Summary Offences (Possession of Hand-held Lasers) Amendment Bill

I call on members’ order of the day No. 4. Just before doing so, I want to advise the House that the honourable member Cam Calder will be using a visual aid, and to advise the member that it must be removed at the conclusion of his speaking, and also to tell him that it must not interfere with the view of the Speaker or other members.

I move, That the Summary Offences (Possession of Hand-held Lasers) Amendment Bill be now read a first time. I nominate the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee to consider the bill.

I am privileged to have my office in the vibrant and diverse electorate of Manurewa. The Manurewa electorate is overflown by upwards of 140,000 flights annually. Some years ago I became aware of the risks posed to pilots, on their final approach, from cockpit illumination with readily available handheld laser pointers. Laser pointers, though used by teachers, researchers, astronomers, and university lecturers in the course of their daily work safely and without incident, assume an altogether more sinister role when used to illuminate a plane’s cockpit. The sequelae, temporary vision loss in its various forms, can have potentially catastrophic consequences not only for those in the aircraft but also for those in the communities around airports or on the approach paths thereto. I was surprised to learn that each year in excess of 100 cases of handheld lasers being used in such a manner have been documented in New Zealand alone, and the incidence of their misuse shows no sign of decreasing.

I consulted with the New Zealand Air Line Pilots’ Association, the Civil Aviation Authority, and the Police Association. All agreed that preventative measures need to be put in place to reduce the chance of laser misuse occurring. I discussed my concerns with Ministers. After a period of consultation, on 15 May 2013 the Government announced that handheld lasers strong enough to be a hazard to aircraft will be subject to new import, sale, and supply controls under health and customs legislation. Their use will be restricted to authorised users who have a legitimate purpose, such as astronomers, researchers, and the New Zealand Defence Force. An order under the Customs and Excise Act 1996 and regulations under the Health Act 1956 to control these devices are being drafted, and I expect that the new controls will be in effect by the end of the year. These new regulations mesh with and complement the proposed Summary Offences (Possession of Hand-held Lasers) Amendment Bill.

The regulations will dramatically reduce the number of new lasers coming into the country and people who will have access to them. There are, however, an unknown number of handheld lasers already in New Zealand. The legislation will make it perfectly clear that it is unacceptable to be in possession of these handheld lasers in a public place without reasonable excuse. The bill is designed to have a preventative aspect, and will reduce the likelihood of misuse by individuals of any of the unknown thousands of laser devices already in our country. My research indicated that the problem with laser pointer misuse had been acknowledged all over New Zealand and, indeed, was a well-known problem internationally.

I was concerned to find there was currently no legislation to control the carriage of such a potentially offensive weapon, despite section 13A of the Summary Offences Act being in force for the carriage of a knife in a public place. Society has decreed, in its wisdom, that it is not in the interests of the safety and well-being of our citizenry if knives are routinely carried on one’s person. Obviously, knives can all too readily inflict grievous wounds or potentially be used to kill an individual; hence, carrying them routinely is discouraged by section 13A. Section 13A could be said to have a preventative role. The legislation is not designed to capture a family going on a picnic that needs a sharp knife to cut a tomato, and is applied with due cognisance of circumstances.

Obviously, a high-powered laser pointer has the potential to cause visual damage to an individual, but because the range of a laser pointer can be measured in miles, the potential collateral damage of such visual disturbance to the pilot of an aircraft or to the driver of a large vehicle is huge. A simple trawl on the internet shows that high-powered lasers of up to 800 milliwatts in power are readily available. They are advertised as 532-nanometre green lasers to impress even the serious professionals. The light can burst balloons, melt plastic, light matches, and have a range of up to 60 miles—yes, 60 miles. Handheld lasers range in size from a small pen to a torch, and are readily carried in a pocket. Yet because of their ability to interfere with a person’s vision at a huge distance, they are potentially far more dangerous than a simple knife. It is ridiculous that something so small can pack so much punch and yet its carriage remains completely uncontrolled.

Laser pointers are available in a wide range of strengths, from a power level of less than 0.39 milliwatts, as seen in compact disc players or laser printers—so-called class 1—right up to class 4, with a level of 500 milliwatts or above, which may cause eye and skin damage, even from reflected beams. Outdoor and industrial laser pointers belong to this category. But as we have mentioned, many lasers of this strength are easily carried in the hand and are virtually indistinguishable from the lower-powered variety.

