Mapp Wayne: Terrorism Suppression Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Mapp Wayne: Terrorism Suppression Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:626;Page:21635] 
Dr WAYNE MAPP (National—North Shore) 
: 
 I want to make a comment on the comment that Mr Locke has just made. He said that the Greens are now the only party opposing the bill and that is true. It is also worth reflecting upon the fact that the Greens represent 5 percent of New Zealand. Strictly speaking one might expect them to get only one call in 20 but of course it does not quite work that way. So I believe that the Green Party can hardly say that in this Parliament their views are not well represented. I appreciate that Mr Locke puts a lot of work into representing his viewpoint. 
I want to pick up briefly on the points that others have made about the important distinction between act and entity. Section 8(1) of the Terrorism Suppression Act—and I am pleased that New Zealand First has now recognised the reality of this—applies only to funding the terrorist act itself. It has taken this bill the Terrorism Suppression Amendment Bill (No 2) to rectify what should have been done before under the United Nations convention—that is to include the funding of entities themselves. That is the sort of thing that needs to be fixed up. It does speak of a general problem. There is no doubt that the legislation in 2002 was passed in urgency and I do not mean “urgency” in a parliamentary sense but under the tempo of urgent times. There was an immediate need internationally to strengthen domestic law and international law to deal with the scourge of terrorism and most countries have acted. It is also true to say that most countries have had to fix up their legislation as well because in the nature of things legislation passed quickly is unlikely to be entirely perfected. 
I conclude by saying that National supports very strongly indeed the measures to strengthen the laws against terrorism. Both myself and Mr Carter are deeply offended by the statements of two Government speakers: the junior Labour whip and Mr Maharey. They alleged—not just alleged; actually stated—that we were insincere and were trivialising the issue. That is entirely false. I think it is quite reprehensible for the Government—[ 
Interruption 
] Well Mr Hughes’ colleague Mr Maharey included myself I would have to say and I think it is quite reprehensible for the Government to make that allegation. At no point did any of the National speakers seek to score some political point against the Government on this issue. We recognise that the Government has been reasonably forthright— 
Darren Hughes 
: Mr Carter did. 
Dr WAYNE MAPP 
: No he did not. He had been forthright in dealing with terrorism. We recognise that a substantial contribution by the New Zealand armed forces has been committed over a substantial period of time and indeed it is continuing to deal literally with the lair of terrorism in Afghanistan. I think it is unfortunate that the debate in that particular area took an unfortunate turn because it says that the Government maybe due to nervousness about an upcoming poll is losing perspective and its members are making personal attacks whenever they can. 
On an issue like this I think it is reasonable that we raise our sights and deal with the issue seriously. I have to acknowledge that Mr Locke does deal with the issues seriously. He does not try to personalise them. He always puts his point of view forward reasonably. I do not agree with it—it is fundamentally wrong. He does not seem to recognise the dangers of terrorism. But to have personality politics intrude into a debate of this nature I think was hugely unfortunate and lamentable in particular from a senior front-bencher of the Government. I conclude by saying I would like to think that the Government would take on board those comments. We on this side of the House expect serious issues relating to national security to be debated without personality politics being played out in this Chamber.