Collins Judith: Films Videos and Publications Classification  Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Collins Judith: Films Videos and Publications Classification  Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:623;Page:18430] 
JUDITH COLLINS (National—Clevedon) 
: 
 I rise on behalf of the National Party to support this bill. This afternoon I thought I would have to come down to the House and give the Hon Phil Goff a right royal bollocking but I am not going to do that. The reason is that the Minister has listened to the pleas of ACT MP Deborah Coddington and of Denise Ritchie from End Child Prostitution Child Pornography Child Sex Tourism and Trafficking in Children for Sexual Purposes (ECPAT New Zealand). He has listened and he has decided that yes our laws about the possession of child pornography should be at least the same as those of our comparable neighbour Australia and of Canada. But that is the least of it. 
As a mother—and I am sure many mothers listening to this would agree—I cannot think of any penalty tough enough for the people who use children in those pornographic and disgusting ways. Frankly sentencing them to be hung drawn and quartered might be a little too soft on them. I see my colleague on the other side Jill Pettis agreeing. There is absolutely no reason at all why anybody in any circumstance should ever be able to trade produce or enjoy—if we could ever think of using such a word in relation to that sort of degradation and abuse of children—such material; yet we think we are doing such a great job in stating that possession is punishable by 5 years’ imprisonment and trading by 10 years’. Frankly we cannot think of anything else to do but to lock them up and throw away the key. 
Unfortunately as the Minister has stated there has been a proliferation of that sort of smut and filth ever since the Internet became something most of us use. Unfortunately the ease with which that material is sent around the world means that we are talking about young teenage boys accessing such filth. I know that that is judgmental but I am never afraid to be judgmental. Frankly on some occasions we just have to say: “That is filth.” because that is the sort of thing that is going on unfortunately. 
I note having read the bill that there are all sorts of offences to do with showing pornography to under-18-year-olds. The Minister has told us tonight how much he thinks of Denise Ritchie who runs ECPAT New Zealand and the Stop Demand Foundation for whom I also have a very high regard. He has told us how much he thinks of her but he was not thinking much of her when she asked this House not to do the things we did with the prostitution reform legislation because of the fears of having younger people driven into and kept in crimes of prostitution. What we have in this bill— 
Hon Phil Goff 
: It’s just an underhand attack on Don Brash for supporting the prostitution bill. 
JUDITH COLLINS 
: The Minister had a fair go and he should let me have a fair go. The Minister should not seek to attack someone just because she is telling him the truth. 
This bill states that it is an offence to show pornography to children—children mind you—under the age of 18. But we all know that around this country—in Christchurch as we heard from Tim Barnett; in South Auckland where my electorate is; and certainly all around the country—children of 12 14 and 16 years of age are prostituting themselves on the streets. We get all excited about preventing people from showing children pornography; yet nothing is happening now to stop those kids from being abused. For anyone to say that those children know what they are doing—well they might know exactly what they are about to do—is to say only half the story. I say to such people that by goodness those children do not know the consequences. It is an unfortunate irony that we can get all excited about restricting pornography but we are not really brave enough to do something about the people who abuse those children. 
When I looked through this bill I saw that the commentary stated that the select committee will look at “hate speech”. What will be next? “Hate thought”? For goodness’ sake! Do we in this Parliament not have something better to do than to try to regulate “hate speech”? We might as well in fact regulate “hate thought”. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: The member’s own party supported that; the members sitting behind her—Shane Ardern and Lindsay Tisch. Why doesn’t she talk to her colleagues? 
JUDITH COLLINS 
: It is about time that that Minister took some responsibility for the fact that it was his negligence that allowed the House to get this bill in this state. [ 
Interruption 
] 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: To help the honourable member I refer my colleagues to Speaker’s ruling 56/1. Interjections are to be rare reasonable and—as a former colleague used to say—if at all possible witty though I have given up on that. 
JUDITH COLLINS 
: One could not call the Hon Phil Goff witty—not by a long shot. 
If we are to regulate this “hate speech” the Minister is shouting about there are many other things we could also look at. We could look at the fact that 12 13 and 14-year-olds are wandering around the streets of inner-city Christchurch prostituting themselves—as told to us by Tim Barnett—yet nothing happens. What will be the next move for “hate thought”? 
I would like to say on a positive note for a moment how pleased I am that the Department of Internal Affairs is doing a good job in catching the low lifes who trade in and use the sorts of images dealt with by the bill. However as I did on the first reading of the bill I would like to sound a word of warning about possession. 
I am concerned about all the spam emails and the secret things hidden in emails. We in this Parliament get an awful lot of them. Fortunately we have very sophisticated technology that is supposed to stop them coming into Parliament but a lot of people would not have that technology at home. It worries me that people might have illegal things on their hard drive and not even know they are there. Unfortunately someone who does not know they are there could end up being prosecuted. We know from the Australian experience of the arrests that have occurred there that this sort of crime does not just affect a particular group or even a particular gender; it is prolific and goes right through our society among people in any occupation and people who lack an occupation. It is not something of which we should ever say: “It’s just a particular group.” It is not. We have seen that in New Zealand only recently. That is a far more important issue than something like “hate speech” or even “hate thought” which is sure to be the next thing. 
I note that the Minister talked about covert filming. Of course we will have to be very careful in relation to covert filming; otherwise the news media will not have anything particularly exciting to show. 
Dianne Yates 
: Why are people in swimming pool dressing rooms doing it? 
JUDITH COLLINS 
: As Dianne Yates has pointed out we certainly do not want to see people being filmed as they get changed to go into the swimming pool. She is quite right—especially not most of us here who would not look too good. 
Dianne Yates 
: Especially not me. 
JUDITH COLLINS 
: She says: especially not herself! But I agree with her; I fully support her. That issue is certainly something we want to look at. 
But at the same time let us look at the really big stuff that we know is already happening in New Zealand. Again I mention child prostitution yet we sit here turn a blind eye and say that it is all right because we have said they can use condoms—or something silly like that. At the end of the day none of it will be made better by the current Government. Although the Government likes to talk tough unfortunately  
Time  
magazine has said that this country could in fact become a safe haven for paedophiles. 
Jill Pettis 
: It had George Bush as man of the year! I cancelled my subscription. 
JUDITH COLLINS 
: I am very concerned that the chief Labour Party whip has just insulted the President of the United States here in the Parliament of New Zealand—considering that the United States is our second-largest trading partner. That is the sort of anti-business rhetoric I would expect from that particular party and that particular member who is now—[ 
Interruption 
] She is is she not? I am sure that traders and farmers in this country are listening to this and asking what the Government is doing in trying to upset our second major trading partner. In fact all it is doing is trying to avoid looking at the issue. The Government hates it when it is told the truth. 
I would like to close by saying that I support the changes the Minister says he will make. We have not actually seen them of course; he only says he will make them. He said so today only after Denise Ritchie got on the phone to people in this House and told us what the changes to the bill should be after Deborah Coddington came to this House and told us what should be done and after  
Time 
 magazine pointed out that this Minister and this Government have made our country a particularly soft option for paedophiles.