Quinn Paul: Search and Surveillance Bill — First Reading 
Quinn Paul: Search and Surveillance Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:656;Page:5418] 
PAUL QUINN (National) 
: 
 I will take a short call on this first reading of the Search and Surveillance Bill. I support this reading and the contributions of my friends and colleagues on this side of the House and perhaps some of the contributions from our friends and colleagues on the other side of the House. 
I was struck by Jacinda Ardern’s opening comment about the use of the word “old” to describe the current legislation; she said that something being old was not of itself a reason for changing it. I agree with her to the extent that being old of itself is not a reason but being out of date is. One thing is for sure: the current legislation is way out of date. Times have moved on methods have moved on technology has moved on and the way we do things has moved on. As a consequence it is time to take a fresh look at the legislation through this omnibus bill and to bring it into today’s times so that the law enforcement agencies can use modern techniques to assist their honourable work in protecting society the community and individuals. I cannot help but reflect that this modern and focused Government has today brought in two long-overdue bills to modernise legislation. To some extent that is a reflection of this modern party and its drive to put the focus on doing rather than doting which we have had over a lengthy period. 
I want to make a couple of comments on some other previous speakers. Lianne Dalziel said there might be some contradiction as set out in the regulatory impact statement. I say to her that this Government at least has an open book and is prepared to provide regulatory impact statements. I was a bit confused by the messages provided by Charles Chauvel and David Parker in respect of the Law Commission. Although I agree that the Law Commission does some excellent work I do not think it has a free licence to have all its work considered excellent. I reflect on one particular bill where I was involved in a consultation process that from my recollection was completely against what the community wanted. That was the Waka Umanga (Maori Corporations) Bill and fortunately it languishes way down the Order Paper. I think that yes the commission provides expertise in some areas. Search and surveillance and limitation are technical in nature and the commission can provide some expertise on them but I think we need to follow the wise counsel expressed by David Parker that ultimately Parliament must take responsibility for passing laws not the Law Commission. I heartily agree. 
I also want to pick up on the concerns expressed by the Maori Party and to say that I am sure that the Justice and Electoral Committee will diligently work through those issues. Some of those issues have been raised on both sides of the House. I am sure they will be taken into consideration when this bill is referred to the Justice and Electoral Committee which is under the excellent leadership and chairmanship of Chester Borrows. 
I do not have much more to add other than to say that it is always good to be working on very important bills that enhance the crime-fighting capabilities of our law enforcement officers in order to make our communities and society safer. On that basis it is with much pleasure that I look forward to this bill being referred to the Justice and Electoral Committee. Thank you.