Brownlee GerryHon GERRY BROWNLEE (National—Ilam): Well I listened a few moments ago to the speech offered to the committee by Minister Andrew Little in which he accused National of playing politics over this bill and tried to tug at some heartstrings by saying that it's sad that a party with our long history should choose to take this course of action. I think it ignores the fact that we have three parties in Government at the moment who are trying to pull the wool over the eyes of New Zealanders and tell them that this bill somehow provides protection from those who would return to this country with evil terrorist intent. There is no way that the National Party wants to be involved in a sanction or sanctioning or approving—or whatever term you might like to use—a bill that is fundamentally weak and I think the disgrace here is that a party like the Labour Party which has had a sound record through its many long years in this House of cooperating with the other large party in the House on security matters chose not to in this case. The Minister sits there and shakes his head but let me tell the committee that the discussions that were entered into initially were not discussions. They were lectures—Rt Hon David Carter: Ultimatums. Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: —and they were ultimatums and they were Here is the hard line on the table."—here is the hard line on the table—"Follow this or don't be on board." Well there was no willing ear to hear that there might be a different view. I'm fascinated for example that the Prime Minister—CHAIRPERSON (Hon Ruth Dyson): I'm sorry to interrupt the member but the time has come for the committee to adjourn—Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: I'll be back. CHAIRPERSON (Hon Ruth Dyson): —for the dinner break.Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: Thank you Madam Chair. Very difficult to resume a theme when there's been a 1½ hour gap between the just over two minutes that I was speaking on before and now. But essentially what I was saying is that the purpose that is stated in this bill is a complete illusion. New Zealanders cannot feel safe because of this bill. They cannot feel that everything is being done to protect their interests against the opportunity for terrorists to come into this country and perpetrate their terrorist acts because of this bill.It's fascinating that the Prime Minister in recent days has gone out and talked about Mark Taylor. Mark Taylor is the "Bumbling Jihadi" I think the media have fondly named him. The media do this country a disservice by naming him that way because it makes him sound harmless. He's not harmless. Our security services know he's not harmless. He is a very very bad man and because he now finds himself on the end of a losing side where there's apparently no more opportunity for him to cut people's heads off he suddenly wants to present himself as some kind of a victim living in a refugee camp in Syria stateless because he decided to destroy his own passport. He wants the New Zealand Government to get him back. I've no doubt there are politicians sitting in the Chamber tonight who are quite keen to help him out. The good thing is that because he made those threats against New Zealanders with the suggestion that there should be a number of violent acts perpetrated around Anzac Day a few years ago he will be arrested at the border because that is inciting a crime and apparently he's able to be arrested in that way.But the point is there could be these sorts of people coming back into New Zealand where that is not immediately known—that is not immediately known. So four hours for the maximum time that someone can be detained from the time they land in New Zealand make their way off the aircraft or off the ship or whatever it is that they used to come into the country into some kind of immigration control area where they can be identified and held up four hours is not enough time to do the sorts of checks that have already emerged around Mark Taylor. So what we are saying is: why can't it be a bit longer?One thing that will interest some New Zealanders is that if someone is being deported from Australia because they're some kind of recidivist thief or some other such then they can be detained for an even longer period of time. Someone who apparently does have New Zealand citizenship can be detained for a longer period at the border than someone who is known to be a terrorist.And then look the Minister shakes his head. He seems to have an incredible grip on the law in New Zealand! He looks at me incredulously because he's says "I am the Attorney-General; of course I know about the law." Well if he did he would admit that this law is completely inadequate for the purpose that is being set out. He continues to shake his head.I said earlier there were negotiations between the New Zealand National Party and the Government. But the negotiations—Hon Aupito William Sio: Then you changed your mind.Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: Aupito William Sio they were not negotiations. They were a list of demands put on the table by Andrew Little and the ultimatum given "Go with this or don't go in it at all." And when we looked—Hon Andrew Little: What planet are you on?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: Well I'm sorry Mr Little asked me what planet I'm on. Mr Little you're the one sir who is not on the planet. You are the man who is presiding over a piece of legislation that is attempting to pull the wool over the eyes of New Zealanders and tell them that this will protect them from returning jihadists and other terrorists to New Zealand. This is the man who knows that we have a watch list in this country of a large number of people that we are part of the Five Eyes network that will give us all sorts of other information and that we have other security intelligence arrangements that will give us information about these people and all of those countries—all of those countries—have far tougher legislation for their returning terrorist fighters and others who might seek to come into their countries than we do in this legislation. That is a simple fact.So what we have is a watered-down version. It's watered down because the Government places more interest in its survival as a coalition—although New Zealand First's position is completely unable to be understood in this circumstance—all because the Green Party has stuck their head up and said "This is what we want and this is our price for staying involved."So when we see a bill that says Terrorism Suppression (Control Orders) Bill and we read the purpose we have to read behind that purpose to find out what can actually be done what can be done to control those people who come into this country. Well there's a list that we're going to discuss in the next part; so I won't go on to that. But what it says in this first part here is that none of those conditions need to be put in place. They are not exhaustive it says and they are not particularly—meaning that they must not be always used in every case. So we can have people coming into this country they can have a control order put on them but there will be no provision for that person to be confined to one particular part of the country. They can go off wherever they like. Of course they don't have to be monitored for 24 hours just whenever they want up to 12 hours I understand. Then of course—Rt Hon David Carter: Yeah not allowed any more than 12 hours.Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: Yeah that's right. No one is allowed to monitor them for more than 12 hours. Well what do they think they're going to do in those other 12 hours if they've got evil intent?The other point I'd make here too is that when it comes to things like electronic monitoring if there is no control over where a person can go what happens when they move out of range no longer under other monitoring. They don't have to report in on a weekly basis or a fortnightly basis or a monthly basis. They can do whatever they like.So it is a very very weak bill and almost denies the fact that we do have a number of people who might be in the category of returning terrorists—you can't talk too much about that—but we also of course are slowly opening our borders to more and more people who come from countries where they could hide themselves in refugee numbers. I think—Hon Aupito William Sio: Oh come on.Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: Mr Sio goes "Oh!". "Oh!" he says. He's the same man who allowed his Government—his Government sat in Cabinet—to completely miss the boat and allow the country he was born in to suffer the measles epidemic at the moment. So you sigh all you like Mr Sio. The reality is that this is a very very weak bill. This gives the benefit of the doubt to terrorists who turn up on the doorstep. It virtually says that look we're going shake your hand we're going hold you here for a couple of hours and see what we can do. We might have to put a control order on you because that's what we'll tell the public.Hon Clare Curran: Gerry sit down.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): Order! Order! You use his whole name.Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: "Oh they're under a control order." But it'll be a meaningless exercise and have absolutely no effect on the efforts of those people to perpetrate the terrorism that they want.So here we have a Government that actually—we also know it's here. It was brought in very suddenly because they're a Government in trouble out of step with New Zealanders and this definitely proves it.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): Just before I take any more speakers I know we have relaxed the rule on "you" and are trialling that but the way that was used then is not in order. So just cool it."