Flavell Te Ururoa: Customs and Excise Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third Reading 
Flavell Te Ururoa: Customs and Excise Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third Reading 
[Volume:637;Page:7807] 
TE URUROA FLAVELL (Maori Party—Waiariki) 
: 
 Kia ora tatou katoa iteneipo. I do not know whether members know but this morning the Race Relations Commissioner announced a range of initiatives that are supposedly making a positive contribution to race relations in Aotearoa. One of these initiatives is a peace treaty created by a person by the name of Jason Kerehi. It was launched on Waitangi Day in Masterton and the people of the Wairarapa were given the opportunity to sign a treaty that calls for a peaceful tolerant and inclusive community. The peace treaty provides an opportunity for people of all cultures to sign up to its intentions. All ages are embraced and the peace treaty is now touring Wairarapa schools and libraries to gather more signatures before it is placed in the Wairarapa Archive. 
I wanted to refer to this initiative in speaking to the Customs and Excise Amendment Bill (No 2) because so often in the House we tend to focus on system failures policy glitches and the regulatory weaknesses that require legislative tweaking. Meanwhile we overlook the impressive contributions that are made every day by New Zealanders in their commitment to this issue of harmony and peace in the world. This bill is on a much bigger scale obviously but it is driven by the same goals that inspire Jason Kerehi—that is the quest to promote peace and safety. 
This bill aims to protect the well-being of New Zealanders by restricting possibilities for terrorist intrusion or safety threats. We welcome the broad definition of “safety threat” as encompassing suspicion related to infectious diseases and including biological or chemical weapons. 
Hon Tau Henare 
: What’s it got to do with the bill? 
TE URUROA FLAVELL 
: So this legislation against the question that was asked by Mr Henare would probably have been very useful in fact 167 years ago when tangata whenua were introduced to a host of infectious diseases that accompanied the arrival of the settlers. The onslaught of infectious diseases was rampant as we know and impacted negatively on the Maori population to a level where it was thought the extinction of tangata whenua was a real possibility. At that time our people lacked the immunity required to fight even common bacterial and viral infections. The population suffered from a disastrous decline from the introduction of infectious diseases alongside the impact of weaponry drugs and foodstuffs to which Maori people were unaccustomed. 
In the Mohaka ki Ahuriri Report 2004 of the Waitangi Tribunal Professor Ian Pool is cited as attributing the 19th century Maori population decline as being largely due to infectious diseases brought by Europeans. He and other scholars such as Professor Mason Durie do however also acknowledge the connection between infectious diseases such as dysentery influenza and tuberculosis and the socio-economic conditions including land alienation. These so-called diseases of poverty served to decimate the Maori population right until the mid-20th century. So the increased capacity of the customs officers under this bill to detain a person under a suspicion of a perceived threat to endanger the lives of others is welcome. We can never overlook the impact of our shared history on our future. 
The Maori Party is also pleased to endorse the fact that the bill ties in with the New Zealand Nuclear Free Zone Disarmament and Arms Control Act 1987 in prohibiting the import and export of strategic goods relating to nuclear weapons. Strategic use as interpreted in the strategic goods list currently kept by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade is defined to include the development production or deployment of nuclear explosive devices biological weapons chemical weapons or military goods. 
In an interesting twist of fate it should be noted by this House that some 49 years ago today—28 February 1958—the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament was founded in London by the philosopher Bertrand Russell amongst others. It is our hope that by the time we commemorate 50 years of that campaign this bill will well and truly be established among our statutes and our borders will be benefiting from tighter scrutiny of areas of concern with a particular relationship to nuclear threats. 
Of course we cannot address this third reading of the bill without pointing out again the very real danger of racist ideologies that threaten the security of Aotearoa for tangata whenua. I want to acknowledge at this point the recommendations of the National Council of Women of New Zealand which like the Maori Party was concerned at what could be seen as an unchecked licence of new powers for customs officers. I am advised that the National Council of Women suggested in its submission to the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee that there should be a requirement to document and report annually on the frequency and circumstances of incidents that necessitated the use of new powers. 
The Peace Foundation likewise was concerned at the suggestion of the unbridled powers of seizure and detainment. In fact it was at the foundation’s suggestion that the select committee I am told introduced new section 175B to insert the word “reasonable” before the words “cause to suspect”. At the second reading of this bill we focused extensively on the subjective interpretation of the concept of “reasonable”. My colleague Mr Hone Harawira explained that on at least 16 different occasions in the bill the test of reasonableness is proposed as a basis of judgment. Interpretations of reasonableness are required in order to understand the nature of “reasonable force” to detain someone the seizure of anything that officers consider they have “reasonable cause” to suspect as evidence or the capacity to detain a person if officers consider they have “reasonable grounds” to believe that the person poses a threat. 
So I return again to the concept of racist ideologies and the ability of officers to be able to identify accurately and indeed to understand whether the ideologies are reasonable and whether the ideologies are racist. We register here our concern that those officers responsible for border security and the measures around that are equipped to be able to understand the impact of racism. 
Hon Tau Henare 
: What do you mean? 
TE URUROA FLAVELL 
: I am talking here about institutional racism which the Te Puao-o-Te-Atatu report described as “… a bias in our social and administrative institutions that automatically benefits the dominant race or culture while penalising minority or subordinate groups.” The Maori Party wishes to remind this House that the New Zealand Customs Service has in the past fallen into the context of exercising such bias through the actions of its officers. 
In 1981 the New Zealand Security Intelligence Service was criticised for drawing up a list of twenty “subversives” who participated in protests against the 1981 Springbok Tour. That singled out certain individuals as being subversives and it was deemed by many to be a violation of the right to protest Government decisions. It was also deemed to be an act of racism against those who were determined to speak out about the adverse effects and the impact of the apartheid policy. 
I am not suggesting by any means that the practice we saw in 1981 would be replicated in 2007 but one would hope that in the implementation of this new Customs and Excise Amendment Bill (No 2) the agency and the officials involved will pay particular caution towards preventing such targeted surveillance from occurring again. 
Hon Tau Henare 
: Tell us what you really think. 
TE URUROA FLAVELL 
: Finally in response to that comment I say that the Maori Party will support the bill at its third reading and we urge the Minister and the New Zealand Customs Service—Te Mana Arai o Aotearoa—to ensure that the service truly lives up to its name and protects the authority and the rangatiratanga of tangata whenua alongside all other New Zealanders.