Shearer David: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeShearer David: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 27 November 2014. Volume:702;Page:929. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]8.DAVID SHEARER (Labour—Mt Albert)to the Minister in charge of the NZ Security Intelligence Service: Is he satisfied that the timeframe for submissions on the Countering Terrorist Fighters Legislation Bill allows sufficient time for public input?Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Minister in charge of the NZ Security Intelligence Service):Yes.David Shearer: Does he agree with the opinion of the New Zealand Law Society which presented its evidence today orally because it had had no time to prepare written text that “rushed legislation often misses the target has unintended consequences and often gets it wrong.”?Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON: The matter is before the select committee now but I would say as a general principle that I agree with that proposition. Rushed legislation often can miss the mark; so can carefully drafted legislation. The important task before us in this piece of legislation is to focus on the particular issues bearing in mind that it is interim legislation and bearing in mind that it is going to have a sunset clause to ensure for example that we comply with the requirements in the Security Council resolution while we plan the full review.David Shearer: When he referred to a full select committee process this morning as “a 6-month chit-chat” was he referring to the submission from the New Zealand Law Society the Human Rights Commission the Privacy Commissioner or the many New Zealanders who are queuing up to make a submission on an important bill?Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON: No. I wondered whether that would come up. As soon as I said it I thought it was uncharacteristically flippant. The focus really is on the interim legislation. I am very firmly of the view I say to that honourable member that next year there is going to be a full and comprehensive review of all the legislation in this area and it is incredibly important that every person has an opportunity to have his or her say. It certainly is not chit-chat and as I say—Hon Annette King: Apologise.Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON: I apologise. As I say the interview was at 10 past 6 and I had just awoken from my slumbers.David Shearer: I am astonished! Given that in Australia and in the UK the threat levels are considerably higher than they are here in New Zealand and they are also passing parallel legislation in accordance with Resolution 2178 does he consider that the weeks they have to consider that legislation through their own respective select committees are also chit-chat?Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON: I do not know the parliamentary procedures of other parliaments. What I can say is this: I have read the speech of Theresa May on what is proposed in the United Kingdom and I have spoken to Senator George Brandis about what is going on in Australia. I am very conscious that their legislation goes beyond what we are seeking to do here and it is not interim legislation. The opportunity for the full submissions will come next year when we review all this legislation.David Shearer: If New Zealand citizens have fewer than 48 hours to prepare and present a submission to the select committee would the Minister agree that the SIS should not need a 48-hour period to spy on New Zealanders before getting a warrant?Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON: I hear what the honourable member is saying but what I do say is this: this is modelled in part at least on what is contained in the search and surveillance legislation with other safeguards that I was very keen to see inserted. If there are other safeguards that are suggested as a result of the good work of the select committee I—I am not the Government; I should not speak for the Government—and other members of Cabinet will have a very close look at those. I emphasise to the honourable member that what we are seeking to do is not give these powers to the SIS in perpetuity. There will be a sunset clause in this legislation—Denis O’Rourke: Too long.Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON: —and there will be an opportunity for full review. I say to Mr O’Rourke that if it is too long well let us have a talk about that as well.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Why would a political party give support to this legislation with such constricted time for consideration when the very bodies he seeks to give expanded powers to have shown themselves to be so politically biased as to favour one political party over another?Mr SPEAKER: In so far as there is ministerial responsibility for that answer the Hon Chris Finlayson.Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON: Yes I think in answer to the right honourable member it is very important to concentrate on the facts and what the findings were and instead of engaging in third-rate rhetoric about bias focus on—Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. [Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! A point of order has been raised. I wish to hear it in silence.Rt Hon Winston Peters: I asked this Minister who is in charge of this legislation as to why a political party would support it given a certain event in the past. He has a responsibility. He is after all the man in charge of the bill—so that is the responsibility—and I do not want a lecture from this overblown—Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member will resume his seat. I invite the member to go back and carefully study the question he asked and then consider the answer. I think the question was addressed by the Minister satisfactorily. [Interruption] Order! The member will resume his seat. When I give a ruling I do not expect a senior member to yell out disputing a ruling I have just given. That lowers the dignity of this House and it is happening frequently from that particular member. It is time he showed more respect to this place.Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Do you—Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] When the member rises he calls “Point of order” and then I call the member and then he speaks. A point of order has been called.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Do you Mr Speaker think it is fair that in a response that the Minister is responsible for because he is in charge of the legislation he should then be allowed to launch a personal attack and then you find it suitable and appropriate?Mr SPEAKER: On this occasion I do believe the answer was appropriate when I consider the tone and the language used by the member when he asked the question. That is why I invited the member to look carefully at his Hansard when he gets an opportunity.