Goff Phil: Third Readings 
Goff Phil: Third Readings 
[Volume:612;Page:9376] 
Hon PHIL GOFF (Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade) 
: 
 I move  
That the Crimes Amendment Bill the Terrorism Suppression Amendment Bill the Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill (No 2) the New Zealand Security Intelligence Service Amendment Bill the Sentencing Amendment Bill and the Summary Proceedings Amendment Bill be now read a third time 
. These are important bills. They reflect New Zealand’s need domestically and internationally to be able to respond effectively to the investigation detection and prosecution of terrorist activity. These bills were preceded by the Terrorism Suppression Act which implemented resolution 1373 and also two international conventions relating to terrorist bombing and financing. 
The bills contain a number of terrorist-related offences such as participating in or recruiting members of terrorist groups. They also contain procedures for the designation of terrorist entities and the freezing of their assets. The bills implement two further international conventions relating to nuclear material and unmarked plastic explosives which are the final two of the 12 terrorism-related international instruments with which New Zealand is required to comply. The other measures in the bills are recommendations arising from a whole-of-Government review of possible gaps in New Zealand law that could be exploited by terrorists which have become a serious international problem following the attack on the World Trade Center and of course more recently in Bali. 
In a couple of respects these bills ensure that New Zealand has in place a comprehensive package of anti-terrorism measures. We are now fully compliant with UN requirements in this area in the event that it becomes necessary domestically to deal with planned or executed terrorist offending. The bills include a number of offence and penalty provisions and investigative powers. In addition the Government is progressing other initiatives that have a bearing on this issue—for example in relation to border control. 
The bills contain the following new offences to deal with the kind of offending likely to be committed by terrorists: improperly dealing with nuclear material radioactive material or unmarked plastic explosives; harbouring or concealing a person who has carried out or intends to carry out terrorist activity; causing sickness or disease in animals; intending to endanger the health or safety of an animal population and causing major economic damage; contaminating products such as food water or crops intended for human consumption; intending to harm one or more persons or cause major economic damage; threatening to do an act that is likely to cause major risk to persons property or the economy and intending to significantly disrupt the civilian population or infrastructure or the administration of Government or commercial interests. 
The bills make terrorism an aggravating factor for the sentencing of criminal acts generally. When murder occurs as a result of terrorist activity there will be a presumption in favour of 17 years’ minimum non-parole and that will be only the starting point. A judge will be able to impose a longer term than 17 years if he or she feels it is justified. 
The bills provide for the following investigative powers to ensure that law enforcement agencies can effectively investigate offences that may be committed by terrorists as well as other serious criminal offending. Firstly the use of tracking devices by police and customs officers. There are safeguards around the exercise of this power such as warrant requirement and obligations to report on the extent to which such devices are used. Secondly a requirement on persons to assist computer access in the course of a warranted police search by providing reasonable and necessary access information such as the computer password. Thirdly evidence of serious criminal offending including terrorism lawfully obtained by interception warrant will be admissible even if the warrant was issued in relation to a different offence—provided that the offence of which evidence is obtained is one for which a warrant could have been issued. 
These investigative powers are not limited to terrorist offending and there are two very good reasons for this. The first is an issue of principle. Terrorist offences are not a separate class of criminal offences. They are the same acts—murder bombing property damage and unlawful possession of restricted weapons for example but committed with a political ideological or religious motive. In the criminal law motive—the reason why the offence is committed—is only relevant to sentence. There is therefore no justification for particular powers to investigate terrorism that are not equally applicable to other serious criminal offending. The second reason is purely practical. It will not always be possible to identify before an investigation commences or even during it whether particular criminal activity has a terrorist motive. Drug smuggling for example may occur to finance a terrorist act but this is unlikely to be initially apparent. 
The Terrorism Suppression Act provides for the property of designated terrorist entities to be frozen. This bill includes two related measures. It gives customs the power to intercept and detain property crossing the New Zealand border where there is good cause to suspect that the property is owned or controlled by a designated terrorist entity or an entity that is eligible for designation. This is to prevent for example cash being carried over the border that would be frozen if it were in a bank account. Secondly the bill provides that the details of already designated terrorist entities can be updated in accordance with new information provided to New Zealand by the United Nations. This is essential for anyone including financial institutions who is attempting to reliably identify whether an entity with whom they are dealing has been designated. 
Many of the submissions on this bill emphasised the importance of allowing innocent persons to go about their lawful business. Unfortunately it is a reality in these times that terrorism is one of the greatest threats to that right. Quite rigorous measures that have as their goal the suppression of terrorism may therefore be justified and this is internationally recognised. However this Government has been careful in the development of this legislation to take into account concerns on the other side of the equation—specifically the need in attempting effectively to address terrorism not to institute measures that themselves would have an unduly restrictive effect on the activities of innocent persons. 
In conclusion this bill ensures that New Zealand has done what is necessary to implement the final two of the 12 terrorism-related international instruments with which we are required to comply and is therefore fully internationally compliant. The legislation contains offence and penalty provisions to ensure that should a terrorist act occur in this country we will effectively be in a position to prosecute those responsible. It creates new investigative powers with a view to ensuring that acts of that kind can be detected and prevented before they have a chance to occur. I consider that this bill strikes an appropriate balance between robust and responsible measures to deal with terrorism and protecting civil rights. I commend the bill to the House.