Collins Judith: Search and Surveillance Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Collins Judith: Search and Surveillance Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 20 March 2012. Volume:678;Page:1126. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Justice) 
: 
 There are a couple of issues I want to deal with. The first is the issue around the  
New Zealand Herald  
editorial that Mr Parker praised so widely. I just want to share with the Committee something about that editorial. I thought that clearly whoever wrote it had not read the Supplementary Order Paper that I put forward and had not read the press releases that I had put out about what was in the Supplementary Order Paper. And I thought frankly that no matter what the sentiments it was actually just wrong on a couple of issues. 
I thought it would be a good idea to visit the editor and just go through the issues and find out what their concerns were. Well apparently freedom does not extend to me writing a letter to the editor. I wrote a letter to the editor saying “This is where I think you’re wrong. I’m sorry that you didn’t read the press releases. This is where there is actually an enhancement in the Supplementary Order Paper to protect press privileges.” I rang up the  
New Zealand Herald  
when they did not print my letter to the editor and they said they did not print it because they did not like it. I thought that was probably not that helpful. So then I thought I would go and see them and talk this thing through because I think it is important. They are a major arm of the media and it is important that they understand my Supplementary Order Paper which I thought was addressing the concerns. And I have to say I had worked on it with Charles Chauvel. We had tried to get some agreement and we thought we were doing well on that part. 
Charles Chauvel 
: And for the future you’re going to want the  
New Zealand 
Herald 
 on side! 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: Yes we want the  
New Zealand Herald  
to understand what we are trying to do. I thought it would be a good idea and because I was in Auckland for 4 days last week I thought it was a good chance to do it. Well could we get an appointment? No. I have not given up though and the invitation is still there. 
There is also the issue that the Law Commission is currently looking at some of the media regulation. It is looking at those issues and I think it is really important to engage with the media particularly the let us say more mainstream media around these issues. We do not want to end up having legislation that does not get a broad agreement from the people who would be most interested if that is possible. So the invitation is still there to the  
New Zealand Herald  
editor. They are welcome to publish my letter to the editor which would not have changed from the last one I sent them which they would not publish because essentially they did not like it; they did not agree with it. I suppose I should have re-sent them a copy of my press release which might have explained again what I had already sent out. However less about me; let us get back to the Search and Surveillance Bill. But the invitation is still there and I am happy to go through those matters with them. 
Part 5 of the Search and Surveillance Bill is very much a technical part applying the bill’s general search powers outlined in Part 4 to search powers in other legislation and also repealing provisions that are being replaced elsewhere in the bill. It is a very technical part. However it also has a very important clause. That is the final one clause 316. Acknowledging that the bill represents a comprehensive reform of search and surveillance laws clause 316 provides for the Act to be reviewed approximately 4 years after it becomes law. The Minister of Justice must refer the Act to the Ministry of Justice and the Law Commission for review by 30 June 2016. The review must then be completed 1 year after the reference is made. The bill is based in large part on the Law Commission’s 2007 report on search and surveillance powers and it is therefore appropriate that the Law Commission be involved in the review of the bill. The review will consider how the provisions in the Act have operated in practice whether the provisions in the Act should be retained or repealed and whether any provision should be amended. I think this is an extremely important clause and I think it is something that many members in the House will take some comfort from. 
The question was put that the following amendments in the name of the Hon Judith Collins to the proposed amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 12 in her name to Part 5 be agreed to: 
to replace in clause 237A(2) in the heading to new section 239A “239A” with “293A”; and 
to insert in clause 267(3) and (4) “of Part 4” after “subpart 2”.