Shearer David: Countering Terrorist Fighters Legislation Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeShearer David: Countering Terrorist Fighters Legislation Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 25 November 2014. Volume:702;Page:786. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]DAVID SHEARER (Labour—Mt Albert):It is a sad coincidence that unfortunately this bill is being introduced into the House on the same day that the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security has looked into the activities of the SIS and seen that it has so woefully failed. It does actually raise a point that I think is very important. We had the Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB) last year which was seen to have some very serious shortcomings and again we have seen the SIS today. It does raise the issue—which has been brought up before and which has still not yet properly been addressed I believe—that neither of the problems that occurred in those two agencies were revealed by any internal oversight that was happening. The internal oversight completely and utterly failed. The problems were brought out and made public only by scandals that occurred which were subsequently looked into and it was found that those agencies were really wanting in terms of the oversight that we have.We have a system in our intelligence agencies where the Prime Minister is ultimately in charge of both of those organs the SIS and the GCSB. The Prime Minister also chairs the oversight committee—or the supposed oversight committee—of those two organisations and has the casting vote so what chance is there of internal oversight really functioning and working when you have such a system as that? I think it is a major problem in our security apparatus. It is unique to New Zealand. It does not happen in any other country that I know of and certainly in none of our “Five Eyes” partners does that low level of oversight occur.This bill is one in which we have to get the balance right between the security of our citizens and at the same time the protection and the safeguarding of the privacy and human rights of our citizens as well. We know that the world is changing. The spread of Islamic State (IS) has occurred very rapidly and there are perhaps threats to New Zealand that were not around a few months ago. But we also have to recognise that this is a regional conflict that is being internationalised in part by ourselves by the way that the international community is engaging with this regional conflict.John Key said a couple of weeks ago that IS would rain carnage on the world. Look make no mistake this is a nasty brutish organisation but it is not about to bring terror and mayhem into our neighbourhoods tomorrow. It uses terror and atrocities as a weapon but it uses them as a weapon to dominate and control parts—parts—of two countries. It has not been constituted in the same way as al-Qaeda was for example. However it is sophisticated and increasingly it is reaching out to local people including here in New Zealand and asking them to take up arms and requesting those people to leave their own countries and to travel over to Syria and Iraq and have them fight on the ground there for it. It preys upon those people within New Zealand who perhaps have a grudge and might be swayed by that propaganda and who might be on the extremes or who are the outliers of what is in New Zealand an extraordinarily peaceful and productive Muslim community.The question that still has to be asked—and has still to be debated properly I believe—is what impact the Government’s decision to send troops to Iraq will have on the risk that we are facing here in New Zealand. We have according to what we have been briefed on by the security agencies some loopholes or some openings that have left us more vulnerable than what might otherwise give us confidence to believe that we are well covered for. To look at those loopholes and to see what legislative changes are needed is the reason why Labour has said that we will support this legislation’s referral to the select committee where we can actually hear about that.We have two concerns—I certainly have two concerns—and the first one revolves around the issue of process. A short review took place directly after the election followed by the drafting and the pushing through of this legislation before Christmas. That certainly was not the first time that these issues came up. Certainly some of the shortcomings that the SIS our security agency had were known about well before the election and the review could have taken place much much earlier. I do not believe that the Government has been particularly vigilant in terms of what it needed to do to get its house in order rather than rushing it through now and rushing it through means that the select committee process that we are likely to have is going to be truncated. It is going to be much shortened and the people giving the expert advice which we are going to get into as part of that submissions process are going to have much less time to consider the legislation.A third area that has been a casualty of rushing it is that we have not engaged properly with the Muslim community. Phil Goff and I met with senior members of the Muslim community last week and had a chat to them. I believe that they are allies in this process. They could help us considerably in getting this legislation through and help us with regard to some of the things that we want to protect ourselves from but the Muslim community has not been engaged. Therefore in many ways it is seen to be the problem rather than what I believe it is which is part of the solution.The sunset clause as has been discussed just now is there. It is 2018 which is 4 years out. Conceivably and in all probability there will be a different Government in power at that stage. It is a very long way out. We would all hope that the review could be done some time much sooner than that.So it is important to get the balance right between having the protection that we want to seek and at the same time having that protection of our personal freedoms right. Australia for example is putting through legislation for exactly the same reason but it has seen fit to be able to give its Senate select committee a much longer time in which to be able to consider the issues before it. There are some aspects of this bill that have been mentioned up to now that are obviously of concern. We would like to get much more expert advice on these from the people who will appear in front of the select committee. The expansion of the powers of the SIS particularly around video surveillance is in some ways bringing it up to where the police already are. So in some respects that is possibly less controversial but again we would like to hear about that from the experts concerned.The extension of the time for withholding passports from 1 year to 3 years—again I would like to see the evidence for why that is necessary first of all and secondly to make sure that the checks and balances are in place the review is there and the ability to appeal is there so that people are not unnecessarily disadvantaged.Lastly the point I want to mention that is perhaps the most important is the 48-hour period when warrantless searches can take place—surveillance can take place without a warrant. I do believe that 48 hours in today’s world is too long. We have telephones emails—everything that we demand is beyond what we need and I do believe that we can look at that and certainly modify it considerably.Lastly the cancellation of the travel documents of people who are travelling and who are thought to have taken part in terrorist activities—we need some way of getting those people back. We simply cannot leave them stranded on the other side of the world without travel documents. That would not be responsible of New Zealand as a global citizen.So we need a good process. We need to address those fundamental issues carefully. We need to deliberate carefully. We need to hear from the experts. That requires time—it should not be hurried. It needs time for public opinion and for the public to be able to take a proper look at this as well and as we see it at the moment I regret that that is probably not going to happen.