Already this year we have seen further instances of where laser misuse has endangered the safety of the public in New Zealand. Members of the House may recall that in late April two aircraft were targeted at Wellington Airport, one on take-off, the other on landing. Airline company Jetstar labelled the laser strike as highly irresponsible. Commenting on the laser strike from the airport, Police Sergeant Brett Cousins stated that it could have caused multiple fatalities. Stu Julian from the Airline Pilots’ Association observed that it had not yet associated lasers with the same capability as a gun, but that they can cause loss of life.

In early March the New Zealand Herald outlined an instance from the “Surely Some Mistake” file. Two particularly challenged young men thought it fun to engage with the police’s Eagle helicopter. Not content with illuminating the cockpit once, they did it half a dozen times, for 5 to 10 seconds at a time, and continued, according to the Crown prosecutor, to inflict very intense flashes on the cockpit even as the chopper was hovering above them directing a ground patrol on to them. In his summing up and sentencing, Judge Nevin Dawson said: “The results could have been catastrophic. There was potential for very tragic consequences. People need to get the message that this offending is not just a foolish prank.” Speaking of the case, New Zealand Airline Pilots’ Association President, Glen Kenny, said: “The handheld laser threat is an on-going public safety concern and today’s result should strengthen the safety message and make people think twice before they shine a laser at an aircraft”. Because these individuals were apprehended actually using a laser against a moving vehicle or aircraft, they were successfully prosecuted under section 270 of the Crimes Act.

It is pertinent to note that cheap, common, and readily available class 3 lasers with a power less than 5 milliwatts can have a range in excess of 11,000 feet, or 2 miles. This can seriously interfere with a pilot’s night vision. I have here in my hand one of these lasers of that nature. You can see how strong that light is if I just shine it directly above us, and that can go for some 11,000 feet.

What is the effect of a laser beam when illuminating an aircraft cockpit on a night approach to an airfield? Temporary vision loss is, of course, one of the most common and potentially dangerous effects of cockpit illumination. It can be associated with glare, flash blindness, blind spots, or after-images. Glare is considered to be a temporary disruption in vision, caused by the presence of a bright light within an individual’s field of vision and lasting as long as the light exposure. In flash blindness the temporary loss of vision persists after the source of illumination has been removed. Blind spots are similar to flash blindness, but only part of the visual field is affected. An after-image is an image that remains in the visual field after exposure to a bright light. The US Federal Aviation Administration simulator studies about the effects of laser illumination during final approach show that a legal laser of the size I just demonstrated can easily cause glare and distract pilots up to 3,700 feet and remain a distraction hazard up to 11,000 feet—in excess of 2 miles. Near flash blindness is a potential problem in the last stages of final approach at a range of 350 feet. Thus, we have a wide range of effects from laser misuse determined by the distance away an affected person is from the source of the laser beam.

As I have mentioned, serious consequences can also eventuate if laser beams are shone into the eyes of the driver of any moving vehicle. Imagine the consequences if a beam were shone into the eyes of the driver of a fuel tanker on a motorway at night. Imagine the consequences and the potential for tragedy of that event.

The purpose of this amendment bill is to have a preventative aspect and to reduce the likelihood of a person being in a position to carry out an offence with any one of the countless thousands of devices already in New Zealand. The bill will complement the effect of regulations restricting the importation, sale, and accessibility of laser pointers. The bill will send a clear message that these devices are not toys, that they have the potential to cause significant harm, and that, without reasonable excuse, their carriage in a public place will not be tolerated. I seek the support of the House for the Summary Offences (Possession of Hand-held Lasers) Amendment Bill to progress to the select committee.

It is a pleasure to rise and speak to the Summary Offences (Possession of Hand-held Lasers) Amendment Bill, in the name of Dr Cam Calder. I want to put on the record, to start with, that Labour will support this bill going to the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee. There are several reservations that we have with this legislation that we think would need to be tidied up at the select committee, but we do congratulate the member on pursuing a worthy subject. There have been, as I think the member probably pointed out in his speech, over 100 incidents of laser strikes against aircraft in the last year. There have been a handful of convictions related to that, and I think it is important to acknowledge that this bill does not make it an offence to perform one of these laser strikes against an aircraft; that is already an offence. Recently, a young man was sentenced to 4½ months’ home detention, having been caught and convicted of carrying out a laser strike against a landing aircraft.

