Brown Peter: Crimes (Intimate Covert Filming) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Brown Peter: Crimes (Intimate Covert Filming) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:625;Page:20325] 
PETER BROWN (Deputy Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I will say from the outset that New Zealand First will most certainly support the bill’s referral to the Government Administration Committee. I am not totally convinced that that select committee is the correct one but nevertheless we will support its referral. It is a sad day in New Zealand when we have to produce legislation like this. It is a sad fact though that there are some weirdos out there and they will resort to this sort of activity. Much has been said by earlier speakers about the activities of those people but I will not enlarge on that. But I do think that in the fullness of time this activity will become a more prevalent crime. I think this bill is needed with some degree of urgency. 
I say that it will become more prevalent because I have read many of the censor’s reports on those sorts of videos coming into this country and they feed the brains of weirdos who would get into this sort of activity. So New Zealand First supports the bill. 
However I raise three points of concern. Firstly clause 3 inserts new section 216M “Protection from liability” and applies to any member of the police amongst other groups which I will come to. Why should members of the police be protected if they have this sort of material? Let me put a hypothetical case where a young woman or boy is filmed covertly and the parent or someone calls the police and they become involved. Why is it necessary for every police officer involved in that investigation to see this sort of material? Why cannot the average police officer accept the word of the investigating officer that the matter is to be addressed? The section also covers any customs officer and a list of other people who will be protected from liability if they have this material and rightly so in most cases. 
But we say that in every case the material in the hands of these individuals should be confined to the people whilst they are doing their investigation or whatever part of the proceedings they are involved in. As I read the bill this material could be passed from one member of the police or Customs Service with impunity. I do not think that that is tough enough. I am certain the select committee will address that matter. 
The honourable member who resumed his seat referred to this bill as relating to the modern version of the peeping Tom. I agree with him 100 percent. Peeping Toms stalkers and people like that are undesirable. But occasionally we come across a person who has been set up as a stalker. It occurred to me on reading this bill that if a person filmed himself or herself and transferred it to the computer or the video phone of somebody else to make it appear that the somebody else had filmed him or her—I see the Minister is smiling but this could occur. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: Why would you? 
PETER BROWN 
: To get the other person in strife. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: False claims are made in all sorts of criminal areas. The courts deal with those. 
PETER BROWN 
: I do not know that the courts would deal with this as adequately as they would deal with the genuine offender under this bill. I am saying to the House and I see that the Minister has taken note that hopefully it will not be exploited by people but it could occur to a very minor degree. But I believe that this bill needs to be balanced a little bit in that area. 
The final point I would like to make is that I understand that the Australians adopted legislation along these lines some time ago. I understand that very very recently in the last few weeks because of this type of legislation they have now advanced it to preclude parents photographing their children in any state of undress—namely at a swimming carnival and an athletics meeting. I understand that in Australia—I wanted to check this out but I did not have time before I came to the House—no parent is allowed to film his or her children at a swimming gala for example or at a sports day. To me that really is a backward step and I hope that this is not a move along those lines. 
Having said that—and it might have appeared quite negative but it really is a reflection of our concern that we get this legislation correct—I do say that New Zealand First welcomes this bill. It is a sad day for us that we have to produce such legislation in this country but we do and New Zealand First will support it proceeding. We support it going to a select committee.