Marcroft JennyJENNY MARCROFT (NZ First): Tēnā koe Madam Assistant Speaker. Kia ora koutou katoa ko ēnei ngā kōrero mō tēnei kaupapa.[Thank you Madam Assistant Speaker and greetings to you all these are the comments pertaining to this matter.]This is my first call in the House and I am grateful for that opportunity. I take a look at this bill the Films Videos and Publications Classification (Interim Restriction Orders) Amendment Bill and I would just like to start off by saying that New Zealand First supports this bill.This is not a groundbreaking alteration to the legislation; this member's bill of Mr Bishop's is simply a small tweak. The Films Videos and Publications Classification (Interim Restriction Orders) Amendment Bill has been labelled as being something of a catchy title; personally I think it's a little clunky.Looking at a little bit of back story painting a picture here we've seen public silent readings of a book. We've seen book shop front window displays with books encased in paper bags being faced with the potential of seriously large fines of thousands of dollars. Now this gives a whole new perspective to the term reading for meaning" all over one single book which has become something of a poster child for this piece of legislation. This literary poster child has created a bit of a brouhaha over a blip on the legislative landscape.Destined to become for ever a footnote in Aotearoa New Zealand's literary history the written word of course is art and we know that art improves our human experience and our life in general. Art in all its forms is aspirational; it challenges inspires and has the power to shape our attitudes and our values. So this little legislative tweak will correct what seemed like a big overreach at the time and an obvious example of destructive interference with a process that was taking some time to work but nevertheless was working well.It shouldn't have ever been about the book—a book that is a writer's authentic work presented for public consumption in a very genuine way. The author's ambition to write about difficult subjects like teen sex drug use and bullying in language that teenagers can relate to is a good and worthy one. How well he has succeeded—how well the author has succeeded—is an entirely different question. People will have different views of this book and it is right and proper that those views can be and have been expressed in public debate.When we look at reading and reading of all manner of books that is of course good for everyone. Especially important is finding topics to engage our young people. This particular book has engaged young male readers and that is something that we need to encourage more of. Not only does reading increase our empathy it also happens to be one of the single best habits for enhancing our creativity.A study by graduates at the University of Western Ontario published in the US for a psychological science journal has found that creativity thrives in people who are happy and positive and those who read books regularly are on average more satisfied with life happier and more likely to feel their lives are worthwhile. If you read regularly the resulting improvements in your mood will spill over into your creative endeavours in life so you're happier more creative—kind of like killing two birds with one book.Reading's also a boon for creativity in so far that it promotes a calm a contemplative mind-set reducing stress—and we could all do with a bit of that—and it does that more so than would you believe listening to music drinking a cup of tea taking a walk even in the bush or any other commonly used stress relief mechanisms. So in spite of all these benefits too many people claim that they don't have enough time for reading.The Films Videos and Publications Classification (Interim Restriction Orders) Amendment Bill—the process that the Office of Film and Literature Classification went through in the case of this book that we've been talking about Into the River was a very rare one but through the amendment this anomaly will not happen again and that is something to be thankful for. This is the first time in over 10 years that an interim restriction has been put in place and it's the first time for a book. The last time was in 2002 for the film Bully which was initially rated R18. This bill would not have been applicable in the case of this film as until the decision was reviewed it was perceived that this film may not have been suitable for viewing by an adult audience. After the review process the same classification remained for that film.From the few submissions that have been made in relation to this bill—and there were four submissions—there were two main concerns the first being that in censorship of content currently interim restrictions function like censorship making the classified documents illegal to possess distribute import and display hence the books in paper bags. This bill aims to have these interim restrictions changed from temporarily banning the content whilst the classification is reviewed to instead allowing the material's availability to be restricted to particular groups.In the case of Into the River at no point was there any reason based on the classification it was given for it to have been banned for adults. Even the group that had appealed the rating of the book was advocating only for an R18 rating not for the book to be banned. The author himself Ted Dawe was aggravated by this step to ban the book until the classification could be reviewed because he felt he was being cut off from the reading public. He had a lot of comments to make at the time; he in fact was baffled by that.One thing he said was that for most writers when they get the premier award for winning which he did for this book it will be their glory year. For him it was a year of hell. It was a year of accusations of nasty emails of censorship. It soured the entire experience of being an award-winning author. He will never get another chance for one of those awards as according to him you only ever get one. Usually that's the case and now his will be spoiled. He said he was blindsided by the ban of his book. He said it was extraordinary and he's had a few emails from people who share that sense of outrage. He asked "Do we live in a country where books get banned? Next thing I'll get burned."This amendment is a movement away from unnecessary censorship. The enforcement of the banning of a book that has already been released in this case was not only difficult to enforce but entirely unnecessary. There were outcries from school libraries from public libraries from librarians across the country and from overseas media of course ridiculing the ban. The Library and Information Association of New Zealand Aotearoa director Joanna Matthew said that libraries generally supported freedom of speech and that she saw that the ban of Into the River was a tragedy. If we censor literature that talks frankly about some of these issues that the book touches on then I think we run the risk of burying them.The other concern of submitters was for the ability to appeal the classification to remain intact. Now this amendment still allows for groups like Family First New Zealand to appeal the classification decision but by all accounts the book Into the River contains some very graphic content that they weren't happy with that made the book inappropriate to be categorised as a child's book as a children's book. Now New Zealand First respects community standards and places a high priority on the protection of children from harmful material. This appeals process is fundamental to the protection of the young and the impressionable from objectionable content.To sum up we must balance the public good with freedom of speech. We need to remove all barriers in the way of readers. We need to encourage our young people in particular to read. We have a wealth of talented writers in New Zealand and they must be encouraged to tell all of our stories. To ban the book was seen as a Draconian measure. The flip-flopping of the classification decision—this made New Zealand look like a little backwater on the international stage as we hit the headlines around the world as one book caused quite a bit of kerfuffle.So in conclusion New Zealand First supports this bill. Although just a little tweak of legislation a blip on the legislative landscape it is an important alteration to an anomaly that will improve the freedom of expression."