Collins Judith: Search and Surveillance Bill — In Committee 
Collins Judith: Search and Surveillance Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:678;Page:947] 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Justice) 
: 
 There has been a very interesting debate tonight and I would like to thank all participants for their contributions. I think there have been some intelligent contributions from both National and Labour and I think they have been very helpful. However there are a few things I want to talk about just to respond to some of the comments. The first is around the Serious Fraud Office and its powers. As has been rightly said these powers have actually been in place for 22 years. This is not a recent phenomenon. It has been around for 22 years with wide-ranging powers. The previous Labour Government did as has been noted wish to merge the Serious Fraud Office into the police and those members clearly thought that that was going to continue to happen because that is the rationale they tell us for the way they first initiated this Search and Surveillance Bill that we are debating tonight. However the National Party campaigned in 2008 on keeping the Serious Fraud Office and frankly in hindsight that was a very good thing to do. We did not know at that time—I do not think anyone in this House would have known—that we were about to walk into one of the biggest financial messes in finance companies that we can remember since the 1980s; and frankly that was when the need for the Serious Fraud Office was first apparent. So it was in fact in hindsight a good thing to do. 
In terms of issues around media freedoms I think media freedoms are extremely important and I actually was a little bit concerned to hear some contributors tonight talk about a couple of issues. The first was around the police investigating the so-called teapot inquiry. The Hon Phil Goff who has just resumed his seat was talking about that and using that as an example of something we should be concerned about. Well actually we should be concerned if a Government instructs police to do things like that and we should be concerned if a Government instructs police not to do things like that. Under this Government—and I am sure under previous Governments—Ministers did not instruct police to do things like that. I note that when I was Minister of Police there was in fact— 
Hon Phil Goff 
: The Prime Minister laid the complaint. 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: Yes and as any citizen can and the police do not have to investigate it any further than they choose to. Just as when the Hon Darren Hughes was involved in media and police investigations I was instantly accused by some in the Labour Party as being involved in it. I did not even know about it. I found out like everyone else did by gossip around the place. So let us be very clear here that this Government did not tell the Serious Fraud Office to go “charging into the  
National Business Review 
” to use the words that have been used about it. We did not ask the office to do production orders. What we ask people to do is to actually perform in accordance with their obligations. 
The Serious Fraud Office at that time was investigating South Canterbury Finance. Frankly there has been one fraud after another just recently shown in some guilty convictions around South Canterbury Finance. This is a very difficult situation and I would have thought that most people here would think about why we have those powers. 
The other point I want to make really about this evening’s debate is that what I am hearing from the Labour Party is that it in essence agrees with this bill. That is what I am hearing except for the fact it does not include the Serious Fraud Office. That is it in essence. I have worked with Charles Chauvel to get some amendments through which we are putting in our Supplementary Order Paper to try to help the media freedoms and deal with some other issues. The Minister responsible for the Serious Fraud Office the Hon Anne Tolley has agreed to make sure that the Serious Fraud Office reports in its annual report about its examination orders production orders and what it does and when so that we as a Parliament can have some confidence in that these are not being overused. I think that is a very good thing and I thank the Minister for that. 
But I think it is important to understand that if this bill does not get through on 17 April all police covert surveillance is turned off—all of it; that is it. There is nothing else—that is it. It is gone. What we have is a major party like the Labour Party saying that yes it agrees with the bill and thinks it is a great bill and in fact it started it but because the Government is not including the Serious Fraud Office—which by the way this party has never intended to do and has never said it would—Labour will not vote for the bill. So I hope that after this debate common sense will reign and that this Parliament can come together with the major parties which in my opinion are the parties that have to actually look to responsible Government because they have in the past and they will in the future. I think that we need to actually come together and say what is really important here—and this bill is.