Ghahraman GolrizGOLRIZ GHAHRAMAN (Green): Thank you Mr Speaker. In August last year the city of Auckland—my home—announced and welcomed confirmation that we would be hosting the APEC leaders' week in 2021. What we've heard today repeatedly is all about the benefits of that APEC summit. We will have world leaders from some of the biggest trading nations from our region come together in New Zealand. All of that is true and the benefits may well be vast. We are a small nation. We do need trade and New Zealand should take every opportunity to showcase our nation and to build friendships and to contribute to a multilateral world order and to strengthen the rule of law internationally.So all of those things stand but this bill isn't about the benefits of the APEC summit; this bill is about the imposition of certain security measures that are imported and imposed. They are not New Zealand's own security standards or policing methods in fact. We are adopting these new standards while we lower the standards of safety for the rest of the public the not-so-trade-valuable visitors who may be here and other New Zealanders. We are lowering the standard of safety and of human rights. For those reasons the Green Party will oppose this bill.We see this bill and the measures that it proposes to impose as an overreach. We're seeing and we've heard repeatedly that there'll be expanded powers given to foreign security agents to carry and import firearms that are otherwise restricted in New Zealand. Those are restricted firearms that will be allowed into New Zealand on an ad hoc basis being carried by people who have not undergone police training or do not have the same culture of regulation as what we have out in our communities. We see that as an overreach and we see it in particular as unnecessary and counter-productive while New Zealand is itself undergoing reform of gun regulation. It makes no sense to go the other way to the way we have been going in this House and out there in our communities when it comes to regulating gun ownership and gun violence because we have very recently learnt some lessons about the kinds of devastation that can occur when guns that should be restricted are out there on the streets. We've heard again and again today that should those firearms be used by those foreign agents New Zealand law will apply—we can charge people with murder or manslaughter our self-defence laws will apply. But that is cold comfort to any victims that have been killed or injured or their family or loved ones because we have allowed the APEC summit to be made secure so to speak by way of putting more and more what should be restricted firearms out on our streets being held by foreign agents that we didn't train that are not used to interacting in our communities.What I will note as well which is alarming any time we resort to armed policing in ordinary community settings is that we know that overseas and here in Aotearoa policing and security agencies do treat different constituencies differently. We know because a loud and vast movement in the United States—and the US is included in APEC—Black Lives Matters is still fighting to stop the disproportionate harm the deaths murders shall we say by US police against men women and children who are of migrant of colour or of black communities. We know that in Hong Kong right now democracy protesters are being brutalised by Chinese-backed security agencies and we know that right here in our own nation Māori and Pasifika communities are far far more likely to be the victims of use of force by police. So we do have to acknowledge that when we risk life and limb by arming police or security agencies from anywhere in the world or here we're actually risking certain communities more disproportionately than others and it is terrifying for those communities. So that's one thing that this bill allows.As if the risk to life and limb weren't enough as if that wasn't enough to justify opposition to or changing the types of security measures that APEC has obviously imposed on New Zealand there are also some serious concerns about human rights and civil liberties that are being impinged by the measures proposed by this bill. So we have for example police powers being given temporarily during the summit to restrict freedom of movement in certain roads certain areas and certain residential buildings. People living or visiting those areas or those buildings will and may be restricted by again these armed security officers or police. People may be required to show IDs. People may not be able to access their homes or the areas where they live work or need to visit. That's a power that we're giving away.The other thing we're doing which is a little bit of an unknown is we're allowing electronic so-called countermeasures to be taken and this again is in the name of security. It's so that we know if electronic devices like phones are going to be used as bombs. Yes we need to know if something is going to be bombed but we don't actually know what these countermeasures are going to be because they're going to be imposed by foreign agents. They may well include collecting data about where certain electronic devices are. So these are the privacy rights of ordinary New Zealanders or visitors to this nation during the summit—to have their movements tracked and known their devices accessed in ways that we are not going to be regulating. The only measure of security included in this bill against abuse of that power is that the foreign agents won't be allowed to share that information. Well we know that privacy rights are breached the minute our information is accessed our movements are tracked and again it is cold comfort to a victim of a breach like that—if they're being targeted by a Government as a protester as an activist or as an ordinary citizen—that that Government has collected their information tracked their whereabouts but hasn't shared it. That's another power that we're giving away.It is concerning that at this moment in global history where New Zealand stands as a beacon for things like kindness and progressive governance instead of standing up to these measures that we know have again and again been imposed by the international elite we are instead bowing down. Instead of standing as an independent voice on the world stage forging a path showcasing our ways in terms of human rights in terms of privacy rights in terms of non-violence we are instead adopting what has been imposed again and again placing at risk the safety of our communities and lowering our standards of human rights. So the Green Party won't be supporting this bill.