Parker DavidHon DAVID PARKER (Labour): Can I add to the thanks that the Opposition gives to the Minister of Foreign Affairs for bringing forward this piece of legislation which as other speakers have noted gives effect to New Zealand's obligations arising from the 2005 changes to the international protocol relating to laws of the sea and maritime terrorism. Ministers do good things as well as bad things. The last speaker Mark Mitchell said that we should be proud of the Government's work in the Middle East through New Zealand's armed forces doing work there. I am sure all people in New Zealand are supportive of the armed services when they are sent overseas and told to do what the Government says they should do.It is a wee bit superficial to let that stand without recounting what has led to the terrible state of affairs that we now have in the Middle East. It is interesting that in the next few days we are going to see the Chilcot report come out in the United Kingdom which considers whether the Parliament there was misled by its then politicians who took them into the war in Iraq when the United Nations refused to endorse an invasion of Iraq because Hans Blix on behalf of the United Nations had spent some months ferreting around Iraq and had concluded that there was no evidence of weapons of mass destruction which were used as the excuse to invade Iraq.I was a junior backbencher in this Parliament in the then Labour Government when the New Zealand Labour Party kept New Zealand out of the war in Iraq. I would like to pay my tributes to the three people who led New Zealand in that regard at that time: Helen Clark Michael Cullen and Phil Goff. All of those people withstood enormous pressure from the National Party then in Opposition as well as pressure from our traditional allies Australia the United Kingdom and the United States. I can remember sitting on the backbenches over the 6-week period when this was unfolding watching the leaders of my party go grey. The pressure was intense. I remember the stress that they were under as they took that decision for New Zealand and withstood enormous pressure from our traditional allies and from the intemperate comments that came from the National Party which said we should be in that—[Interruption] Well Mr Deputy Speaker the other parties have said that this is another example of us doing our duty in respect of terrorism and I am recounting how some of the things that have gone wrong in the world—Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Just apply it to the bill.Hon DAVID PARKER: —backed by the National Party have made terrorism worse—including maritime terrorism.The leaders of that party Phil Goff Helen Clark and Michael Cullen bounced back from that stress—they did bounce back from that stress. But I challenge any one of the members of Parliament who were here then not to agree with me that the pressure was enormous and that the leaders of the Labour Party showed true leadership at that time by refusing to make the world's problems with terrorism worse with an illegal invasion of Iraq. Those things are still dogging us in the world—including in the field of marine terrorism—because the consequences of that terrible decision that was made by other countries including Australia the United Kingdom and the United States are still with us. Iraq of course has not seen a moment's peace since those days. We have terrorist atrocities becoming worse in Iraq. Everyone knows that Saddam Hussein was a terrible leader but what we have unleashed in the world since has flowed outside the Iraqi borders and afflicts other countries not just Iraq. It is interesting that we see international reports that some of the leaders of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant are actually former Iraqi military personnel and intelligence personnel who have just found another outlet for their evil ways.Can I refer also to another aspect where the reputation of the New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT) has been undermined. That is the matter that was touched on by David Shearer relating to the accusing of Mr Leask and Mr Fyfe of being sources of leaks from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade. The Rebstock inquiry was—Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The member is now 5 minutes into his 10-minute speech and has not mentioned a single clause in the bill. He needs to do that. I accept that previous speakers from both sides of the House made asides in respect of other matters that were outside the bill and I let that go. I note that the National Party member spoke for only 3 minutes and Mr Shearer's points were sideways but I think the member who now has the floor needs to start talking about what is in the bill. This is a first reading of the Maritime Crimes Amendment Bill.Hon DAVID PARKER: Thank you Mr Deputy Speaker. As other speakers have said this legislation does introduce new offences that relate to maritime terrorism including maritime terrorism itself and the illicit trafficking by ship of weapons of mass destruction—you have got to be a bit careful about that around here because the National Party would be very willing based on its history to misrepresent what was proper evidence of weapons of mass destruction so as to justify the invasion of countries like Iraq. The bill also introduces offences relating to the transportation of fugitives by ships.We know that the incidence of maritime terrorism is relatively low in frequency. It constituted less than 1 percent of all terrorist incidents between 1968 and 2007 but none the less we should not be complacent. I agree that we should put in place this legislation pursuant to the convention that we have signed up to or to the protocol that changes the underlying international convention. But I do make the point that if you are interested in curbing terrorism and doing your bit internationally you need to maintain the reputation of your country including the reputation of your Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade—and you do not do that any good at all when you undermine that ministry by wrongly criticising senior officials within it which is what this Government did through the Rebstock inquiry. It does not reflect well upon Minister Bennett last week in the face of the Ombudsman's report saying that Messrs Leask and Fyfe had been dealt with unfairly to say that there were some procedural problems but not to acknowledge that the Ombudsman found not just that the processes were wrong but also that the substantive conclusion she made was without justification. She besmirched the reputation of those New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade officials and undermined the reputation of MFAT—internationally as well as in New Zealand.I end by supporting this legislation but say that if you want to as the last speaker said have a reputation as a good global citizen you should act responsibly as a global citizen. In the Middle East the current Government has not got a good record. Whether it is in respect of the Iraq decision or in respect of what it has been doing with Saudi sheep in the desert—where it spent $11.5 million including over a million dollars on flying sheep to this farm in the desert and a $4 million cash payment—Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: So back to the Maritime Crimes Amendment Bill—Shane Reti.