Catchpole Brent: Copyright (Parallel Importation of Films and Onus of Proof) Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Third Reading 
Catchpole Brent: Copyright (Parallel Importation of Films and Onus of Proof) Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:612;Page:9395] 
BRENT CATCHPOLE (NZ First) 
: 
 The title of this bill—Copyright (Parallel Importation of Films and Onus of Proof) Amendment Bill—is a load of rubbish. This bill is nothing more than a “Guilty Until Proven Innocent” bill because that is what it sets out to do. The bill contains a clause that provides that a person is guilty regardless of whether he or she is a legitimate business person. You are guilty until you can prove that you—[ 
Interruption 
] 
BRENT CATCHPOLE 
: I am not talking about the Chairperson. 
David Benson-Pope 
: Yes you are. 
BRENT CATCHPOLE 
: I am not talking about the Chairperson I am talking about the public in general—the business people. [ 
Interruption 
] I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. We have just gone through the second reading without an opportunity to speak on the bill. I ask you to keep the senior Government whip and the Minister quiet during our speaking time. If you want us to continue on this bill I suggest that you keep those members quiet. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I am the sole judge of the situation in the Chamber. I will call order when I believe that someone has gone outside Speakers’ rulings or the Standing Orders. That has not happened at this stage. 
BRENT CATCHPOLE 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I ask you to keep a very close eye on those members on the other side to give us a fair chance to have a say. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I always do Mr Catchpole. 
BRENT CATCHPOLE 
: As I was saying the title of the bill should be nothing more than “Guilty Until Proven Innocent”— 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Order! 
BRENT CATCHPOLE 
: I was not referring to the Chairperson at all. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: You cannot the use the word “you” because it refers to the Chair. 
BRENT CATCHPOLE 
: The general public is guilty. Every businessman or woman in the country who imports any sort of books DVDs or CDs is guilty unless he or she can produce the paperwork when asked at any time to prove whether that business is legitimate. According to this bill the general public and every business person is guilty until they can prove that they run a legitimate business. Those people could have been running a legitimate business for many years importing DVDs CDs and books. However this bill turns the onus of proof around completely and makes those people guilty until they can put all the information on the table. The request for information can be made purely on the whim of the Customs Department or the Comptroller of Customs. If they feel they want to slow down the importation of other goods they just have to say that that person is guilty and prove it. Businesses will come to a halt unless they can prove that they are not bringing in pirated copies. 
That is where the bill goes wrong. It attempts to try to prove that everybody is guilty rather than put the onus on the ones who want to bring charges to prove that they have a case before they can stop a situation. It is a misnomer to name the bill the “Copyright (Parallel Importation of Films and Onus of Proof) Amendment Bill”. It is a “guilty until proven innocent” bill and that is the wrong way to go about it. It hinges on our civil rights. All that is needed is another genuine importer to lay a complaint and a person is considered to be guilty and that person will have to go through all the hoops to prove that he or she is not guilty. That is where this bill goes wrong. This bill should be named the “Guilty Until Proven Innocent Bill”.