideas and information.” These pieces of legislation are the Harassment Act of 1997 the Human Rights Act of 1993 and the Privacy Act of 1993. Each of these presents the select committee with a different nuance a different layer of application of this bill.The Harassment Act—fine we are bringing that up to date by putting electronic media and electronic communication into the meaning of “harassment” as it is expressed in that Act. That is a good thing because we are aware of and as I say at the moment acutely sensitised to harassment bullying and exposure of people in a way that is despicable as I have said. So the Harassment Act is going to be an important part of the consideration.The second important point in my mind is the amendments to the Human Rights Act. Subpart 3 in Part 2 of the bill will amend the Human Rights Act. It will amend section 61 which addresses racial disharmony; it will amend section 62 which refers to sexual harassment; and it will amend section 63 which refers to racial harassment. That is critically important because next come the amendments to the Privacy Act. There are provisions in the Human Rights Act that with the addition of this bill and the amendment by this bill will really go to the heart of freedom of speech and the inability of people to compromise other people’s right to exist peacefully. That is covered in the Human Rights Act through a range of provisions and making electronic media or electronic communications susceptible to those Acts is a good thing. We do not need neo-Nazi fascist websites to proliferate in this country. I am pleased if by this means there will be some address of that. In other countries around the world we have certainly seen such proliferation and that is undesirable.The third point is around privacy. This bill will amend the Privacy Act but it is going to be an area that requires considerable submission from interested parties and real consideration of those submissions on the part of the select committee. In addition to that we need to be careful around internet service providers and we need to be mindful of the impact of “notice and takedown” measures on their services and their ability to function as businesses. That is another area and I hope that that businessconsideration will be represented by a submission from InternetNZ because the bill does impact on it.I think that this bill is a worthwhile measure. It has got some fish-hooks in it. It has got very sensitive and far-reaching implications across other parts of our legislation. I commend it to the House.