Mahuta Nanaia: Customs and Excise (Joint Border Management Information Sharing and Other Matters) Amendment Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Mahuta Nanaia: Customs and Excise (Joint Border Management Information Sharing and Other Matters) Amendment Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:677;Page:473] 
Hon NANAIA MAHUTA (Labour—Hauraki-Waikato) 
: 
 I am sorry to cut off my colleague Kris Faafoi but I wanted to raise a couple of questions with the Minister of Customs. I am seeking some clarification. 
Firstly it seems to me that in principle I need to say that the purpose of the Customs and Excise (Joint Border Management Information Sharing and Other Matters) Amendment Bill—to improve information sharing between border agencies—is well supported but the devil will be in the detail and the implementation. So the fact that the bill refers to a review at 5 years and before 6 years is I think a positive thing. It is an important element of ensuring that the operational practice of implementing the intent of this bill has been achieved effectively. 
The questions that I have for the Minister that I am seeking clarification on relate to the level of discretion given to the chief executive. In particular I am looking at clause 22(2) of the bill. In my initial reading of that clause it seems to me that the chief executive is given quite a wide-ranging brief in terms of his or her ability to exercise discretion. On that matter if the Minister were inclined to take a question it would be this: is he comfortable with the level of discretion that the chief executive is able to exercise in relation to this bill and is he convinced that it is a matter that does not require review? It could be the simple fix that as the aspect of information sharing is to be reviewed at 5 years or 6 years the level of discretion exercised by the chief executive could be subject to that review also. 
If the Minister did take the opportunity to respond to that question the other part would be in relation to the setting of penalties and the rates. It is not clear to me whether the calculation of penalties is reasonable. I think it is a fair question. Obviously to say that the penalties have not been addressed over a period of time and need to be looked at—I do not dispute that. My question to the Minister is on what basis he determined that the penalties set were a reasonable amount and something that was justifiable. In reading section 128B in clause 13 and the amount of discretion implicit in it that the chief executive can exercise again my question to the Minister is whether he is comfortable with that. He may well in fact respond by saying that my reading of that section is entirely wrong and I accept that but it implies that again the chief executive has the ability to exercise discretion over the amount of penalty that could be attributed to offences under this particular provision. 
Can I also say in relation to the explanation about agencies other than border agencies having access to the information that is collected on the database that I understand that one of the submissions was given by Auckland International Airport and that it argued that it was important to have access to this information so that it could make some timetabling decisions around staffing at the airport. Although I have some sympathy for that argument my main concern if we are going to deal with the issue of border control is that this is primarily an issue of ensuring that those border agencies that are tasked with ensuring security at the border are the primary utilisers of the information. Although I have some sympathy for the airport’s position I do not think it is the type of agency external to border agencies that should have a huge amount of access to the information that is being collected in this particular database. If I understand the way in which this bill is constructed it is not intended that the airport company or for that matter cruise ship companies or services or duty-free services at cruise ship terminals would have an in-depth detailed amount of information from this system. But it is again worth asking the Minister whether as this matter is being reviewed it is the Minister’s intention that the primary responsibility and objective of the bill is focused on border agencies and not in large part on external agencies. We must be absolutely confident in this House when we pass laws to do with our border that our primary focus is on security at the border. 
So with that in mind I am hopeful that the Minister will take a call on those questions. I have been very specific so as not to waste the time of the Committee. It has been encouraging to see that the Justice and Electoral Committee spent some time going through this bill and making some useful amendments to ensure that it can pass with the support of Labour and other parties in the Committee. I encourage the Minister to take me up on my offer and respond to those questions. They are genuine ones that I consider are useful and may help with clarification—certainly in  
Hansard 
 and in the bill being read as intended by the Minister—to help in the interpretation and utilisation for the successful implementation of this particular bill.