Maritime Powers Extension Bill

Kia ora, kia ora, Madam Deputy Speaker. Tuatahi, e tika ana ki te maumahara tō tātou rangatira kātahi anō kua hinga, te pāpā a Shane Jones, Munro Peter Jones. Nō reira e te pāpā, kei te mōhio mātou tō āhua, ko koe te pukumahi i ngā wā katoa. Nō reira e te pāpā, moe mai, moe mai, a moe mai rā.

Ka nui tēnā, ka nui tēnei wā hoki ki te mihi ki a Dan Bidois mō tana kōrero ātaahua i tēnei rā, nō reira tēnei te mihi ki a ia me tana whānau i tēnei rā, nō reira ki a koutou Te Rōpū Nāhinara, tēnā koutou. Ngā mihi ki a koutou.

[Kia ora, kia ora, Madam Deputy Speaker. Firstly, it is only proper to remember our recently deceased chief, the father of Shane Jones, Munro Peter Jones. Therefore, sir, we know what you were like: hard-working all the time. Therefore, sir, rest in peace.

Enough of that, and this time is also important to congratulate Dan Bidois for his lovely speech today, so I acknowledge him and his family today, therefore to you the National Party, greetings. Greetings to you all.]

Kia ora, Madam Deputy Speaker. I just wanted to acknowledge, first and foremost, our colleague and friend Shane Jones for the loss of his father in the last day. I was just doing a mihi to him and the whānau and wishing them all the best in the North. I’m sure everyone in the House would support that. I also, just before continuing on, wanted to mihi to the young man Dan Bidois, who did a tremendous speech. He did a good job here today. I think he is a role model for Māori; it’s just a shame he chose the wrong party to represent. But well done to him and to his whānau today. Those are always special moments.

I mention Shane Jones because Shane Jones is so anti-drugs—anti-drugs. This Maritime Powers Extension Bill is all about stopping the drug dealers coming into the country. We’re seeing international crime groups targeting New Zealand by smuggling large quantities of illicit drugs into the country. So this bill is needed to give authorities the powers to act outside our territorial waters. This will allow customs officials to intercept mother ships. They sit outside the 24-nautical mile zone with a supply of drugs and they send in smaller boats to try and smuggle their rotten cargo ashore.

Our country’s become more and more appealing for these drug-smugglers who don’t care about communities—don’t care about the communities that Shane Jones represents in the North. Why the Hon Shane Jones is so vigilant in this area is because we have had our communities ravaged by these drug dealers. Sadly, we see intergenerational drug use along with intergenerational unemployment. We see it in the North. I’ve seen it myself in South Auckland. So it’s time that we get a strategy together, and that’s what this bill’s all about.

So I want to congratulate our Minister Meka Whaitiri on her vigilant work. Part of the reason why she does this is because she knows the type of damage that drugs and drug dealing can cause in Māori communities, particularly communities that she represents in the Ikaroa-Rāwhiti. So I say well done to her. Also well done to the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee, who sat on this, led by Simon O’Connor over there, who went on and on and on before the Dan Bidois speech. Well done to our select committee—

💬 Hon Ruth Dyson: Excellent speech!

Thank you very much—for moving this through, but the essence of this is to protect our communities and you cannot doubt that—a structure of support for our customs people, a strategy in place to stop those dirty, rotten drug dealers. We’re talking about $1.8 billion in social harm that’s happening annually, and this includes police involvement, courts, and prison beds. So, 45,000 Kiwis receive support each year to reduce their alcohol and drug use. We are now on the way in terms of turning that around, all thanks to this Government. So I have no hesitation in recommending this bill to the House. Kia ora.

I’ll just point out to the member resuming his seat that it is actually a first reading. It hasn’t yet gone to the select committee.

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, for your contribution also. I was about to throw a point out that the Hon Willie Jackson is on the second reading of this bill, and the rest of the House is on the first reading, so that shows how much involvement we have got from the Ministers. So that was a really, really good contribution, Hon Willie Jackson. I really appreciated it.

