Guy Nathan: Private Security Personnel and Private Investigators Bill — Third Reading 
Guy Nathan: Private Security Personnel and Private Investigators Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:666;Page:14022] 
Hon NATHAN GUY (Associate Minister of Justice) 
: 
 I move  
That the Private Security Personnel and Private Investigators Bill be now read a third time 
. This bill will significantly improve the regulation of the private security industry. The private security industry is a very diverse and very important industry which protects New Zealanders and their property around the clock. However it is currently regulated by an Act that is widely acknowledged by members of the industry to be in need of updating. A lot has changed since the 1974 Act and the bill addresses those changes. 
The overriding purpose of the bill is to prevent harm by ensuring that security businesses and personnel are suitable and do not behave in ways that are contrary to the public interest. Security personnel play an important role in protecting our safety and property and members of the public need to be assured that the people in whom they place their trust— 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: I am sorry to interrupt the honourable member but the time has come for me to leave the Chair. 
Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m. 
Hon NATHAN GUY 
: Just before the dinner break I was letting the House know that we are in the third reading of the Private Security Personnel and Private Investigators Bill. I was talking about the importance of passing this bill because it has been in the proposal area for 7 years. It is great that this Government has been able to progress it. I understand that it has widespread support from across the House. 
The public needs to be assured that security personnel have the skills and knowledge to do the job safely and competently. One of the key changes introduced in this bill makes it possible to impose training requirements. As I mentioned in the second reading this Government intends to make regulations requiring crowd controllers property guards and personal guards to be trained. Another key change in the bill extends the licensing regime to include security personnel who are responsible for protecting people or in a general sense keeping order. This addresses a significant gap in the current regime and will be important for the safety and success of major events such as the Rugby World Cup which is a little under 12 months away. 
The bill establishes two new bodies the Private Security Personnel Licensing Authority and a dedicated enforcement body called the complaints investigation and prosecution unit. The two bodies will work together to improve overall compliance. The authority will be responsible for licensing and discipline and the unit will investigate and prosecute offences against the Act. 
The bill also aims to improve compliance and deter unlicensed operators by updating offences and increasing penalties. 
Another significant change introduced by the bill is the change to the licensing regime from an annual process to a 5-yearly cycle. This will apply to both licences and certificates of approval. Instead of having to make a full application each year to renew a licence or certificate there will be a much simpler process. Licence holders will have to provide annual returns to the licencing authority and advise the authority of any changes for example if they have been convicted of a relevant offence in that time or if their business address has changed. Certificate holders will also have to advise the authority of certain changes as they occur. 
The Justice and Electoral Committee led by Chester Borrows who does a fantastic job with that committee recommended several changes to ensure the bill meets its objectives. Most of the changes are technical in nature to clarify aspects of the bill and to make it operate as intended. All of those changes are now reflected in the bill. 
I want to comment about the most significant change in the bill since it was introduced and how that relates to the regulation of private investigators. Private investigators as members know perform a valuable role investigating fraud and other criminal offending but the current prohibition on taking or using photographs or audio recordings without the subject’s written consent can make it difficult for private investigators to do their work. That restriction was in clause 66 of the bill introduced to the House. The select committee recommended replacing clause 66 with a requirement to make regulations prescribing a code of conduct for private investigators. The bill requires the code of conduct to cover the surveillance of individuals by private investigators. 
In conclusion I am pleased that the bill has reached its third reading this evening. It achieves reform that is proportionate to the risks and overall it is cost-effective. It will benefit the many members of the private security industry who already meet the high standards we expect and in whom the public trusts every day. 
The bill was very well received by the Security Association conference which I addressed today and it is pleased that the legislation has finally been modernised. I commend this bill to the House.