Street Maryan: Cultural Property (Protection in Armed Conflict) Bill — Third Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Street Maryan: Cultural Property (Protection in Armed Conflict) Bill — Third Reading 
[Sitting date: 05 December 2012. Volume:686;Page:7250. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon MARYAN STREET (Labour) 
: 
 In the Forum in Rome there is an archway that pulled me up short when I saw it because in bas-relief on that archway is depicted the triumphant return of Titus from the siege of Jerusalem. The soldiers are carrying under the flag of the Roman Republic the SPQR emblem both the Ark of the Covenant and the menorah the seven-branched lamp stand that was used in the ancient tabernacle of the desert and in the Temple in Jerusalem. I was really shocked. I knew that Titus had been and laid waste to Jerusalem once upon a time. I had learnt that somewhere. But to bring back artefacts of such cultural and religious significance—the offence that I felt at seeing that repeated and preserved for posterity in that marble archway in the Forum was deeply shocking. 
That is an example of why this convention is important. In the Cultural Property (Protection in Armed Conflict) Bill this Parliament will be giving New Zealand the imprimatur to fulfil its obligations that are required for accession to the first and second protocols to the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict. 
Of course the Romans were not the only ones to have perpetrated such cultural offences over history but it was a remarkable offence to take two of the most important religious artefacts remove them from the Temple of Jerusalem and install them in Rome in the Forum. That was in AD 70. There are other examples across the world and across time as well. The Minister for Arts Culture and Heritage has rightly referred in his introductory speech to artefacts that were taken removed stolen expropriated during the course of World War II which caused great offence. This is something that conquerors do to the conquered and have done for a long time. 
Another example that New Zealanders may be familiar with if they have ever travelled abroad are of course the bronze horses in the Basilica di San Marco which came from Constantinople. They have gone backwards and forwards between Istanbul and Venice ever since but remain now in Venice not without controversy. 
More recently however—and some of the things that make this poignant for New Zealand—has been the removal of Maori artefacts from New Zealand to parts of Europe under the rubric of ethnography of souvenir taking of some memorabilia from what were essentially conquests in the 19th century in our own history. Some of these artefacts have turned up in museums—for example very significant ethnography museums in Germany. Most recently of course we have seen the repatriation of some items that were taken. They have been returned by the French because they are of huge significance to Maori and to New Zealand’s history. 
This convention then and the Cultural Property (Protection in Armed Conflict) Bill will allow the prosecution of people who engage in this kind of theft in situations of war. This is a bill that arose out of the Labour Government. It has taken some time to get to the House. Again as with other bills that began in the Labour administration one wonders why it has taken quite so long to get here. But it is here now and Labour will be supporting it. 
The bill of course criminalises actions such as stealing or destroying important cultural property in times of war and it will also prohibit the trade in cultural property removed from occupied territory. It provides a way of prosecuting people who undertake these crimes. In fact the bill comes complete with a couple of dear little flow charts that demonstrate just how the procedures might be pursued in the course of prosecuting anybody. 
The interesting thing about the bill is that it looks to enable New Zealand to prosecute people whether a crime is being committed inside or outside New Zealand. That is quite complicated in terms of international law. This bill I hope will address that issue and allow that to be effected in a way that protects cultural property from theft. 
In the passage of this bill our Parliament will reinforce New Zealand’s commitment to the international measures that protect cultural activity and cultural property. This is important as far as our UN obligations go and our international obligations more generally but it will also reinforce our participation in the Unesco family as a champion of the protection of cultural property. 
Not only has great offence been caused to numerous countries over the millennia of human existence but also most particularly the offence created within our own country because of the expropriation and theft of cultural icons and taonga is something that this bill will address. The Labour Party is fully in support of it given that it originated with us and it is something that we feel New Zealand should commit to. Thank you.