Penk ChrisCHRIS PENK (National—Kaipara ki Mahurangi): Thank you very much Madam Speaker. I have enjoyed all the speeches that we've had this afternoon on this topic and also at previous different stages. We've had some excellent speeches in the first reading second reading and so on not all of which were by me but some of which may have been by me. That's for others to say but I do share the enthusiasm of others in this House for the subject. If you'll indulge me for a moment Madam Speaker if you can imagine to yourself a Venn diagram with three overlapping circles: one is maritime things another is parliamentary process and another is law enforcement and sort of legal processes in general. This bill's right at the intersection of those so you can understand my excitement. And I can tell that it's shared by many who are still awake!So the Maritime Powers Bill does important things that others have already referred to. Lest we fail to appreciate its significance I think we've had really good comments made on both sides of the House actually about the seriousness from the shadowy existence of misconduct and indeed the abuse of conduct that can take place beyond the horizon. That which is out of sight should not be out of mind for our law enforcement agencies or indeed us as a Parliament which is why it's important to legislate in this space.The way that the bill operates has been well traversed. At previous stages we've heard about the different zones" for want of a better phrase to encapsulate it all in terms of New Zealand's territorial waters exclusive economic zone and even—actually as the very learned colleague and friend of mine Joseph Mooney pointed out—the continental shelf delineation as well and New Zealand's rights and responsibilities extend even out that far. And of course if the exclusive economic zone is to be exclusive in anything more than just name then it's important that New Zealand has the ability to enforce that exclusivity. And of course there are offences that may be conducted I suppose but obviously we seek to deter those or at least to detect them and then to enforce the laws in so far as they may have been breached. And it's by allowing our law enforcement officers the ability to carry out searches seizures and so forth that that will enable that to be so.Others have talked about the extent to which this provides powers to what are described as enforcement officers. And Joseph Mooney has highlighted I think pretty well the National Party's concerns—I think it's fair to characterise our concerns as such—but also noting that we paid heed to the discussions at select committee and advice of officials and so on to seek assurance in relation actually more so to the warrantless search aspect; that this is a power that will not be abused. And of course you will expect no doubt Madam Speaker that we will be carefully scrutinising the way in which the powers are exercised going forward.The bill also has a number of different provisions that make it clear that to some extent the law remains the same. So the offences themselves remain the same. There isn't expanded jurisdiction in the case of what we would regard as criminal or unacceptable behaviour. So the expansion of jurisdiction is actually more so clarifying that the offences that currently exist can be regarded as such even in new territory. I use the word territory perhaps a bit loosely because traditionally it refers to land. Indeed that's the etymology of territory of course. But as others have pointed out New Zealand is highly reliant on that which comes from the sea and goes out actually from our nation via the sea offshore as well. And of course we should be interested and concerned with what happens on the sea whether or not it's directly connected with our own trading interests for example.And so I think that probably says enough from the National Party's perspective. So on that basis we commend the bill to the House."