Seymour David: Passports Amendment Bill Customs and Excise Amendment Bill New Zealand Security Intelligence Service Amendment Bill — Third ReadingsText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSeymour David: Passports Amendment Bill Customs and Excise Amendment Bill New Zealand Security Intelligence Service Amendment Bill — Third Readings[Sitting date: 09 December 2014. Volume:702;Page:1270. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT):I rise on behalf of the ACT Party in support of this legislation. The lines or the written laws that demarcate the relationship between the power of the State and the rights and freedoms of the individual are among the most important things that we will ever debate in this House and so I am grateful for the opportunity to explain my support for this legislation.During the first reading I said that I too have read both Franklin and Rawls. The main conclusion I came to is that I wish the Green Party would apply its new-found classical liberalism to the role of Government within the domestic economy—but I digress. I also conclude that we do not live by the maxim that those who give up freedom for security deserve neither. In fact the history of classical liberal society is that we have done precisely that and have done it very very carefully to get a good bargain in terms of security for the freedom that we have been prepared to trade off. I said at the time that extending visual surveillance powers that already exist within the police to the SIS was not a significant change in principle and neither was extending the period that a passport could be cancelled for.Forty-eight hour warrantless surveillance with a very wide scope however I said was not OK and was a significant shift in principle rather than extent. So I stand before you today and explain why it is that I have changed my mind on what I regard as a very important matter. No doubt reducing the period of warrantless surveillance to 24 hours puts it far more in line with the practical requirements of the time taken to get a warrant properly. Bear in mind a much greater threat to civil liberties was that under practical pressures the existing warrant-granting process might have been watered down. It is far better to have a more transparent process like this than to do that. Narrowing the scope to terrorist acts only was a significant concession that has made it much easier for me to support this bill.But most important is the fact that despite the truncated process that we have gone through—and I might say it is very easy for members of New Zealand First to say that we should have sat through the holiday for this legislation because for them going on holiday does not change their workload very much anyway. I have to say that despite this truncated process the greatest mercy that we have is that we are able to revisit this legislation within the current term and that is how I was able to change my mind.In particular I would like to thank the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security for her briefing. I would like to thank the chair of the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee Mark Mitchell for his chairing. In particular I would like to thank senior members of the Labour Party whom I respect. Ultimately for me it was their willingness to forgo the ability to do political point-scoring in order to support this legislation for issues of both national security and our civil liberties simultaneously that persuaded me that it was worth supporting this legislation. With that in mind I commend this legislation to the House. Thank you.