Belich CamillaCAMILLA BELICH (Labour): Kia orana Mr Speaker. I rise to speak on this bill in the name of Andrew Bayly the Secondhand Dealers and Pawnbrokers (Electronic Records) Amendment Bill. We've heard from other colleagues in the House today that the purpose of this bill is to require licensed pawnbrokers second-hand dealers and other regulated traders like internet auction providers to keep and supply records in an electronically readable format which is then to be used by police computers. The intent is to make it easier for police to locate stolen goods as well as to find the thieves who unlawfully took the goods in the first place. Like others on this side of the House I also support the intent of this legislation. The intent is honourable and it is to make it easier for police to locate these stolen goods but I have as my colleagues have also outlined a number of concerns as to the unintended consequences relating to a few areas. The first area is compliance costs by regulated traders that they would face compliance costs to the police and also a lack of clarity in the bill. For these reasons I cannot support this bill. However as stated I'm generally supportive of its intent which is to support the police. I think it's important to note that on this side of the House we have supported the police in meaningful ways. We've invested $450 million in the police and we've seen the largest police workforce of all time and this was also mentioned by my colleague Arena Williams the MP for beautiful Manurewa in her speech.This bill will try and support the police by codifying an existing practice which the police are currently undertaking voluntarily with apparent success. So I ask then where is the need for this legislation? In relation to my concerns about clarity the meaning of records that are electronically readable by police computers is not to me clear. I fear it may be a step too far for some owners of small businesses and also difficult due to the lack of clarity for them to comply with. The Serial Number Automated Checker—which is quite cutely I thought named SNAC—is not a system rolled out by the police throughout New Zealand so it's really difficult to understand what the effect or the implications of a nationwide roll-out would be but undoubtedly it would likely mean additional costs for our police and this in my view would be exacerbated by the bill's three-month commencement which is a very short time frame to ensure compliance. This very short time frame is coupled with a very high fine of up to $10000 for non-compliance. To me this does not appear to be something that would easily be implemented by many small businesses.Interestingly and as has been noted by other members in this House this bill would I think impose significant costs to businesses including small businesses and sole traders. In fact small businesses could also face a change and additional cost if the police were suddenly to update their electronic record-keeping system. So if the police changed their system this would automatically mean according to this legislation that the small businesses and sole traders would also need to update their systems. It is not outlined in the bill a delayed time frame if such a thing were to occur and it could as I've stated before result in a large fine if there was non-compliance. So these are some questions on this side of the House that we are left with having read through Mr Bayly's bill.This does not mean that we do not support digitisation of records but in our experience small traders and second-hand dealers if they are willing to do this and it is something that they have the capacity to do will already be doing this. So we see no need to force small businesses to mandatorily digitise in this way at this stage. As has been mentioned previously there is already extensive duties on second-hand dealers and pawnbrokers and a quick Google search will show you the responsibilities that currently exist for them. There's also as my colleague Emily Henderson mentioned a Digital Boost programme to assist businesses who wish to update their digital capability. So there is work under way but I do not see a need for this particular bill at this particular time for something that already seems to be happening at the moment.