Key John: Border Security Bill — First Reading 
Key John: Border Security Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:609;Page:6836] 
JOHN KEY (NZ National—Helensville) 
: I am pleased to join in the debate on this bill which as members will know is part of a trifecta of legislation that the Government is looking to bring in including the Counter-Terrorism Bill and the Maritime Security Bill. I have no doubt that the Minister of Customs the Hon Rick Barker will be pleased to have the support of the National Party. I say that because in the   
New Zealand Herald  
of 23 June of this year he said: “It should have been done a long time ago.” The Minister will be relieved to have our support and he will no doubt have our wise counsel and wisdom when the bill is referred to the select committee in some days’ time. 
National supports this legislation because it seeks to preserve our national security and it seeks to preserve our $4 billion of exports to the United States. Most New Zealanders would know why this legislation has been recommended to the House—that is because of the activities post - 11 September 2001. I want to take a moment to digress from the bill and to reflect on 11 September 2001 in a personal capacity. I spent 6 years from 1995 to 2001 living in the United Kingdom but spending every second week in New York. In that time I spent every second week living in the hotel that was destroyed on 11 September. That is not the reason that I raise that matter at this important time in the House; I raise it because on that day my boss Michael Packer died. He was giving a speech on the 108th floor at Windows on the World. He perished with another two employees from Merrill Lynch both of whom worked for me and whom I had recruited from the private sector. So that occasion was one of great sadness for me. The world has come to learn that terrorism has taken on a whole new face. We in New Zealand are not immune from such activities. 
I want to make specific reference to the $21 million the Government has foreshadowed will be the cost of this legislation over 5 years. I want simply to make this point. Not only has the world changed in the last 2 years but also the cost of what happened on 11 September has been incredible and monumental. I say that because just 2 weeks ago the US Senate approved the Homeland Security Bill creating the department under Tom Ridge. It approved the spending for the Homeland Security Bill and the sum that the Senate approved was US$29.4 billion. That is the expected cost of homeland security for the United States of America. I simply suggest that the select committee spend some time analysing whether the realistic cost of this legislation will be $21 million over 5 years. I suggest that the cost will be a great deal more. This issue is a significant one. We have seen from the terrorism activity that has taken place post - September 11 that this kind of activity will be with the world in my opinion for decades to come. 
I want to speak for a moment on the travel security provisions. My colleague the Hon Murray McCully spoke for a moment about the issues that may arise from the provisions in the legislation that relate to the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act and privacy. In particular it is worth noting that a great amount of the cost the $21 million is the cost of the pre-border electronic checking process that will take place not only for individual passengers but for people associated with individuals checking in. Those provisions will be very powerful and very useful if they are implemented properly. We simply have to have accurate information on who is coming to New Zealand and whether they are appropriately entering our country. 
But we should not fool ourselves and the select committee will need to spend a bit of time examining the impact that this measure will have on passengers when they go to the airport when they go to our borders. I suspect the delays will be pretty significant. Some months back I travelled to Los Angeles en route to Canada and I managed to experience at first hand what this is like—my not having been back to the United States for a little bit of time. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: A body search? 
JOHN KEY 
: The body search unfortunately did not take place. I am sure it would be a very pleasurable experience in the right circumstances. It would have been a lot more exciting than what did take place which was a 3-hour wait. It was like having to read a Labour Party manifesto—I was asleep by the time I got to the first paragraph. A 3-hour wait pained me. I said to myself that there has to be a better way—US$29.4 billion worth of homeland security! 
To my right I noticed something that I had seen in place many times as I had gone into New York and that was the latest scanning equipment for thumbprints or fingerprints. I thought to myself that certain parties in this House would not like the concept of retina scanning or fingerprints but I suggest that that will be absolutely necessary in the years ahead. I do not think passports which can be forged in all sorts of dodgy countries in the world will cut it. I think the real cost of this legislation when it is finally put in place will be considerably more than $21 million but if it means that I do not have to spend 3 hours in a queue in Los Angeles then I look forward to it. 
I note the supply chain security which comes to the issue of our preserving our $4 billion of exports to the United States. I have a little message to pass on to Labour Government members just while they are thinking about this and are alert and all ears. I recognise that this has been a rather slow and dull debate to this point. If they want to preserve our exports to the United States of America here is a little tip: sign a free-trade arrangement with the US. The only way we will get one of those in place is when we have a real alliance with the US. From the way that the Government has been interacting with our great counterparts the Americans we will not get one. A free-trade arrangement would preserve our $4 billion—in fact grow our $4 billion—a great deal more than tamper-proofing a few canisters before they go to the US. 
I would like to touch on some of the customs’ search and seizure powers because they are quite detailed in this legislation and quite important. Under this legislation customs will be able to detain for investigation for up to 7 days suspicious cash and tainted property. I wonder what “suspicious cash” actually looks like. Is it slightly different in colour or slightly larger in denomination or packaged in brown envelopes? I am not really sure of the definition of “suspicious”. It is something that will have to be spelt out. It may simply mean lots of cash—but plenty of people travel with lots of cash. “Tainted property”—I wonder how the Minister will define that. For instance the Labour credit card said Labour would not put up taxes. I see that in my personal opinion as tainted property. We all know that the Minister of Finance has declared a jihad on the taxpayers of New Zealand by raising taxes 15 times since he promised on his credit card that he would not do that. I suggest that it is tainted property. Others may find a use for it but we in the National Party do not. 
We will be supporting this legislation going to the select committee. I look forward as the committee will to the great input that will come from the National members who are well travelled and well versed in world events. We look forward to making our sparkling contribution as we always do in this great House. 
Bill read a first time and referred to the Government Administration Committee. referred to the Government Administration Committee