Hipango HareteHARETE HIPANGO (National—Whanganui): E Te Mana Whakawā ahiahi mārie. Good afternoon. May I acknowledge the members of the House who are present here today—thank you—and may I also acknowledge the voters of the Whanganui electorate who have placed me here to speak today.Furthermore may I also acknowledge my colleague Chris Bishop for his steady sturdy and robust inclination and work on this piece of legislation which I have the pleasure of being able to stand to speak in support of noting that for many years having worked as a lawyer in the courts this is the first time that I now have the ability to stand and speak in the passage of a bill that is soon to be passed into legislation. So that is indeed a privilege and I acknowledge my colleague Chris Bishop again for the effort put into this.May I just say that in my maiden speech I concluded that with the words e tīmata—it begins! So this opportunity post-maiden is quite a privilege as I stated and so I have begun. I begin by referring to this bill—soon to be legislation as it is non-contentious. It's supported by New Zealand First—the member who spoke this afternoon—the Greens and also members from the Labour Party. I reference that the comment had been made by the New Zealand First member that it's a small tweak. I would submit that it's more than a tweak. Although small it's not insignificant and there are members in the House who have spoken to this prior to that particularly referencing the importance of the freedom of speech and I will turn to that later in the submissions.There's been talk—and it's been well canvassed and covered—as to the purpose of this bill before the House. The Films Videos and Publications Classification (Interim Restriction Order Classification) Amendment Bill—yes it is a mouthful but it is a very small albeit important piece of legislation to ensure the significance of freedom of speech. We've heard members speak about the detail of the bill. May I just give some context as to how this came to be by way of a book called Into the River. I'd just reference as my first time standing to speak post-maiden the coincidences associated with Ted Dawe's book Into the River. I am from Whanganui and I have an association and relationship with the river. Now this story it's well-known was an award-winning teen novel about a young boy who was coming of age. This 14-year-old character Te Arepa Devon" Santos a Māori boy from the rural East Coast wins a scholarship to attend an exclusive boys' school in Auckland and it's a story about him being bullied I believe.Like a number of those here today I've not had the privilege of reading this book but I just hark back to the days when I was a student at college in the 1970s and there was a contentious story called The Catcher in the Rye—so there are those of us who may be familiar with that period. It was contentious because it was a book that had been banned in America. It was a piece of American literature that for me attending a Catholic girls' convent school—to read the story The Catcher in the Rye had some type of similarity to this book Into the River. Catcher in the Rye was the story of a young character who in the 1950s went on a journey and an adventure into life. But it happened to be that that life journey and adventure was based in the city of New York. And again I referenced the coincidences of me speaking on this proposed amendment bill—the association with Into the River being of the river but also Catcher in the Rye which was a story that when I read it as a 16-year-old back in the 1970s I had no idea I would actually be referencing in the House of Representatives here in relation to this legislation. The other coincidence is that I have a son who lives in New York and is working there.The importance of these stories is about the ability and access that was restricted at the time as has been canvassed in the discussion and debate before the House—the restriction for a period of six weeks for a group of interested readers to be able to access the story and the messaging behind this. The details around Chris Bishop's bill here—I refer to the second reading where Mr Bishop had indicated why it was that he saw this as being significant. The book had been temporarily—for that six-week period—banned or restricted; but it was still restricted therefore effectively a ban and there was an anomaly in the censorship laws as result. This bill is going to address those anomalies.It's been canvassed and I just again refer to the second reading quotes from Chris saying that New Zealand publications are classified by the Office of Film and Literature Classification. So it started in September 2013 where Into the River was classified as unrestricted suitable for mature audiences 16 years and over. That was appealed by Family First a families lobby group—well known—who sought a restricted classification for the book. So in December 2013 it was classified R14 and this was a unique classification in that it had never previously been assigned.As a result of growing dissatisfaction back in that time Auckland Libraries requested the board's decision be reconsidered by the classification office and so that was done. It was appealed again by Family First. So moving fast forward through to arriving at why this amendment to the Act is being made. As stated it's more than a tweak; it is significant. And the significance is that this bill proposes simple amendments to give authority and empowerment to the president of the board for those reviews and more flexibility when imposing interim restrictions.The key provisions in the bill are intended to allow interim restriction orders to completely restrict access to a publication as they currently do or importantly to restrict access to only people who are of a certain age who belong to a certain class such as tertiary students or those who are accessing the publication for a certain purpose such as a film festival. So essentially the bill—what it does is it creates three new types of interim restriction orders that mirror and reflect the classifications that can be imposed on a publication by the Office of Film and Literature Classification. In essence it means that there is a calibration of the interim restrictions or a recalibration.I referenced earlier the importance of freedom of speech and the importance of what we have as New Zealanders under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. Some may think that this may be small and tweaking and insignificant—it's far from that. It's a robust bill that makes a small albeit important change to better protect the freedom of speech and expression of ideas here in Aotearoa New Zealand. So it's adjusting—it's more than tweaking; it is completely altering an anomaly which was identified by Chris Bishop within this legislation soon to be amended. Importantly also when Parliament thinks that the law is being applied poorly then it's important that Parliament addresses these matters by way of amendments to the law.In conclusion with all the speakers before everybody who has stood today to be heard in this House we've commended Chris Bishop for the work and the members of the committee and I too seek to commend this bill to the House with the support from not only myself but the party that I stand to represent. Kia ora.Bill read a third time."