What this bill seeks to do—and, as I said, it is a worthy cause—is to reduce the likelihood that people will be able to have lasers and use them in an inappropriate way, such as a laser strike against an aircraft or, indeed, as the member raised, a strike against a land motor vehicle such as a truck. I think the member used the example of a fuel tanker. That would probably be the most disastrous possible outcome. But, indeed, I know that a number of airline pilots have said that really it is only a matter of time before somebody tries this against a moving vehicle, and the consequences of that could, indeed, be quite disastrous.

What this bill does is make it an offence liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 3 months or a fine not exceeding $2,000 for anybody who, in a public place, without reasonable excuse—which is an interesting phrase that I am sure is open to interpretation—has any handheld laser in his or her possession. We think that this bill is probably a bit too broad. This is going a little bit too far into the realms of a nanny State for the National members to support a bill that would ban the possession of all lasers in a public place without some reasonable excuse.

In fact, it actually goes much further than the Government itself has indicated that it is comfortable with, with the regulations that it recently brought in, as announced by the Associate Minister of Health Jo Goodhew, that can be made under the health and customs legislation to regulate the importation and possession of lasers. What the Government did and what the Minister announced was exactly what the airline pilots have been calling for, which is tighter regulations on the most powerful lasers. In fact, the controls that the Government has introduced will be applied to handheld laser pointers with a power output greater than 1 milliwatt—I assume it is probably not a megawatt—in line with the approach taken in Australia and with recommendations from the World Health Organization. The new restrictions will not cover lower-powered laser pointers used as presentation aids, or those used with survey equipment or at rifle sites. That to me seems to be the sensible balance that needs to be achieved. Without a change that better reflects the Government’s approach to those regulations in this legislation, Labour would find it difficult to support this bill past the select committee process, but I believe that the member would be open to some debate and conversation around how we can better target this legislation at the lasers that actually cause harm and not inflict unnecessary regulation on people who have these lower-powered lasers for perfectly legitimate reasons.

There are very few occasions to have the higher-powered lasers in a public place. I know that some astronomers use them, and certainly astronomy teachers use them to actually point out constellations in the sky for young children who are learning about the night sky, and I am sure there would be other reasons related to survey equipment, etc., where it would be reasonable to have the higher-powered lasers. Many people would carry around a little pen laser pointer that is not capable of creating the havoc that the member in charge of this bill is concerned about. As is always the case with this kind of regulation, it is about getting the balance right. We want to reduce the harm, we want to reduce the likelihood that people will be able to carry out these laser strikes, but we do not want to unnecessarily burden people who have the lower-powered lasers for perfectly legitimate reasons.

It is a bit of a surprise that a National member would support such a Draconian approach, but we will get that sorted out at the select committee. I can see some of the National gentlemen who are on the committee and who are looking forward to fixing that bill up, I am quite sure.

It is a bit unfortunate, I think, that the Government has been so slow to respond to this issue. It was not until May this year that Jo Goodhew announced the regulations that will come into effect. They have not yet come into effect, and it is anticipated that those regulations will come into effect towards the end of this year. The Government has left it to a member’s bill and it has left it to a backbencher, with all due respect to Cam Calder, to promote this legislation. It has left it at the mercy of the ballot and left it at the mercy of the members’ orders, and we know that it takes an awfully long time for a member’s bill to rise to the top of the Order Paper and get its first reading debate.

I would have thought that this Government would take the safety of airline pilots, of passengers on aircraft, and, indeed, of road users much more seriously and would have promoted this type of legislation much sooner than it has. There has been a dramatic increase in the incidence of these laser strikes from only a handful in 2006 to over 100 in the last year. The evidence was clear that this was a growing problem. The airline pilots came and spoke to us in the Opposition, and I know that they spoke to Government members. They did not do a big kind of public rah-rah campaign. They came and spoke to us very reasonably and asked the Government to promote legislation that would increase their safety, and yet the Government sat on its hands. It sat on its hands until May this year before announcing regulations—regulations that have not yet come into force—and the supporting legislation that Cam Calder is promoting has come to the House only because a backbench MP decided to put this bill in the ballot. He was lucky enough to have it come out—very lucky to have it come out—and it has finally made it to the House tonight, in September. I think that that tells you a little something about this National Government’s approach to safety, particularly transport safety.

Debate interrupted.

The House adjourned at 10 p.m.