Alexander Marc: Third Readings 
Alexander Marc: Third Readings 
[Volume:612;Page:9384] 
MARC ALEXANDER (United Future) 
: 
 It is with pleasure that I rise to support this counter-terrorism legislation on behalf of United Future. I shall attempt to speak with just a hint of wisdom and a lot of brevity because much has already been said. Before I start there are a few things I would like to mention. 
It is interesting to note that Keith Locke from the Green Party has been incredibly consistent as has been pointed out by others but I think he has been consistently wrong. The idea of separating the original bill into two along the lines that he suggested is ridiculous because there are strong links between terrorist activities and organised crime. As has become increasingly obvious there is a blurring between the two. Organised crime as with other avenues such as State sponsorship is increasingly becoming the means by which terrorists secure funds to carry out their activities. 
If we want to do our part in the international community and do our bit to protect the New Zealand public we must effectively legislate the means by which we can implement United Nations Security Council Resolution 1373 adopted on 28 September 2001 following the abominable terrorist attacks against the USA. No country is safe and we cannot hide from the rest of the world. We cannot stick our heads in the sand. The Bali attack was in our backyard and we have to be concerned. 
This legislation will complete the Government’s response to the very real security threats that we have become aware of—increasingly so since the September 11 attacks. Following on from the Terrorism Suppression Act this is very much an enabling bill. It will provide the legislative framework necessary for the agencies charged with investigating and preventing terrorist activity in New Zealand to carry out their investigations effectively and to prosecute offenders. Given the ongoing worldwide effort being put into the war on terror it is essential that New Zealand pulls its weight and contributes to the counter-terrorism effort in its own backyard lest we become a soft environment for terrorist organisations and a consequent security liability to our friends and allies. 
Every party in Parliament supported this legislation through its first and second readings except for the Greens. Apparently a rigorous and robust approach to terrorism is not required on their planet. I guess it is a very good indicator that the rest of us are probably on the right track. I suppose good intentions and a bit of positive thinking must be enough to get terrorists to change their minds and their thinking and become peaceful organic farmers instead of unconscionable murderers in some far-off place—and sometimes in a not-so-far-off place. 
United Future on the other hand is not willing to risk the safety of New Zealand citizens by indulging in a bit of wishful thinking and anti-American ideology. We also do not agree with the standard line that this legislation will somehow violate our civil liberties. It certainly appears to have enough safeguards built into it. For example under this legislation any information intercepted by the law enforcement agencies through the use of electronic listening devices may be used against an individual or organisation in court only if it was collected under the auspices of an interception warrant. The use of such warrants is also limited to certain offences. 
This legislation implements in domestic law the requirements of two international conventions relating to the physical protection of nuclear material and the marking of plastic explosives. I think those two conventions really need to be highlighted. Those are the final two of the 12 terrorism-related international instruments that New Zealand is to ratify and with the passage of this legislation we will be fully compliant with UN requirements. The legislation also contains new offences designed to deal with terrorist-type activity. It will be an offence to harbour or conceal a person who has carried out or intends to carry out terrorist activity. It will be an offence to endanger the health or safety of animal populations thereby causing major economic damage and in New Zealand that is a very important ingredient of the bill. The contamination of products such as food water and crops intended for human consumption is something that is basic and fundamental. It will be an offence to threaten or disseminate communicating information about an act that is likely to cause risk to the health or safety of the public cause major property damage cause economic damage and disrupt civilian populations and infrastructure including the administration of government and commercial interests. 
I support this Government’s efforts to combat terrorism as they are based on sound common sense and are neither too heavy-handed nor too soft. This bill is the final step in that process. What we cease to remember sometimes—and certainly this is true of the Greens—is that the very liberties we are now able to enjoy have come at the price of the blood of people who are now buried having fought for those rights. The Green member would then spit on those graves and use that against the very people who presently threaten our liberties. That is something we cannot tolerate and cannot allow. We commend this bill to the House.