Mallard Trevor: Major Events Management Bill — Second Reading 
Mallard Trevor: Major Events Management Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:641;Page:10884] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Minister for Sport and Recreation) 
: 
 I move  
That the Major Events Management Bill be now read a second time 
. Firstly I would like to thank the Commerce Committee for the thorough work it did on the bill and the people who made submissions to it. 
This bill is designed to position New Zealand as an attractive destination for major events. It is a careful balancing of commercial and public interests and the committee’s careful deliberation has resulted in a number of improvements to the legislation. It provides for a clear predictable and fair regime for dealing with ambush marketing issues it accords with broader Government objectives of maximising the return to New Zealand of involvement in major events and it positions us as a highly competitive and desirable destination for those events. 
We will host the World Rowing Championships in 2010 and the Rugby World Cup in 2011 and we are to be the co-hosts of the Cricket World Cup in 2015. These kinds of events attract major audiences and organisations will pay very very significant sums to secure the rights to promote themselves and their goods or services in association with the event. In essence ambush marketing describes the actions of companies or advertisers who are not official sponsors who try to capture these benefits for themselves without the authorisation of the organisers. Many major sponsors now insist that there be protection against ambush marketing before they will commit to sponsor events and it is common practice for organisers of major events to require ambush marketing protections to be implemented by jurisdictions as a condition for hosting the event. This sort of legislation has been introduced in other jurisdictions including Australia the United Kingdom South Africa and the West Indies. 
Before recommending that an event is declared by Order in Council to be a major event the Minister for Economic Development must consult the Minister of Commerce and the Minister for Sport and Recreation—the second one while shaving presumably! The Minister must also take into account the specified criteria to determine whether the event is of international significance and will offer sufficient sporting cultural social economic or other benefits to New Zealand or New Zealanders. Only events that are of truly international significance will be protected under the bill. It would not apply to for example annual or regular events that New Zealand hosts as of right. 
It was suggested by some people that the bill should apply to nationally important events that may not meet the current criteria—for instance the Big Day Out concert or the Super 14 rugby competition. But the committee opted not to do that as it was critical that the protections in the bill not be overused and that the threshold for declaring a major event remain high and I thank the committee for that. The declaration of a major event will also specify the period of time for which the ambush marketing protections will apply. 
Before I go into more detail I want to stress what the bill does not do—there have been some very misleading comments including from one member in this House—and correct the factually incorrect reportage on it. The bill does not prevent businesses from going about their normal everyday activities including their normal advertising. There are a range of safeguards and exceptions for existing rights and honest business practices. The bill does not impose a blanket ban on advertising within a 5-kilometre radius of a venue. It does not prevent people from wearing their personal branded clothing or taking other personal branded items to an event if the brand is not an official sponsor. And it does not introduce or increase the prison sentence for pitch invasion. 
I say to Mr Locke who has said the opposite regularly in an attempt to mislead the public that this bill does not introduce or increase the prison sentence for pitch invasion. There is the same maximum jail term of 3 months that has always been there. It is the monetary penalty that has increased under the legislation. I do not know whether Mr Locke pretends not to understand or is really ignorant. I do not understand which approach he has taken but he has been wrong time and time again. The member knows the penalty for disorderly behaviour is— 
Keith Locke 
: Is pitch invasion a new offence or not? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: The penalty for it is the same for disorderly behaviour which is the current charge. The member knows that. He has probably been charged with it on a number of occasions. If he cannot remember because he has been joining Tim Groser in too many sessions then that is his problem. 
The Commerce Committee has recommended a change to the bill to ensure that a person who pays for commissions or authorises infringing representation and a person who receives consideration for the placement or location of the representation are equally liable. It has proposed new exceptions for representations of personal opinion for no commercial gain and that I think protects the media in the area of comment. Clean zones will consist of major event venues and areas immediately approximate to such venues such as a road circulating a venue or an adjacent car-park. Existing business advertising that is in accordance with honest business practices will not be banned. The clean period will be no longer than is necessary and may in some cases be only for the day of the major event. 
Also banned under the legislation is pitch invasion and behaviour such as bottle throwing which disrupts international sporting events and creates potential for injury to participants security personnel and in fact—as we have seen in incidents with cricket bats—the pitch invaders themselves. This behaviour can result in adverse media coverage and international sanctions for the sporting organisation or stadium owner. The behaviour will be punishable by a term of imprisonment not exceeding 3 months as is currently the case for disorderly behaviour or a fine not exceeding $5000 which is an increase. 
The Major Events Management Bill is an important step in ensuring that New Zealand continues to be seen as a viable and attractive host country for events of major international significance. I commend this bill to the House.