Before I go further, I would like to acknowledge the contribution of our newest member, Dan Bidois. He did very well, and I hope he will have a very long innings in this House. Whereas Hon Willie Jackson said that he was in the wrong party, I think he is in the right party, because whatever he did, that is what is expected from a National Party member.

I would also like to pay my condolences to the Hon Shane Jones on his father’s passing away. I hope that when we see him, we will do it in person also.

It’s my privilege to stand in the first reading of the Maritime Powers Extension Bill and support it during the first reading. As the previous speaker from our party, Simon O’Connor, mentioned, we will be supporting this bill through the first reading and the process, and, hopefully, during the select committee there will be some more changes. I would also like to acknowledge the Hon Nicky Wagner and the Hon Tim Macindoe for their contribution to this bill, which was developed during their leadership.

We live in a country which we feel is a fortunate opportunity for us. It is a neat and clean place to live in and to welcome our tourist guests with open arms. Some of these people who want to enter New Zealand through our various ports of entry have malicious intentions. Due to these bad intentions, over the years there has been a rapid increase in the number of attempts to smuggle drugs into New Zealand. The New Zealand Customs Service does a good job to stop that and they have a mandate to stop harm to New Zealanders.

The New Zealand Customs Service plays an important role in this. We want to ensure that New Zealand takes all steps possible to make it harder for the global criminal groups to target New Zealand. We know that each year, the use of illicit drugs, particularly methamphetamine, is estimated to cost New Zealand $1.8 billion in social harm. The criminal networks don’t care about the devastating effects of these drugs. They are motivated by greed and a relatively high price in New Zealand, and they are getting more sophisticated.

Customs is seeing more and more importation of these drugs, and the number of attempts to smuggle these drugs has increased in recent years. Last year, it is estimated customs did a great job in stopping these drugs. It is estimated that more than a tonne of methamphetamine was prevented from being imported into New Zealand, and the street value of that drug was around a billion dollars. In 2015, the seizure of these drugs almost tripled, with customs and police intercepting 293 kilos compared to 105 kilos in 2014.

Keeping methamphetamine off our streets and away from our communities was a big priority for the National Government. That’s why we were taking the initiative to make sure that this bill went through as soon as possible. Most importantly, these seizures have protected our families and the wider community from a considerable amount of potential harm.

We hope that this bill progresses as soon as possible and that it stops such importation and gives the authority to customs to work in international waters so that we can intercept such consignments coming through to New Zealand. I commend this bill to the House.

Just before I call the next member, I’ll just point out to members that the time isn’t working. So we’ll go back to the old-fashioned way in which I’ll ring a bell at two minutes.

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Look, it’s a pleasure to be able to speak on behalf of New Zealand First on the Maritime Powers Extension Bill. I know that—

💬 Brett Hudson: The old sea dog, Ron Mark.

💬 Stuart Smith: Are the P-8s on the way, Ron?

It was a good dinner, was it? It shows. It’s an interesting bill—

💬 Hon Christopher Finlayson: Yeah, like your leader after lunch.

—because I know the reasons and the rationale behind the bill, a bill that was put together under the Hon Chris Finlayson’s Government—and he’s obviously enjoyed dinner as well. I’ve got to say of young Mr Bidois, knowing some of his family: it’s good to see him here.

It’s an interesting bill, and it doesn’t surprise me that most of the focus in the debate thus far has been around what I would describe and New Zealand First would describe as the scourge of drug trafficking and the methodology by which international drug traffickers seek to get their wares into New Zealand. We know—the documentation and the papers are all very clear—that one of the reasons we’re seeing an upswing in the illegal importation into New Zealand of illicit drugs and their precursors is because of the profitability. The National Party, more than any party in this House, understands the market forces, or says it understands the market forces, and if you look into that sort of philosophy, it’s easy to understand why drug barons, drug lords, drug traffickers see some lucrative gain to be harvested here in New Zealand by peddling their wares amongst our vulnerable.

