Tuiono TeanauTEANAU TUIONO (Green): Fakaalofa lahi atu Madam Speaker. I'd just like to congratulate the member Louisa Wall for pulling another one out of the hat out of the jar. The luckiest member in history. I'm not a gambling person but maybe if that member got a Lotto ticket she'd be a winner. And also probably there's at least with the class of 2020 the second-luckiest member at pulling out another bill Ginny Andersen.We're going to support this bill. It makes sense the Protection of Journalists' Sources Bill. Our vision for the media is to make sure that we have a strong diverse accessible and independent media which is essential to effective democracy and to Aotearoa New Zealand's social cultural economic and environmental wellbeing. This bill will make two changes to improve the protections for journalists' sources to address the issues of the type that arose from the search of Nicky Hager's house. One amend the definition of journalists" in the Evidence Act 2006 so that it explicitly includes investigative journalists. Two clarify that books written by investigative journalists are covered by journalistic privilege i.e. not just media articles. And three amend the Search and Surveillance Act 2012 to provide explicit protections for journalists' sources when applying for a production order or applying for a search warrant or exercising a search warrant.The issues arose out of this from the investigative journalist work of Nicky Hager. He's written books and I'm pretty sure some of us have read those books around the House such as Other People's Wars Hit and Run and of course Dirty Politics. I wasn't in Parliament then but I do remember reading that book Dirty Politics and there was an all-star cast in that one. There's an all-star cast with a bit of a legacy maybe there's a bit of a trilogy and there may be a bit of a residue.In December 2015 the then Green Party co-leader Metiria Turei complained to the authority the Independent Police Conduct Authority about the police's search of Mr Hager's property. She asked the authority to investigate a couple of things: whether there was any misconduct or neglect of duty by any member of police the police's decision not to disclose in their warrant applications of journalistic privilege issue and the actions of officers who were involved in the decision-making process regarding the application of the warrant. It's been referred to a couple of times tonight that the judgment—I mean basically they got told off. They got put in the naughty box. One of the findings that the authority had was when interviewing the officers involved in drafting and executing the search warrant the authority found that they had no experience in dealing with the journalistic privilege issues. So this is going to help clear it out because sometimes with the cops you've got to really really spell it out that actually you need to apply the law evenly: to the powerful as well as they do with the powerless. Sometimes you've got to spell it out and this is what this will do.Because we are living in the world of massive media companies like Facebook—and just last week we had a lot of articles around the whistleblower at Facebook; and Facebook is a $1 trillion company. And so we need to be able to protect those journalists. The type of power that those new social media companies—it should be something that we all worry about as well because in many ways we're all kind of prisoners of their algorithm. I mean you don't get on the news unless you say something outrageous. The journalists are kind of trapped into it as well: in order for them to reach their audiences they've got to make sure that what they write is engaging on Facebook engaging on Twitter and all that kind of thing. In order for us to get our messages out to people we've got to make sure that we do things that are engaging for them as well. So at the foundation of this is the question of power—the foundation of this is the question of power.I look forward to the submissions that will come in to the select committee. I think there's a lot of issues that could be teased out because this is one example of yes we need to spell it out so they know what they're doing when they're going to people's houses what journalistic privilege actually looks like. But then there are actually all these underlying power issues that we need to spell out in a whole lot of other circumstances so that when the law is applied the police can recognise where and when they should be applying it across the board with the powerful but also with the powerless as well. So in that vein we support this bill."