Wall LouisaLOUISA WALL (Labour—Manurewa): Tēnā koe e Te Māngai o Te Whare. I'd like to contribute a kōrero that's based on some of the information that the Minister in the chair the Hon Tracey Martin has contributed tonight and I want to thank her as well for her constructive engagement in this process. It really is about the Strategic Goods List that I did find on the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade's website and the definition of dual-use". Essentially this part is dealing with dual-use goods. If you're brokering you need to be registered and you get a permit. If you're engaged in brokering dual-use goods that are not being used for military purposes—and I guess that's the caveat—you don't need to register and you don't need a permit. But you actually need to understand what dual-use goods are. So by definition they're goods and technology developed for commercial purposes but which may be used either as military components or for the development or production of military systems or weapons of mass destruction. Herein lies some really interesting distinctions because included in that are such things as technology. So it's specific information or software necessary for the development production or use of a product. This information takes the form of technological data or technological assistance. It can be instructions skills training working knowledge consulting services the transfer of technological data that may be blueprints plans diagrams models frameworks tables engineering designs specs and those sorts of things.Herein lies I guess the challenge of this bill. What we're essentially instituting in Part 2 of this piece of legislation as my colleague Duncan Webb highlighted is an exception and we particularly focused on staff—you know employees working for somebody in a factory in a warehouse—and how would they know? I think that whole question of "how would they know?" is really important.But I guess herein lies why clause 4(3)(b) is really important and the gazetting of that Strategic Goods List and ensuring actually that employees have access to information that ensures they understand the industry that they're involved in and I guess the technology or the goods that they are handling on a day-to-day basis. It also—and I'd love the Minister to elaborate fully—is relevant to clause 18A which is actually about brokers providing an annual report to the secretary.The reason that we're wanting that form of transparency is because if you are a broker we want to actually know where those goods are going. It's in the process of understanding where those goods are going that actually you possibly can make a determination about what the use of those dual-use goods is or the use of I guess the military goods and technology—what they will be used for.So I'm really interested in the Minister's perspective. Each of these parts isn't discrete; they're actually all interrelated. Everything in this bill fits together and I think in a really nice way. I would like some clarification I do have to say in terms of the offences—where did the fines come from? Where did the $100000 for individuals and the $1 million in any other case come from? I mean obviously that's a deterrent and what we're trying to do is to ensure that people who are engaged in activities either brokering or dual-use technology or goods actually understand that this sector and the industry that they're choosing to be part of is one that we must be vigilant about. We actually have to ensure that the Arms Trade Treaty isn't being compromised by people who choose to engage in these activities.What we also know is this isn't just a theoretical exercise from our perspective. There have been occasions and instances where people have tried to sell and to transfer the goods that this bill is talking about. So it would be really good to hear from the Minister about how this whole package is seen as the best deterrent for people who want to trade and to use dual-use goods in a negative way and how this is going to stop that behaviour."