Foss Craig: Patents Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFoss Craig: Patents Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12924. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon CRAIG FOSS (Minister of Commerce): Can I acknowledge the previous speakers and also the work they have done to get us to where we are today and the speakers who I think are going to follow me particularly Clare Curran. The Labour Party has been quite reasonable in our discussions in and around what have been some contentious issues in this bill the Patents Bill. I also acknowledge the support of New Zealand First which initially showed reservations concerning my Supplementary Order Papers but is now supportive as per the member Denis O’Rourke’s speech. So thank you very much. I also understand where other parties—but I will let them talk about it—are supportive of the bill which starts to be a bit of a worry sometimes with everyone supporting this bill.It has been a journey. Most of the issues around Part 1 and Part 2 new clause 10A and what was in clause 15 which other members have talked about concern the part around computer programs so I will just touch on that. It has been a journey. I think we now have legislation in front of us that achieves the intent of the Commerce Committee. I do acknowledge that the select committee when it was going through these very same issues wrestled with all sorts of scenarios and came to a reasonable space although when I inherited the bill and looked at the bill—and I will touch on this again in a moment—I was concerned about what was in the commentary versus what was actually proposed as part of the statute. We have got to the point now where the examples that the previous speaker Clare Curran talked about and that are in the commentary—for example the washing machine as far as embedded software is concerned—are nowcodified in the bill as an example as a pointer to what could or could not be allocated or allowed and given patentability. I think we have done a pretty good job.On that note I do want to thank the many many people who have been involved with this bill since its gestation in 2008 I think. I think we have had three Ministers involved—the Hon Lianne Dalziel the Hon Simon Power and now me. We have had the select committee some members of which are still with us and still on that committee in Parliament. I must fully acknowledge the officials who have been working with this bill for quite some time who have been very very keen to see it progress. I fully acknowledge that some of them took a bit of the heat during some of the parliamentary debates through the time but I also acknowledge that those same officials have helped to get us to where we are today. It is a great example I think of the parliamentary process working in action and of joint ownership of this quite significant legislation which modernises 50-year-old patent law in New Zealand.I also acknowledge my colleague from the ACT Party John Banks. I particularly want to acknowledge the Hon Peter Dunne of United Future who did play quite a role in the communications with various sector leaders information and communications technology players industry people and interested bodies again to get us to the point where we are now. As I said I acknowledge New Zealand First and Labour and I believe that the Greens are now supportive of the bill.I have to thank the many innovative New Zealand businesses and stakeholders that have given feedback on this Patents Bill for their engagement to getting us to this point and helping us pass it. This Patents Bill guarantees that genuine inventions are protected and that Kiwi businesses can continue to grow and prosper. I am proud of where we have got to and the process of this bill over the last year. I am very proud to have a major stake in that to where we have arrived. I fully acknowledge that there have been some bumps along the way of that journey. But again professionals who have looked for solutions have helped us to get to where we are. When I became Minister of Commerce I took on a bit of a mission to have a look at this bill and understand what was holding it up and what the issue was and there really was only one key issue: the discussion around the patentability or otherwise of computer programs. So we spent a fair bit of time on that—again a good journey perhaps takes a long time—but as I say we are there.My Supplementary Order Paper 120 to try to tidy that up last year did create a bit of concern to be fair. That is absolutely fine but interestingly we have gone from a period where there was major concern in the information and communications technology sector about my particular Supplementary Order Paper to where we are now and the entire sector actually cannot wait for the bill to be passed in its new form. So I appreciate all of that.The concern was about that Supplementary Order Paper. Opposition did intensify around that time around what was believed to be my not following the intent of the committee. I can assure the Committee that at all times—and it is reflected in my correspondence with different professionals and people in the sector—the intent was always to follow what the committee pointed to. But I realised there was a problem in the bill in that form where in fact New Zealand could have been exposed to World Trade Organization action. Of course none of us wanted that. But I was surprised at the time because my intent was to follow through as earlier indicated.The bill has been strengthened as reported back initially. There is just one person I want to quickly acknowledge. I will not mention the person but when concerns organised protests campaigns emails and tweets and things were really going I had a chat to a person who is in the information and communications technology sector. At that moment everyone seemed to actually start to engage a wee bit more. When I toldthe person that we had about 250 software patents in New Zealand over the last couple of years I listed some of the programs around at that moment that are well known that are patented in New Zealand and not elsewhere and I pointed to my willingness in wanting to follow the UK process and where it is at as opposed to the euro area and where it is at. That was a pivotal point. Everyone started to engage a bit more and a bit better again leading us to where we are now.I fully acknowledge the key issues. My Supplementary Order Paper the new clause 10A and the previous clause 15—that is where the contentious issues are. I think we are now over those. Again let me acknowledge and thank all those who helped us to get to this point and for their support of the bill I believe at the coming stage.