Martin Tracey: Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMartin Tracey: Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 24 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13646. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]TRACEY MARTIN (NZ First): I rise to take a short call on the Copyright (Parallel Importation of Films) Amendment Bill. Firstly I will just comment that I think it is fascinating that the Green Party member Gareth Hughes appears to be exceptionally happy to have competition in an industry when it is something that will give him immediate access to something yet often I hear Green members talking anti-market and anti-competition the rest of the time. As long as it gives them instant gratification Green Party members seem to be perfectly all right about arguing that there should be competition inside this industry.I also think that when Mr Hughes talks about the fact that the industry has had 10 years to make this adjustment he is quite right and another 3 years means that there is an extension to 13 years in order to make that adjustment. It is not the case that there has been no change over the last decade; there has been a huge amount of alteration and amendment made by this industry to try to get up to speed and make the changes required because of the digitalisation of film. But I think that the Green Party member has a lack of understanding a lack of appreciation about the amount of money required by mainly rural cinema owners in order to step up to this level. It is $100000 approximately in projection equipment and screen equipment. When you are in a rural area that provides a rural service that is a lot of money; that is a lot of profit you have to make in order to reinvest in your business.That is why this Parliament should actually extend this period of time because New Zealand jobs in this industry will be lost. Already we are in a recession. Why would we make it harder for New Zealanders to keep their jobs? Listening to Miss Ardern argue against her party’s minority view position was fascinating. I found it fascinating. The Labour Party’s minority view in the Commerce Committee’s report stated: “The Labour Party is concerned that if the public cannot legally obtain material in a timely manner through DVDs subscription TV or online streaming then they become sceptical of copyright law and use illicit channels.” This concern was repeated by the Green Party in its minority view report that it “ … encourages illegal file sharing in the absence of legal alternatives.”Apart from the fact that New Zealand First believes that this is an incredibly long bow to draw we refuse to believe that New Zealanders will break the law if they cannot go to The Warehouse or JB Hi-Fi or some other retail outlet on the same day that a motion picture has been internationally released and purchase a DVD. We refuse to believe that the New Zealand public are so shallow in the way they will see a delayed release protection that helps other New Zealanders keep their jobs. We do not believe that New Zealanders are that shallow as to turn to crime—that is what it is; it is a crime and we all know it is a crime—because they cannot see a film within a 24-hour release period. We do not believe it.We also want to point out to both of these parties that they appear to have neglected to mention that the DVD retailers have protection under other legislation.Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.TRACEY MARTIN: Just to finish the point I was making both the Labour Party and the Green Party seem to have avoided recognition in their minority views and in their speeches today that the DVD retailer is protected by other legislation. So there is already staggered protection for other areas of this industry. For example the DVD retailer is protected for a period of 9 to 12 months from the same film being shown on pay television and for 12 to 24 months from that film being shown on free-to-air television. So when we talk about how there is a need for competition in the market let us make sure it is a level playing field when we do so.New Zealand First will be supporting this bill because we believe that the protection is required. Another 3 years’ protection is required for the rural cinemas particularly to be able to finish making the investment that they need so that they are not adversely affected by open-slather competition. I think it is worthwhile just pointing out that the PricewaterhouseCoopers report of 2012 on the New Zealand film and television industry indicated that this industry has generated more than $3.23 billion in revenue for New Zealand.