Mark Ron: Telecommunications (Interception Capability) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Mark Ron: Telecommunications (Interception Capability) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:12281] 
RON MARK (NZ First) 
: 
 First I want to make it very very clear in what will quite clearly be a broad-ranging debate and contribution on the various parts that I understand and accept the Green perspective and that of Mr Locke. I have admiration for Mr Locke in one respect: he is always consistent in his view and he is brave enough to express that view no matter the criticism that may be levelled at him by myself my party and other parties. There are many people in this country who have put on uniforms—and I have been one—to defend Mr Locke’s and the Green Party’s right to say the sorts of things they say. I do not think he would put on a uniform to defend my right to say what I say but I have done it for him. 
But I have to say that in all the concerns he and the Green Party have expressed about this bill I have not heard what the alternative is. I ask Mr Locke to table in this Committee now a Supplementary Order Paper; to put up amendments that would deal with the issues that he sees are of concern. If this man and his party believe there is an alternative to this measure for stopping international terrorism they should table it. They should talk about it. They should tell us what it is. 
The sad fact of life is that terrorism is now with us. Regardless of what we may think of this legislation and the ability of the telecommunications companies to comply with it—that is interpreting and intercepting our phone calls—that is the price we pay in a free society if we are to guarantee that freedom. The legislation is there in terms of the orders and warrants required and the compliance that is placed upon the Security Intelligence Service the police or anyone wanting access to this information and the protections are there within the High Court. 
I would say to Mr Locke that he should read today’s paper. He should have a look at page B1 of the  
Dominion Post 
. The Green Party should read what has just happened in Britain with the discovery of 500 kilograms of nitrous oxide. They should read about the 700 police the 24 raids and the intention of people to hit soft targets. I know that the ability to intercept my phone calls has an impact on my life but dare I suggest that having my head blown off and spread across three city blocks would likewise have an impact on my life. If I am to provide the people of this country with the ability to go to a McDonald’s restaurant to go to a KFC restaurant to go to a place that is considered a soft target but an American asset and be safe I have to accept that some constraints will come upon us and there will be some encroachment into the privacy of our lives. 
This is not wanted. This is not ideal. This is not what the men who are represented in the plaques around us commemorating the various battles they fought saw for this country. But sadly this is the reality of life. When there are people who are prepared to make their point by blowing up trains full of commuters killing and maiming thousands of people one must accept there have to be adjustments to our way of life and to some of the issues of privacy that we might have previously thought sacrosanct. 
In answer to Mr Power yes already there is the ability to intercept and interpret emails and faxes and that happens now. But this issue has been with our security people for some time. Every politician in this House wants a secure cellphone so that the other parties do not pick up him or her everyone wants a secure walkie phone in the home but someone has to provide the means to allow our security agencies to intercept calls on the occasions when they suspect that the individual using that device is planning or involved in terrorist activities. 
This is not the ideal. This is not what we foresaw 5 or even 2 years ago as being what our country would have to do. But this is now the reality of life and if we are to be responsible about protecting our citizens protecting our families and protecting this nation and the people who come here—be they tourists businessmen or immigrants—this is necessary.