Shearer David: Border (Customs Excise and Tariff) Processing Bill — First Reading 
Shearer David: Border (Customs Excise and Tariff) Processing Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:658;Page:7123] 
DAVID SHEARER (Labour—Mt Albert) 
: 
 I rise to speak to the Border (Customs Excise and Tariff) Processing Bill and to support its referral to a select committee. This bill amends the Customs and Excise Act 1996 and the Tariff Act 1988. In general these amendments are very welcome. The border security of New Zealand is of the utmost importance particularly the biosecurity. I remember not so long ago when we had the painted apple moth in the Auckland region how many millions of dollars it cost to do the aerial spraying needed to eradicate that pest. We have yet to read through this bill a little more carefully but these amendments will probably bolster New Zealand’s ability to protect its biosecurity. A lot of that ability will depend on our cooperation with our neighbours in Australia and on the intelligence that we share between the two countries. Ensuring that that sharing happens more carefully will also be of great value to the protection measures that we want to introduce. 
I will touch on a number of the key aspects of this bill. For example the SmartGate procedures which have already been touched upon by other speakers will enable passengers travelling from Australia in particular to pass through passport control through a mechanised electronic process rather than having to rely on customs officials to process them. That will happen through a microchip in passengers’ passports that will bring up a photograph that will be able to be measured. Not only will this determine whether a person is the legitimate holder of that passport but also it will screen people and it will scan for people who could possibly be terrorists. The process uses the touch-sensitive technology that we are very familiar with when we travel domestically. It will help to speed up the process and it will bring much closer together the everyday activities of New Zealand and Australian businesses and tourism relationships. It is said to be targeted at those low-risk people who do not pose a problem but who are often frequent travellers between the two sides of the Tasman. SmartGate will enable us to ensure that we are not a soft touch for terrorism and terrorist activities coming into New Zealand. It has a $38 million price tag which is justified in terms of what it is able to do in terms of saving and protecting our biosecurity and our economic and physical interests. 
Another part of this bill gives customs officers the ability to search vehicles. It has been unclear until now whether those powers are currently there or whether the police have to be engaged. This amendment closes another loophole. It enables our customs officers to be more effective and used in conjunction with the police it will enable our biosecurity interests to be protected particularly against breaches of a criminal nature. We talked earlier about needing to protect New Zealand borders from the P aspect as well. This bill also gives customs officials the power to make an arrest of people whom they suspect are violating New Zealand’s biosecurity and security aspects while those people are not on a craft or a vehicle. Therefore it closes another loophole that has enabled some looseness in the legislation governing customs officials what they are able to do and what tasks they can carry out. 
The bill introduces the new offence of making a false declaration. Again this appears to be a sensible amendment as it certainly stops the waste of customs officials’ time. It also perhaps prevents issues around commercial competitors that dob in their competitors and create an unfair advantage. This measure also obviously stops customs officials who might be best utilised dealing with real issues and legitimate allegations from being distracted by that activity. 
Another part which I will touch on very quickly intends through the use of better technology to iron out the issues around being able to look at the possible tampering of containers—that is to check whether containers that have come from safe and secure areas have been tampered with or possibly opened. That technology will enable customs officers to see whether those containers have been opened and whether something illicit has been introduced to them. That is all very good and I think that we will be supporting the amendments in those areas once we can take a closer look at the bill in the select committee. 
The bill also enacts a previous Cabinet decision to raise the fuel excise duty by 3c a litre. This is a direct replacement of the Auckland regional fuel tax. 
Grant Robertson 
: It was scrapped wasn’t it? 
DAVID SHEARER 
: The Auckland regional fuel tax was scrapped. That tax made a lot of sense to Aucklanders because it basically meant that as of 1 July this year Aucklanders were giving 2c a litre to enable there to be security in the planning of Auckland’s transport network. That is something that Aucklanders now cannot do as that tax has been replaced by a tax that is put into a consolidated fund. Aucklanders are not able to see where that money is going. We went from a tax that had significant buy-in across the Auckland region—because Aucklanders could see that if they gave 2c over here then they would see 2c of benefit on the other side—to an amorphous tax that goes into a consolidated fund the wisdom of which we have real questions about with regard to the way it is being used. 
What did that regional fuel tax enable us to do? It enabled Auckland to plan effectively for its transport needs. What sorts of needs? The very needs that are in a great deal of doubt right now. For example there is the electrification of the Auckland train system which Minister Steven Joyce says is possible by 2013 but which nobody really believes is possible. The loop of the rail is to go under Queen Street and Karangahape Road and will connect back in Mount Eden. What does that do? It will quadruple the amount of traffic that those trains will be able to take underneath the central Auckland area. It will enable real economic growth to take place. These are not things that just the Labour Party is backing; every mayoral aspirant from the left or from the right who has put forward his or her name so far—whether it be Len Brown Mr Banks or even Mike Lee—is arguing that this is exactly what Auckland needs. 
What about the rail link between the city and the airport that every other city in the world has? We do not have one and we have nothing like that on the horizon. But the regional fuel tax would have enabled us to plan for a First World city link connecting the airport to Auckland. It had massive economic benefit but it was scrapped. Instead a $2.3 billion holiday highway is being proposed as the first on the list of significant roading networks. It carries the same amount of traffic as Sandringham Road does. Can members opposite understand that? Sandringham Road carries the same amount of traffic as what we are seeing from Puhoi to Wellsford. Why are we putting that road in? I cannot understand why unless one happens to have a holiday home up in the north and live in the suburb of Albany. Thank you.