Carter John: Motions — Terrorism Suppression Act—Referral of Provisions to Foreign Affairs  Defence and Trade Committee 
Carter John: Motions — Terrorism Suppression Act—Referral of Provisions to Foreign Affairs  Defence and Trade Committee 
[Volume:423;Page:18565] 
JOHN CARTER (National—Northland) 
: 
 I want to take just a short call—I was not intending to take a call—because it has just occurred to me as I have listened to most of the previous addresses given by members that it has been a quite wide-ranging debate given that we are considering a motion which is pretty specific. I thought I should just draw the attention of the House to the actual provision. The motion states: “That pursuant to section 70(2) of the Terrorism Suppression Act 2002 this House refer to the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee for consideration the matters specified in that provision”. 
I may have missed it but I am not sure that—other than my colleague Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith who made reference to it—any of the other speakers have spoken specifically about what those matters are. There may be some listeners who are wondering what United Nations Security Council Resolution 1373 is actually about. The motion states that the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee is to look at the provisions of it and see whether they are still applicable etc. We have already heard that the National Party does not wish to see any of them watered down and indeed will be resisting that in the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee—and I am sure the chairman will not want them to be watered down anyway. We will certainly be looking to make sure that that does not happen. 
I thought I would—given the speech made by Keith Locke particularly—just refer to a couple of the sections in the resolution so that people can have an understanding of what we are debating. The first one in that resolution states: “Reaffirming also its unequivocal condemnation of the terrorist attacks which took place in New York Washington D.C. and Pennsylvania on 11 September 2001 and expressing its determination to prevent all such acts”. Well surely there cannot be any member in this Parliament including Mr Locke who would want to oppose that statement. Maybe I am wrong. Maybe the Greens think it is all right that September 11 took place—I do not know. Certainly it seems to me that this Parliament would want to support that sort of statement. 
It goes on to state: “Reaffirming further that such acts like any act of international terrorism constitute a threat to international peace and security”. Well how can anybody want to oppose that? I would not have thought that anybody would want to oppose it but again maybe there are members in this House who do. That would be unfortunate to say the least because I doubt whether it would represent New Zealand’s view. It continues: “Reaffirming the inherent right of individual or collective self defence as recognized by the Charter of the United Nations …”. Again how can one oppose those sorts of things? 
The resolution goes on in that vein. I just thought I would draw to the House’s attention that those are the specific sorts of things that the select committee would be considering and I for one am very comfortable with them. I think we should support them. But I would be interested to see whether we get any submissions that suggest changes or alterations. If we do then we would want to make sure that they add to rather than take away from the legislation. 
Motion agreed to.