Ryall Tony: Copyright (Parallel Importation of Films and Onus of Proof) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Ryall Tony: Copyright (Parallel Importation of Films and Onus of Proof) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:607;Page:4651] 
Hon TONY RYALL (NZ National—Bay of Plenty) 
: 
 The National Party in Opposition strongly opposes this bill. That is because this Minister and this Government know that this bill will do absolutely nothing to fulfil the promise that the Prime Minister made to the people of New Zealand in her Speech from the Throne in 1999. This Minister and this Cabinet know that this bill is anti-business anti-competition and anti-choice. The National Party in Opposition says very clearly that we think consumers should have maximum choice. We are not going to be party to denying consumers the choice they would expect. 
I want to take the House back to the genesis of this bill. In the Speech from the Throne in 1999 only days after the Government had dished out tens of millions of dollars to the arts sector— 
Stephen Franks 
: $80 million. 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: —$89 million of taxpayers’ money—the Prime Minister stood in this House and made a promise to the arts community. Let us hear what the Prime Minister promised she would deliver the arts community. She said that she would prohibit for 2 years the parallel importing of CDs videos films books and software. Well let us look at this bill. Is the Prime Minister’s promise of a 2-year import ban on software in this bill? No. Is the Prime Minister’s 2-year ban on the importing of books in this bill? No. Is the Government’s 2-year ban on the importing of films in this bill? No. Is the Government’s 2-year ban on the parallel importing of CDs in this bill? No. Is the Government’s promise of a 2-year ban on the importing of videos in this bill? No. The only thing this Government wants to ban is DVDs. It wants to limit the choice of New Zealanders to have DVDs until 9 months after their release overseas. 
What we know is that this Government has been told time and time again in official documents that we have managed to prise out of the Government on this matter that the parallel-importing bans will not work and they will not achieve any of the Government’s goals. The Prime Minister stood up and said that banning parallel importing would expand job opportunities and wealth creation based upon the arts. That is what she said yet at the time her own Deputy Prime Minister’s department concluded that the parallel-importing bans would not achieve the Government’s goals and although they might increase the profits of local operators would have a negative effect on retailers and consumers arising from increased prices and reduced access to titles. That is what the department of the Deputy Prime Minister at the time told this Government. 
One of the reasons that the National Party is opposed to the bill is it just does not work. The evidence from Australia is absolutely clear that parallel-importing bans do not assist in the development of the arts industry. It has been estimated that as a result of the parallel-importing ban consumers in Australia pay A$6 more than American consumers for musical recordings. That means that A$1.15 billion more has had to be paid for those CDs than would have been the case if the ban had not been in place. It is clear that there has still been a significant lift in investment in Australian musical culture. One needs only to look at the New Zealand pop music charts to see that there is very strong representation of Australian performers and the CD ban there simply has not worked. 
What is more these Ministers were told by their Government’s own adviser—by the Deputy Prime Minister’s adviser—that there was a very real risk that no extra jobs would be created that the ban would not meet the Government’s goals and that it would just put up the prices for consumers. We have pages and pages of official information where the Government tried to meet the Prime Minister’s promise to the House but it just could not do it. The Government was in such a lather that at one stage we had the previous Minister of Commerce Mr Swain proposing that there would be a parallel-importing ban on all books excepting those for libraries and textbooks for universities and polytechs. So there was going to be a little group of exceptions there but everybody else would have to pay more for their books and their videos. 
What has the Government come up with now? In this bill it is proposing that there be a ban on the importation of DVDs and videos for 9 months after the titles’ first international release. The Government is so committed to the ban that it has a sunset clause. The Government thinks it is such good public policy that it is proposing that it will eventually be phased out in 5 years’ time. Well if it is such good public policy why will it be phased out? There is an internal contradiction there. 
Apparently the Government is proposing to have a ban to protect provincial cinemas from being put out of business as a result of people getting DVDs of the latest films. That is the logic of it. The Government will keep the picture theatre at Whakatane going because it will not let DVDs come in. I tell members that DVDs have been coming in for at least 4 or 5 years and the Whakatane Gisborne Tauranga and Rotorua picture theatres are still showing the films that are being shown in Auckland about a week after they are released in Auckland. There is absolutely no evidence that cinemas in the provinces are being put out of business by the fact that DVDs are coming into the country at the same time that the films are being released internationally. In fact the evidence is quite the contrary. Open up the back pages of the provincial newspapers and members will see the exact same movies being shown in the provincial areas that they can see in the main metropolitan centres. 
This is about protectionism for a very small group of cinema companies and it has absolutely nothing to do with consumers having a choice about where they watch films. This is a slippery slide that the Government has got itself on. Parallel importing has lowered the cost of software books videos DVDs and films in a way that New Zealand consumers want. This is another anti-business move by this Government that will do nothing to increase choice for consumers. All it will do is deny choice to consumers. It will deny the opportunity for New Zealanders to import or buy a DVD that they could whip across to some other country and bring into the country anyway. It will be like the days when people could not buy a cheap transistor radio in New Zealand but could go to Singapore and bring three of them back. That is the sort of protectionist anti-business nonsense being proposed in this bill. 
The Government knows—its own advisers have told its members—that this bill will not work. The Prime Minister was foolish to make her promise in the Speech from the Throne in 1999 to have a parallel-importing ban for 2 years on all these sorts of imports when in fact she has failed to deliver a 2-year ban on any of them—and I say “Thank goodness!”. New Zealanders should have the choice. This bill is opposed by the vast majority of business interests in New Zealand. It is opposed by the vast majority of consumers and when consumers have to pay more— 
Georgina Beyer 
: Where’s the evidence? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: Read the official documents that we had to prise out of the Government. Read the official documents it did not want to release. We had to go trawling for these. Read the official documents from the Ministry of Economic Development and its consultation from Treasury and from the business community and the Government will know that its ban will not work. It is anti-business and anti-competitive.