It’s an easy argument to put up in support of this bill, and New Zealand First supports that, but, as the Minister of Defence, one of the things that concerns me is the fact that, for this bill to have effect, it needs an enabler. The enabler in this case is and always will be the Defence Force, particularly the men and women in the navy and in the air force.

💬 Brett Hudson: Replace those Orions.

Mr Hudson, I know—he’s commenting to me across the House, and that’s because I know he understands maritime law. He’s probably going to make a far better contribution on this bill than I will, because I do not profess to be an expert in maritime law, but I do know a little bit about the responsibilities that skippers, captains of warships, must bear, and the responsibility of ensuring that their crew, firstly, themselves do not contravene international law; secondly, that they do not jeopardise the safety of the vessel that they are in command of; and, thirdly, that they do not jeopardise the lives of their sailors, of the service personnel on board in the execution of their duty. I understand also that there is a line of authority that exists between the customs officers who are placed on board those vessels—and let’s be clear: the bill we’re talking about empowers customs officers to exercise their authority, but from a naval vessel. The lines of authority are very clear and set down in international law, and it doesn’t matter what the customs officer may think, what sort of intelligence that person may have, and what their aims or goals may be; the skipper of the vessel cannot breach the international laws of the sea.

The reason that this piece of legislation is important is because it gives the power for the skipper of the naval vessel to actually put aboard or to—I think the naval term is to “visit”—visit a foreign vessel that is believed to be engaged in illicit trafficking activities or illegal activities on a scale and a size that is recognised internationally and is specifically noted in the convention that this bill seeks to ratify.

So as the Minister of Defence, it concerns me that when we pass laws such as this, we are cognisant of the duties and responsibilities that we’re now asking our naval personnel in particular to exercise and that what they have is the full toolbox of law on their side to enable them to assist customs to (1) pull alongside, (2) board or visit that foreign vessel, (3) search it, (4) detain the people on board, and (5), at worst, to confiscate—either take into tow or take command of—that vessel and return it back to New Zealand waters and to New Zealand authorities. Understanding the lines—and I’m really looking forward to the select committee looking into these questions to make sure that we’ve got it covered off right, because this is a bill that started, for all the right reasons, under the previous National Government, which this Government is responsibly picking up and advancing. So it will be encouraging for me as the Minister of Defence to know the select committee has cast its eyes across these questions of legality to make sure that our Defence Force personnel are not jeopardised and that they are not short-changed in terms of their powers. So I’m keen to see that.

Essentially, the key points that the law is going to address are the questions around the fact that the current international law doesn’t provide for the right to visit vessels on the high seas—that is, in international waters—that one suspects of smuggling drugs unless they have flag-State consent. This bill provides that if one does have consent, or if the vessel doesn’t have a flag—and I’ll get into that—then one can not only board and take off the drugs but also prosecute under New Zealand law. This would require bringing the people to New Zealand, which is another question again, if that vessel has been apprehended, let’s say, for argument’s sake, just outside of the Fijian exclusive economic zone (EEZ) or just outside of, you know, Vanuatu’s EEZ or maybe off the coast of the Horn of Africa.

So those are questions, and we know, from our operations that the navy’s been engaged in to date, that New Zealand Defence Force personnel, particularly from our Royal New Zealand Navy, have been involved in some massive drug busts. I think there was one—$235 million worth of drugs apprehended. Now, that was not actually just an operation involving our navy. That involved air force capabilities as well, which, I guess, brings me to the next point, and I’d ask the House at this point in time, as we pass this first reading, to consider, going forward, what capabilities the Defence Force is going to require to do this sort of work. The combination of intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance, of a P3 or a P1 or a C Hercules or a P8 to do that sort of work, concurrently with a naval frigate or an offshore patrol vessel on the water, jointly staffed, manned, crewed by customs, police, and naval personnel, is what actually delivers the punch at the end and actually enables us as a nation to protect ourselves. So we have to have a capability. We have to have a capability that can deploy over long ranges and have that level of endurance, but we also must have the law that protects our personnel when they finally do make that decision.

