Brown Peter: Crimes (Intimate Covert Filming) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Brown Peter: Crimes (Intimate Covert Filming) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:629;Page:1785] 
PETER BROWN (Deputy Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 New Zealand First members wholeheartedly support this bill. We have known for quite some time that there are some weirdos and wonder-boys out there and this bill is an attempt to put some control on those sorts of people. It is absolutely disgraceful that people can get away with filming people in covert situations and trading the pictures on the Internet or wherever. 
Christopher Finlayson 
: Bit like Saunders Unsworth. 
PETER BROWN 
: I am sure the member does not really believe that. 
I was intrigued when the member who has just resumed his seat mentioned the young lad who went to a farmhouse drilled a hole in the floorboards and put a microphone through into the bedroom. The police—and I know the member is an ex-police officer—had some difficulty in working out how to charge the chap. Never mind whether the recording was in the bedroom—it could be in the lounge or anywhere. Surely putting microphones into people’s houses and recording what they are saying or doing must be a no-no under the current laws. It must be a no-no in any set of circumstances. I am not talking about sexual situations; I am talking about family discussions. That seems to me to be a total no-no but this bill does not cover that. 
The concern I have after reading this bill is that the police are exempt as are customs officers officers employed by the New Zealand Security Intelligence Service employees in the Department of Corrections and lawyers. What about licensed private detectives? Are they classified under new section 216M(1)(f): “any other person or member of a class of persons prescribed in regulations made under this Act;”? Surely if a couple are going through difficult times and the wife is wondering where the husband gets to on occasions and wants to employ the services of a private detective—or vice versa; the husband is worried about where the wife gets to on occasions—it is legitimate to engage a private detective to photograph or video whatever he or she sees for no other reason than peace of mind. Clearly it cannot be distributed to the wider public. In my view a partner in a relationship that is a bit rocky and who suspects the other partner of getting up to something has some rights to determine whether that is true or false. This bill seems to be silent on that sort of issue. 
 I cannot believe that paragraph (f)—“any other person or member of a class of persons prescribed in regulations made under this Act;”—embraces licensed private detectives. It seems to me that a lawyer or agent might cover the situation but I believe the bill should give some consideration to embracing licensed private detectives. But we respect that the Government Administration Committee has listened to a number of submissions on the bill and has come up with a reasonably able working bill which New Zealand First will support. 
I am concerned that the former chairperson of the Government Administration Committee saw fit to praise Bill Hastings beyond repute. I am quite pleased Bill Hastings has some concerns in this area but I should put it on the record that some of the DVDs that are allowed to go through the censor’s office leave a lot to be desired. I want to make it quite clear that I have not seen those DVDs but I have read the censor’s reports. [ 
Interruption 
] I invite the member who is chuckling over there to read the reports and see whether he approves of them. While we are releasing that sort of garbage into society we will reap the downside and I think we are seeing that more and more. Censorship in this country in my view needs to be addressed a little bit more comprehensively. [ 
Interruption 
] Well the members over there mutter. They should go and see some of the films that are being released in this country right now. 
Simon Power 
: The member has not seen them. How does he know? 
PETER BROWN 
: I have read the reports. For the member’s enlightenment the censor has to write a detailed report on the contents of all those DVDs and films. The member should read one of them and see whether he approves. He is a young member. I think he is a father is he not? When his children grow to the age when they will see that sort of garbage then he might be a little bit more worried. His youngsters are not yet involved with those sorts of DVDs. 
New Zealand First will support the bill. We have concerns though and we have indicated our concern that the bill does not quite go far enough in terms of allowing private detectives who are engaged on a legitimate surveillance operation to be exempt. Nevertheless we will support the bill and we will give consideration to producing a Supplementary Order Paper when the bill reaches the Committee stage.