Martin Tracey: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMartin Tracey: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 11 November 2015. Volume:710;Page:7945. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]TRACEY MARTIN (NZ First): Kia ora Mr Speaker. New Zealand First will be supporting the bill not because it actually—and I choose to disagree with Metiria Turei—provides oversight. [Interruption] Minister I am speaking and it is really interesting. You probably should listen.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): The Minister should sit down.TRACEY MARTIN: It is not because it provides oversight. New Zealand First was very very clear when the sister legislation to this bill went through that there was a major defect in that particular legislation at the time. It was around the oversight of the regime and the regime for the surveillance of New Zealanders. It was around the warrants that were issued. New Zealand First felt that there should have been a three-person panel to review those warrants within a certain time frame to make sure that New Zealanders were still being protected.But we are going to support this legislation because unlike the National Party we are not so arrogant as to think that we know everything. We are not so arrogant as to say—and it did not take Ms Dowie long; it certainly did not take Ms Dowie long to actually start to do the scaremongering about terrorists. What we are talking about here is a body of experts in their field being there to advise a Minister of the Crown. That is what they are there for. It did not take Mr Hudson very long either to suggest that we do not need an actual panel of experts to advise the Minister. The Minister can always ring up a mate. The Minister can always ring up somebody or a company that the Government prefers and that is what we are seeing a lot of.It may be why Mr Hudson there have been no complaints because business knows how anti-business this Government has become. Business knows that if they get offside with this Government they will not get any more contracts. Business knows that if they get offside with this Government—Ms Dowie could not tell us how. She went on about the point that there was no middleman between the decision maker and business that they would have full access and that they could talk about it. But Ms Dowie did not actually answer the question as to how. Ms Dowie does not know. The reality is that if you annoy this Government you do not get an appointment. That is why Ms Dowie and Mr Hudson there is a need for this legislation to go through at least as far as the select committee 2 years after—2 years after—to make sure that these companies are not being disadvantaged through the arrogance of this Government which thinks that it knows best.Ms Dowie quite clearly said how could it be expected that all the technical knowledge required be inside a panel of experts from industry yet the Government argues that the Minister does not require the experts’ advice. So they obviously believe that somehow being elected a National Party Minister makes you an expert beyond all those out there in the industry and that you do not require their advice. That is why the Government is opposing this bill. There are only two reasons for that—either those are the notes they have been given—and they have to follow the notes they have been given—or they are delusional. One of those options is what you could pick.From a New Zealand First perspective what would possibly be wrong with supporting this bill to the select committee if Mr Hudson and Ms Dowie are so confident that there have been no problems in the last 2 years around the Government Communications Security Bureau being able to dictate to New Zealand businesses what they will buy whom they will buy it from when they will buy it and how it will affect their balance sheets? If they believe that there is nothing wrong with that and there have been no complaints then send it to the select committee and prove it. Send it to the select committee support Clare Curran’s bill and prove it.But they will not. They will not send it to the select committee. Maybe there is a reason for that. Maybe they know that if this bill got to the select committee the very things that they say that we should not be worrying about the very things that they say are not a problem for industry may just surface. They may just come forth. We all know that Mr Hudson does not get many telecommunication companies in his firm and we all know that there is hardly any telecommunications access in Invercargill. Even though the National Government says there is a massive roll-out down there hardly anybody can pick up a phone down there. Ms Dowie surely does not get telecommunication—Sarah Dowie: I’ve got one.TRACEY MARTIN: You are in Wellington right now Ms Dowie. That is why you have got bars of signal. We know we can be confident that Ms Dowie and Mr Hudson actually do not see the telecommunications companies. We can be confident that this Government is denying this bill having any oxygen because it is frightened of the companies that may come forward and say: “We now have to pussyfoot around a National Government that is throwing its arrogant weight around when it comes to contracts; that only rings us if they are the ones that”—