The point to note in here is that if the vessel we’re talking about in this legislation is unflagged, this law is quite clear: the skipper has the authority to put the customs police and his own crew aboard and to do what has to be done. Where the grey area is is when the vessel is flagged. At that point, the communications have to come from the skipper, back through joint force headquarters, and then out to the flag nation, where we are required to ask for consent to board. Now, all things being equal, if they’re all signatories to this UN convention, they’re going to give that consent. The question then becomes a little murky if they do not. We know there are many nations out there who are not too good when it comes to the corruption indices, who turn a blind eye to drug trafficking, and we’re seeing quite a bit of that on the news lately with a certain particular nation.

So I’d just say to the House: I’m looking forward to this bill coming back from the select committee, looking forward to the select committee giving some consideration to the legalities as they affect the navy, as they affect our skippers, who will be the ones held accountable for decisions that are made—either rightly or wrongly—as to whether or not there are gaps in the legislation, or whether there are some things that we just have to accept where the legislation and the Treaty don’t quite go as far as we might well have liked. Fundamentally, at the end of the day, this is about protecting our nation, and it’s about protecting our service personnel who will be doing this work.

It’s quite timely that I am scheduled to follow the speech of our Minister of Defence. Before I do though, in taking this short call, I first of all acknowledge my colleague Dan Bidois in giving his maiden speech and well supported by his whānau here today. Secondly, the last time that I spoke in this House was on the evening of the tragic seven-death car fatalities in my electorate of Whanganui, north of Waverley. So my thoughts again are with the grieving families as they—the final passage of their loved ones. So this is the ebbing and flowing of life, and as grief washes over the families, I now turn to speaking and addressing the House on the Maritime Powers Extension Bill.

So the Minister of Defence has shared with us his insight and analysis of the bill. Just last evening, there was a gathering of many of us from here in the House, courtesy of the American ambassador, for the Fourth of July celebrations. I had the opportunity to reconnect again with Rear Admiral John Martin, chief of the Royal New Zealand Navy. At the time I didn’t know that I’d be speaking to the House on this bill. Had I, I would have addressed these issues, but I certainly acknowledge the Minister in terms of heeding the service and the regard that we have for our service personnel. This bill is very much about those who will be giving service on those surveillance vessels within the navy. I also seized the opportunity because last night I briefly met with the Chief of Defence Force on his first official appointment and occasion last evening—Air Marshal Kevin Short. I make reference because, Aotearoa, we are a small nation, and these are the relationships that we have, and we are able to duly acknowledge each other for the contributions that we make.

In being a small nation, Aotearoa New Zealand has a vast, vulnerable, and exposed coastline. Our coastline is 15,000 kilometres; that is 9,300 miles. It’s the ninth-longest in the world—just a little bit of information there—following behind Canada, Norway, Indonesia, Greenland, Russia, the Philippines, Japan, Australia, and the USA. So because of the expanse and vastness of this coastline, we are terribly exposed and vulnerable. Drugs are a plague and a scourge in our society. This is an area that—having worked in the criminal law field, I know what a scourge it is, and it needs to be purged from our communities.

This Maritime Powers Extension Bill will enable—picking up on the word “enable”. A key focus is about preventing harm to those in our community. So this bill amends the Customs and Excise Act 2018, and also the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975. It has the following objectives: “to provide the New Zealand Customs Service … with an additional option to disrupt drugs smuggling.”; also, “to establish clear jurisdiction over offences under the Misuse of Drugs Act”.

So there was reference to the detail, which will be canvassed and scrutinised with keen eyes. Seated here in front of me is my colleague Chris Penk, who is a former naval officer of both the New Zealand and the Australian navies. My colleague Chris serves on the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee and will have a particular investment in terms of this and the service that he’s given there.

So a key focus is about preventing harm and making it harder for transnational criminal groups targeting New Zealand. Many of us will recall that on the news—I certainly do, very clearly—there was an incident back in 2016, I believe, where—Operation Frontier it was—there was some 449 kilograms of methamphetamine that had been located in the back of a campervan, with a further 52 kilograms that were buried at Ninety-Mile Beach. There was another incident in February 2017 where a New Zealand - flagged yacht was intercepted off the Australian coast, just east of Sydney, with 1.4 tonnes of cocaine. Now, the fiscal value of that was $320 million, but it’s about the value, and the scourge, and the imposition on the health and safety of our community.

