Fenton Darien: Aviation Security Legislation Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Fenton Darien: Aviation Security Legislation Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 11 September 2007. Volume:642;Page:11744. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
DARIEN FENTON (Labour) 
: 
 I cannot promise to give a speech as short as that of the Hon Maurice Williamson and I say “Well done” to him. The issue on Part 1 that received a lot of attention was the ability for there to be foreign inflight security officers. New sections 15A to 15G are the operative provisions including new section 15B. 
It sounds pretty scary when we read out new section 15B which states: “In-flight security officers may possess carry and use firearms weapons ammunition …” etc. that have been approved by the Director of Civil Aviation. It goes on to state that new sections 15D to 15F provide powers for the in-flight security officers to arrest restrain and search a person whom they believe is attempting to hijack damage or destroy the aircraft. Most New Zealanders find the idea of armed anybodies anywhere to be pretty abhorrent. It is always a shock when we go around other countries to be greeted by armed police or security officers holding AK-47s or bearing other prominently displayed weapons. It is an idea that is quite difficult for us. 
Hon Maurice Williamson 
: How does the member know all these things? 
DARIEN FENTON 
: I say to Mr Williamson that it is anathema to our way of life. I am trying to agree with the member here. In the end if we as free and mobile citizens would like to travel to other countries that are much less safe than ours then we have to take these precautions. Because we need other countries’ planes coming to our country we have to accept some changes that may not sit very well with our day-to-day life in New Zealand. It is a balancing act between freedom and security. 
When it comes to our families’ lives and the lives of our countrymen and countrywomen we must do everything reasonable to ensure that they are safe. It is not pretty and it does not feel good but in the end I would far rather know that every possible step has been taken to ensure the safety of passengers than to have one of our planes spread out in pieces in some foreign country on a remote hill somewhere because we did not accept that we live in a changed word. 
I mention that we are debating the Committee stage of the bill on a very significant day. It is 9/11 or 11 September and none of us who woke up in the morning on that day and saw those terrible things happening will forget that. Although we have a choice as to whether we travel the workers on the planes do not and I am worried about them. What happens to them? They have to get on the planes every day and surely we want to ensure that their safety is protected as well of course as the safety of the passengers. 
So we hope the need will never arise and that we never see armed inflight security officers. I am glad that we have some protection in Government policy whereby there has to be a full Cabinet approval process and the current Government policy is that this cannot happen. We do not want to see it happen but if it ever should happen it has to have full Cabinet sign-off.