Prosser Richard: Summary Offences (Possession of High-power Laser Pointers) Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeProsser Richard: Summary Offences (Possession of High-power Laser Pointers) Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 25 June 2014. Volume:699;Page:18899. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]RICHARD PROSSER (NZ First):I am pleased to rise on behalf of New Zealand First to take a short call to speak to this Committee of the whole House as we debate the Summary Offences (Possession of High-power Laser Pointers) Amendment Bill. New Zealand First has supported this bill from the outset and continues to do so. This is as I have mentioned in earlier stages of this debate a fine member’s bill from a fine member. It will be a fitting legacy for Dr Calder as he departs this House at the election and strides out in search of pastures new and one would hope in some ways greener.Hon Members: No!RICHARD PROSSER: There is nothing Freudian in that. Members will appreciate that time is against us as the election approaches—looming one might say like a colossus on the horizon and dominating the attention of members and hopefuls alike not least because of the not inconsiderable degree of overlap between those two categories. That being the case I do not intend to consume too much of the remainder of the 50th Parliament in arguing the self-evident merits of a bill that we are happy to support into law. Its passing is of greater import and I do not believe that delay for its own sake is warranted. Other members who are also in support will agree I am sure.However there are two aspects of the bill on which I wish to make very brief comment. The first is the definition of a hand-held laser and the recommendation by the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee that this be changed to “high-power laser pointers” along with changing the name of the bill to the Summary Offences (Possession of High-power Laser Pointers) Amendment Bill. That will bring the bill into line with other legislation such as the Health (High-power Laser Pointers) Regulations 2013 and the Customs Import Prohibition (High-power Laser Pointers) Order 2013.This makes a distinction and it is an important one. The definition limits the power output of permissible laser points to less than 1 milliwatt but also specifies that such pointers be designed or intended to be operated while held in the hand. If this distinction were not made the prohibition could well be made to apply to certain laser devices with a power output greater than 1 milliwatt but which are not designed to be operated while held in one hand including certain laser sighting devices fitted to certain firearms and perhaps even including one or more such devices owned by myself. I am most satisfied therefore by the distinction so made. I am very pleased to report that the New Zealand First Party is also most satisfied and is pleased to be able to support the committee’s recommendation.The second aspect is the commencement date for the bill which as I have alluded to earlier we do not agree with.The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson): No no. We are on clause 1. We do not talk about the commencement date; that is in clause 2. When we are doing the bill clause by clause we can talk only about what is in the clauses. It is not a bill where we are coming back to the clauses which is what we do when we are doing the bill part by part. When we are doing a clause by clause debate we talk only about the clause—nothing else. We are on the title.RICHARD PROSSER: That being the case I will wrap up what was going to be a fairly short speech anyway by reassuring the Minister Paula Bennett that laser pointers as used by motivational speakers and others such as lecturers usually have a power output of round about 0.05 of a milliwatt so they fall well into that category of under 1 milliwatt and neither the Minister nor the sponsor of the bill Cam Calder has any cause to be concerned. On that note I thank you. We support this bill.