So my call is short this evening. The detail will be scrutinised before our select committee before it comes back. I look forward to hearing speeches and addressing the House at the second reading. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.

Tēnā koe e Te Māngai o te Whare. Thank you for the opportunity to speak. Sorry, I’ve lost my voice after last night, I’m not sure why. Anyway, on this, the Maritime Extension Bill, on this, the first reading—and I do so as a member of the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee. Like my colleague Harete Hipango, I too want to talk about the context and the need for this piece of legislation. It really does stem from a 2015 Cabinet paper, and then a 2018 Cabinet paper that essentially has highlighted that it’s true—that 17,000 kilometres of New Zealand’s coastline is providing a bit of a highway for drugs to come into our country.

Just a bit of context out there: so, in 2015, we intercepted meth—258 kilograms. It had a street value of $219.8 million, and ephedrine at that time was the other big player—761 kilograms valued at $87.8 million. As Harete Hipango pointed out, in June 2016, 448 kilograms of meth valued at $438 million was found in a campervan in Northland. So this trade is growing and expanding, and it’s growing and expanding here because we have the highest prices for cocaine and ecstasy in the world, which I find fascinating. So a gram of cocaine in New Zealand, based on the Global Drug Survey in 2018—it’s outrageous—is $360. One pill of ecstasy costs $35. So, wow, what an amazingly lucrative business.

So where are these drugs coming from? Well, we know they’re coming from Hong Kong, from Zhangzhou. They’re also coming from Myanmar, Laos, and Cambodia. These are based on reports from the United Nations and other international monitoring agencies. So the other interesting part of all of this—and I didn’t realise this, and I do and I should reference that this bill also incorporates New Zealand’s rights and obligations under article 108 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, and article 17 of the United Nations Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances into our domestic legislation. In international shipping law, actually, vessels can seek shelter in New Zealand waters and bays and inlets without clearing customs. So that’s a really interesting situation, I guess, that we find ourselves in.

So the intention of this piece of legislation is to make sure that our agencies, and namely—as my colleague the Hon Ron Mark has highlighted—those agencies, our Defence Force and our Customs Service, who will provide the vehicles that will patrol our waters, are going to help detect these illicit drugs.

I also neglected to contribute the actual harm to New Zealand of these illicit drugs. We’re talking about a social cost that’s estimated at $1.8 billion in social harm annually. The Drug Foundation have said that that involves 45,000 New Zealanders who receive support for their drug and alcohol addiction. So that combined cost also looks at the investment by the police, by our courts, and by our prison beds. These illicit drugs actually are costing us a lot of money. So this legislation, I believe, and we obviously believe, is part of a solution to detecting these drugs while, hopefully, not just detecting but providing some sort of—you know, with increased patrols maybe not so many people will get into the trade. So who knows? It may prove to be a deterrent. Time will tell. The reality of us having the vehicles out there on our waters patrolling an extension of our borders to make sure that these drugs do not enter our territory is incredibly important.

I don’t really want to speak for much longer. I don’t think it’s going to be valuable for the House’s time for me to do that, but can I just say I look forward to hearing from the submitters and, actually, us quantifying a bit more the actual damage to our country through this trade, and us all working together to stop these drugs coming into New Zealand. I do have to read this because I did do a bit of research, but heroin apparently is coming mostly out of Afghanistan; cocaine from South America; and amphetamines from China, South-east Asia, West Africa, and the Americas. And the other context that we should all be really interested in is that drugs are also coming to New Zealand via the Pacific and from New Zealand to the Pacific and to Australia, but the countries where we we’ve detected these illicit drugs have been Fiji, Samoa, Tonga, Papua New Guinea, Vanuatu, and Timor-Leste. So, obviously, if we can stop the flow of those drugs we’re also going to stop the impact on our Pacific brothers and sisters.

