Brown Peter: Maritime Security Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Brown Peter: Maritime Security Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:12203] 
PETER BROWN (Deputy Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I want to make it clear from the start that New Zealand First will be supporting this bill. But having said that I say that the Government Administration Committee has not got it right. In fact it has made some significant errors. Let me give members four words to show why this should be corrected. The four words are “Australia” “USA” “United Kingdom” “Spain”. New Zealand imports and exports— 
Clayton Cosgrove 
: That is five words. 
PETER BROWN 
: I tell Mr Cosgrove that they are four words and this is a serious matter and he should listen. Forty percent of New Zealand’s imports and exports by value comes and goes from those countries and I suggest that 99-plus percent comes and goes by ship. Why do I mention those four words? Because they are the countries that went to war with Iraq. Do not underestimate maritime security folks; I was going to say “gentlemen” but I know that the ladies are interested in this as well. I have to say after listening to my colleague from Taranaki - King Country Shane Ardern that I accept that the select committee did its best. But there is not one of the committee members who would know the front end of a ship or the back end of a ship from a motorbike. The best I can say is that David Cunliffe would know something or I would expect him to know something because he has a reputation for being “all at sea” most of the time. 
There is a Supplementary Order Paper in my name that addresses five issues basically that are the shortcomings of this bill. One of them—and it is an important one and is in Part 1—is the definition of a company security officer. This bill is based on the code I have here the International Ship and Port Facility Security Code. I note that the Minister is shaking his head. This book which is the backbone of the bill refers to three types of security officer: the port facility security officer the ship security officer and the company security officer. The legislation that is about to be passed today in this Parliament has no reference whatsoever to a company security officer. That is a major shortcoming. I can tell members that nowadays many of the foreign ships that come to this country—[ 
Interruption 
] the owners are not easily identifiable. One cannot necessarily say that that is owned by such and such. One can on many occasions but not every ship. Quite often the crew are put on board the ship by a management contract. They have little or no commitment to the owner of the ship. They are there only to do a job—to take a ship from A to B and to carry cargo from A to B. But they are not necessarily concerned in depth with the security arrangements in this country and how they are implemented. Whilst if there were a company security officer that would be a different matter. He or she would be obliged to consider the security of that ship in that port in a total scene. 
I know that he or she might well be based in Hong Kong and might be out of easy contact by whomever. But I can tell members that a ship security officer will no doubt have to contact the Hong Kong office anyway. If an alert or a concern were raised of any significance it is likely that either the master of the ship or the ship security officer would have to contact Hong Kong. This bill is downgrading the company security officer. It is telling the world at large and the shipping fraternity at large that these three people who are key people in this type of legislation are not equal. I know that the company security officer will be referred to in the regulations. I am not privy to the regulations. I have not seen a copy of them. They stand in this code on an equal footing of importance and they should be reflecting that importance in this bill. Imagine how a shipping company in this country would feel when a company security officer is not referred to in this legislation.