McKee Nicole; O'Connor GregNICOLE McKEE (ACT): Thank you Mr Speaker. I stand on behalf of the ACT Party for this the third reading of the Counter-Terrorism Acts (Designation and Control Orders) Amendment Bill in support as we have been throughout the different hearings of this bill. Mr Speaker I'm going to divert a little bit away from the bill if you would just give me this moment to reflect on a trip that I've just made with the Pacific Mission 2023. One of the countries we went to was Fiji which is experiencing its very first coalition Government ever. In speaking with one of the select committees there one of their members asked the question How do you work in a bipartisan way within your Government because we've never had to experience that ourselves before?" and my answer to him was that when we can look for the betterment of the people of New Zealand we can come to conclusions usually where we can be mostly all in agreement. I think that this is one of those bills where it has been complex and it has been hard to understand and yet the officials were fantastic in giving us the information that allowed us to all come together and actually be able to support counter-terrorism controls and designations within our country. There are two parts to this bill. The first part changes the provisions that are held in the Terrorism Suppression Act 2002 and the second addresses changes to the Terrorism Suppression (Control Orders) Act 2019. Since 2002 when we had the Terrorism Suppression Act the Prime Minister of the day was able to designate only entities rather than individuals and what we have found is that we've now got a lot of lone actors within the world let alone New Zealand that are going off and creating terrorist attacks based on their own ideology rather than that of an entity. They may follow an entity but it's not the entity itself that is committing this attack or even directing it; it is the lone individual. So we're making changes that an individual can actually have a designation placed upon them rather than an entire entity like ISIS or the Taliban for example. The Christchurch terrorist is a great example of where we should use this legislation and in fact the royal commission inquiry had made a recommendation that make these changes because of him. Tarrant has been convicted of murder of attempted murder and of terrorism. Our courts have determined that he carried out the terrorist act on our soil and this amendment means that he can be declared as a terrorist entity in his own right. He doesn't have to belong to a group; his actions and subsequent convictions are enough for any Prime Minister of the day to make that declaration as to his status. By this designation being made it also means that no third party can provide any material support to him. He cannot be supported by property being made available to him and if he had had any property here in New Zealand no third party could deal with it on his behalf. It actually cuts potential supply and support from others towards a designated lone actor determined to be a terrorist in his own right. Our changes also include that when a person is designated as a terrorist and is then incarcerated a hold will be placed on their designation while they are incarcerated. Currently they can actually apply for the designation to be revoked after a mere three years and they can apply for this based on the fact that they are entitled to a three-year review and they're incarcerated so they cannot be a terror to the public. By being in jail they can't be cavorting with a terrorist entity and this means that the terrorist could no longer meet the requirements needed for the designation. Our changes will mean that the incarcerated terrorist designation can be placed on hold for that time that they are incarcerated under His Majesty's roof—that is the requirement for continuing the designation is able to be placed on hold for the duration of that incarceration—and it saves the Prime Minister of the day having to reflect on whether or not that person still meets those requirements. This brings me to the second part of the legislative changes and this is about how we deal with designated terrorist entities once they leave prison. Being able to place a control order on to a person who is thought to pose a real threat to society will now be able to occur. We all recall the New Lynn supermarket horror attack of 2021 where a person injured six people three of them critically in his frenzied attack. That individual was a lone actor who was inspired by ISIS. Our legislation prevented him from being retained in a prison environment. Because we could not impose stricter control orders upon him he ended up under heavy surveillance and thankfully that surveillance enabled lives to be saved on that horrific day.But we have to be smarter about how we deal with these individuals. That is why ACT is supporting these changes. Having police watching individuals 24 hours a day seven days a week because there's no other option available to them needed to change. With that I'd like to acknowledge the police and the work that they did not only in identifying that this person was a risk but actually being on his shoulder and able to stop that attack from being any worse than it already was.We hope that by changing the legislation and by creating new protocols for managing electronic monitoring and allowing each order to be constructed for and unique to an individual in their circumstances—we expect that will greatly assist New Zealand Police. I'd like to thank the Minister who in the committee of the whole House last night clarified clause 15 within the bill which relates to the objectionable material additions that we have placed into this bill. We did have a lot of concern from members who submitted to us that it would create possible terrorist entities for having possession of certain elements that they were deemed to be prohibited. The clarification from the Minister last night detailed that it's actually not being in possession of objectionable material alone but rather as well as meeting other criteria to be a designated entity. Importing objectionable material alone will not designate a terrorist; rather it will assist in the determination after other factors have been identified.So in summary the changes to the Terrorism Suppression Act 2002 will effectively mean that an individual can be named as a designated entity the expiry of a designation is paused if the person is in jail the three-yearly review is retained but the grounds for that have been amended and the designated entity will still have the ability to challenge the designation and its ongoing status but this will be done through a review process rather than a revocation one. The changes to the control orders will add some new definitions which will include and allow control orders on community-based sentences and electronic monitoring as well as post-detention conditions and residential requirements.In March 2019 we lost our innocence as a country. Our police expect us to help them protect our people and this is a step that we can assist them with once an individual has been designated as a terrorist threat. At least one part of the recommendations from the royal commission inquiry is focusing on the terrorist and their activities rather than the good citizens of this country—that we can and will support.DEPUTY SPEAKER: This debate is interrupted and is set down for resumption next sitting day. The House stands adjourned until 2 p.m. tomorrow.Debate interrupted.The House adjourned at 9.55 p.m."