We know that there is an increasing drug problem in the Pacific. So this legislation isn’t only relevant for us but it’s also relevant for our Pacific Islands Forum nation partners, I’ll call them, and I also want to highlight that. This also provides a really good opportunity for us to work with our Australian colleagues and other colleagues around our Asia-Pacific area so that we can work collectively to get this rubbish off our streets. Kia ora.

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, for the opportunity to rise and speak in this, the first reading of the Maritime Powers Extension Bill. I wish to make a relatively brief contribution focusing on the context of this proposed legislation, its purposes, and ways in which it can, hopefully, achieve the aims that it sets out to.

As for the legislative context, we’ve already heard on both sides of the House some good background regarding this, including that it will change our Customs and Excise Act and the Misuse of Drugs Act. I’ll note only in passing that various colleagues have spoken eloquently on the scourge of drugs and the desire that we must have as a Parliament, and, indeed, as a nation, to reduce—ideally eliminate, but, of course, at least reduce by every means possible—their flow on to our shores.

The context of this legislation also includes the fact that we are a maritime nation, of course. While it might truly have been said that no man is an island—or, perhaps, today we’d say no “person” is an island—New Zealand is, of course, a succession of islands and yet we’re not an island in the sense of being isolated. It is very much in an international context that we will be passing this legislation; if indeed it does proceed all the way through beyond the select committee to a second and third reading. It will be precisely for the reasons that the member Louisa Wall has outlined in relation to those international conventions that we will be making these changes.

I think it’s appropriate that the Minister of Defence has acknowledged the role that our Defence Force will be playing in implementing this legislation—effectively, doing things that they already do so well but with certain additional powers. It will be entirely appropriate for the select committee, which I’m very pleased and privileged to say I’m a member of, to examine exactly how it is that they will be able to carry these out in accordance with international law, again, as Minister Mark has said, and also in accordance with rules of engagement that do give them the tools that they require to do exactly that.

I acknowledge as well the other agencies involved—customs and police—and in doing so it is, of course, the customs Minister, Meka Whaitiri, who is bringing this bill to the House. I acknowledge her and her work and that of her department so far. No doubt we’ll work constructively with various advisers and, indeed, those who have drafted the bill at select committee along with those who will be making submissions in relation to seeing exactly what we can do by way of clarifying and strengthening the law so that it is fit for purpose.

Speaking then of the purposes, it’s been outlined already that the provision of the Customs Service with the opportunity to disrupt drug-smuggling will be important, as is the jurisdictional matter that has, again, already been touched upon in relation to clarifying the position of vessels that are not flagged, or maybe have different flagged or unflagged statuses, and are within and beyond our exclusive economic zone.

Briefly, on the subject of protecting our shores and, indeed, our people from the harm caused by illicit drugs, the bill is reasonably careful, it seems to me already—but, again, we can examine it to ensure that it remains as robust as it can and should be—to set out that there will be reasonable cause to suspect that a drug-smuggling offence has been committed or is likely to be committed, and it is that forward-looking opportunity, that ability, that rather hefty tool in the tool kit of our various agencies that will be very important. So, again, it’s exactly the parameters of that type of operation that will be significant to give to our respective services.

As well as the navy, I’ll also mention the air force, as has already previously been acknowledged. On a slightly parochial note, it’s no doubt various members of my electorate of Helensville, specifically the Whenuapai airbase and its residents, who will be conducting much of this good work. Also, on a parochial note, having had some background in the navy, I recall, perhaps on a light-hearted note, if I may, that we used to joke that the word “navy” was in fact an acronym for “never again volunteer yourself”, but I can assure you that the good men and women of the navy will be volunteering and happily carrying out their tasks to do such work as this because they know, as indeed we all know—I hope, indeed the whole country knows—how important this work is to support and to protect our people from the scourge of these drugs.

