Ardern Shane: Films Videos and Publications Classification  Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Ardern Shane: Films Videos and Publications Classification  Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:623;Page:18628] 
SHANE ARDERN (National—Taranaki-King Country) 
: 
 It is interesting to follow on in support of the bill from the Green member Keith Locke. He raised some interesting points about what the definition of undesirable pornographic or illicit material might be. I am reminded of the image of the girl during the Viet Nam War. That was a very powerful image which all of us will remember and it had a completely different message from what this bill might state as an undesirable outcome. I am sympathetic to the argument but I say to the member that in most cases—99 percent of cases—the difference is absolute. In my view those who cannot tell the difference between an image of a naked child portrayed in a sexual way versus the image that I mentioned really need to have a close look at what they are trying to liberalise. 
It is absolute as far as I am concerned. 
So too in my view is the objection to the notion that this kind of activity should be tolerated in any way in society. Therefore I thank the officials and the Minister who took note of a late submission and introduced the Supplementary Order Paper that he suggests should pass through Parliament along with the bill. The reason is that it harmonises the situation we find ourselves in in New Zealand with the situation of internationally comparable Western nations. 
I also say to the Minister that this is timely legislation because of what has happened with technology. If we look at what is the case today with regard to covert filming and the ability to do that compared with what was the case in 1993 for example then we see there is no doubt that some kind of amendment to the existing Act is necessary. Many submissions that came to the select committee or certainly the advice officials had received suggested that that was so. We can see how that is the case today with cellphones that can take movies and the like. So I say to the Minister: “Well done on that part.” 
The part I guess that needs to be further thrashed out is whether the censor who is ultimately the person who will make the final judgment call will find that the legislative framework around that is clear and that is the question our colleague Stephen Franks raised. The Minister may want to go back to his advisers and ask that question. I simply do not know. Mr Franks has submitted that that is not the case and that there is a bit of ambiguity. I do not know. Certainly the officials may want to have a look at that. The reality is that I do not think there would be a person in Parliament without exception who would not want to see something in place to safeguard our children against the kind of activity those people want to be involved in. 
I have said it before and I will say it again that I cannot understand them. I am somebody who is fairly simple in my thinking around this stuff. There is a black and white line between what is right and what is wrong and if there is any ambiguity in the minds of people as far as that line is concerned then they really do need to have a look at themselves. 
It is interesting to look at some of the statistics around child abuse in this country. They are alarming. We have to ask the question: how in a modern society like today’s does anybody get into a position where they consider for more than a few seconds that the kind of activity this legislation is designed to protect our children against is acceptable or is something from which they should derive some kind of pleasure—perverted pleasure as it must be? So I say to the Minister that he should take notice of those groups that have done that work. I know that he has in terms of his amendment but he should also take notice of the number of other alarming statistics that seem to be being promoted by various groups. I have in front of me a letter from the Parentline Charitable Trust which has written to me in that regard. The trust quotes some figures. I have no ability to know whether they are right or wrong but I presume they are right.