McKelvie IanIAN McKELVIE (National—Rangitīkei): Hang on. [Removes mask] I'll get through the first minute getting this off. Apologies Madam Speaker. I've just got to get my hearing aid back in place so I can hear you when you go to sit me down. Thank you Madam Speaker. It's a very interesting place to find myself speaking on the Security Information in Proceedings Legislation Bill and it's probably the first justice bill I've spoken on in the House for quite some number of years. In fact I think the person in the chair may well have been the chairman of the Law and Order Committee last time I spoke on a justice bill in this House. So the bill results from recommendations made by the Law Commission or a 2015 report. That in itself I guess just shows how long it takes for issues of importance to get to the point of legislation in this House under normal circumstances. Before saying a few words about the bill I just want to reflect on the enigma that the Government is when only a minute or two ago we were debating a bill that takes away protections from a few young children—lifesaving protections—and here we are a few minutes later debating a bill that puts in place protections for well reasons of national security but for very interesting reasons. The Minister I heard say that this is an important and complicated piece of legislation. The enigma of this is that for nine years in Opposition this current Government spent the whole of their time opposing every security bill that came into the House. Here they are taking the high ground I suppose and doing what you could only describe as a three-quarter backflip off a springboard and putting a piece of legislation in place that puts in place those types of protections. So you've got to wonder at the reason or logic behind some of their opposition to previous bills. We of course won't oppose this bill because we understand the importance of—Hon Member: Oh good on ya. IAN McKELVIE: No same. We understand the importance of I guess providing security and giving assurance to our international partners amongst other things and international countries that whatever information is produced in the course of court proceedings that might create some security challenges for us or security challenges for our allies or for other people in the world or in fact for individuals is protected in a manner that's logical sensible and as transparent as can be. I think the interesting issue about this bill is that most of the provisions that it puts in place can be found in the law now. But the problem is they are all over the place and as the previous speaker from this side of the House Chris Penk described they are kind of ad hoc and need to be pulled together in a manner that would be different in every case. This piece of legislation intends to put in place practices that are easier to follow and that creates certainty for the courts going forward. I find it interesting because inevitably we get into matters of opinion. Even in legal proceedings it's very difficult to document in legislation something as certain as a process that we will follow on every occasion because every occasion is so different and this bill introduces a new trial admissibility hearing or a pre-trial admissibility hearing where the court determines what process it should take and how the national security information should be protected. That of course will inevitably become a matter of opinion because it's very difficult to document that in law. So like so many other things that we have coming through this House it's going to be interesting to see how the select committee deals with these issues and how they put some certainty or as much certainly as they can around the processes that lead to this stuff because as my learned legal friend Chris Penk also described earlier on these matters are very technical and there are also issues that frankly the legal fraternity need to deal with and deal with in a manner that this Parliament can't deal with. So we need to put the law in place that allows the courts to operate in a manner that then protects the information they want to protect protects New Zealand and protects our allies where necessary. So it is for me a complex piece of legislation. It'll be interesting to see and I'll take a great deal of interest in how the Justice Committee reports this back to Parliament. But in the meantime the National Party certainly supports these pieces of legislation because we understand very well the importance of national security; of protecting our borders our information and our people; and also protecting our allies and the information they may need to provide at times to assist us in whatever types of court cases or civil cases we are undertaking in this area. So it is a complex area and with those few words I commend the bill to the House and look forward to the report of the Justice Committee when it comes back. Thank you.