My final comment is just to note that setting out the purpose of the Act and referring specifically to those international conventions has a threefold purpose. One is that it makes the Act accessible in terms of showing exactly what it is that the Act is setting out to do. Second, in “related purposes”, that it will be an aid to interpretation so that we will see, hopefully, our lawmakers and those carrying out its provisions do so in accordance with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, for example. Finally, it will also signal to the rest of the world—again, going back to that point that New Zealand is not an island except in the geographical sense—that we are ratifying and taking seriously and implementing those international obligations.

So, with that, I join all members of the House, it seems so far, in commending the bill to the House and saying that I look forward to our work as a select committee in ensuring that it is fit for purpose.

This next call is a split call and you’ll get a bell at one minute. I call Jan Tinetti.

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Not being on the select committee where this bill is eventually heading to—and it sounds like it will eventually be heading there after tonight—I had to do a bit of research around this bill, more so than normal for me. So I thought what is this bill about? Is it just a little bill, the Maritime Powers Extension Bill? But then when I did my research I found that, actually, this is a really, really important bill that we’re putting through here tonight in its first reading, because, as we’ve heard here from every member that has spoken so far, we are a country that is in the midst of a drug epidemic.

Why I think it’s so important for me personally is that we’ve seen this—more so probably than in a lot of places—in the middle of Tauranga. Everywhere I go in Tauranga, one of the main issues that people talk to me about is the rise in the use of methamphetamine. People are really, really concerned about the access to the boats, the drugs coming in from the boats, and the spreading of that use of those particular drugs throughout the community. This was really brought home to us last year, in November, when there was a $20 million cocaine seizure. That was horrific for our community, to actually hear that that was so close to being distributed throughout our community, and had that happened it would’ve caused significant destruction within our community.

We need to see, and we are seeing, a commitment from all sides of the House here to attack this issue from multiple angles, and that’s what’s so exciting: to see that people are on board with actually attacking this. The powers contained in this bill will make it harder to get illicit drugs into New Zealand. We need to do whatever we can to protect vulnerable people who use the drug. So it’s about not just stopping the illicit drugs getting in but also protecting those vulnerable people, and on that I will commend this bill to the House.

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. All right, now—I’m looking forward to this call, of course—we’ve seen that a number of the aspects that are relevant to this bill have already been traversed tonight, some in shorter calls than others, but tonight I just wanted to touch on a few of those aspects. Really, what we’re looking at here is trying to provide greater flexibility to our fantastic men and women in customs to carry out the duties required of them in their roles—in particular, protecting our borders from the transition of a broad array of illicit drugs coming in or going out of New Zealand. This is a scourge on our society, and we’ve heard about that already somewhat this evening, but I just wanted to expand a little on that.

We’ve already got a vast array of laws under the Acts we’ve heard about tonight, covering those obligations or options that customs can deploy, at their disposal, as necessary, within our territorial waters or in the contiguous zone further out—again, another 12 nautical miles past those territorial waters. This bill is about expanding that and providing that flexibility to go beyond that, as necessary, to ensure that we can carry out those functions for any situation that is impacting on us in New Zealand, or has the ability to take these drugs offshore and provide further detrimental impacts in other nations. So I think it’s really important that we do extend this to give that flexibility, because otherwise what we can see—and at the moment we’ve seen—is a vast array of diverse manners in which drug traffickers are able to bring their products into New Zealand, or, indeed, look to take them out. So this provides that capacity to reach a little bit further, to capture them, perhaps, in staging areas outside zones that we’re not currently able to reach into.

I’d just like to take a moment to acknowledge the great work of the New Zealand Defence Force—primarily the navy and, indeed, also the air force—in supporting customs through this role. They do some fantastic work, and work that’s nearly as good as the army! I have to put that plug in, of course, with some background in the army myself.

So, look, the drugs are the issue here. It’s about getting tough on crime, and that’s a stance that, in the National Party, we have long supported. We’ve seen, over a number of years now, and not just in New Zealand but internationally, an increase in the volume of drugs coming into different jurisdictions, and an increase in the ingenuity, perhaps, of members of the illegal drug trade looking to bring their product in with different innovative approaches—and we’ve already heard some of those tonight, during the debate, with the hauls that have been intercepted. So this is about trying to adapt, to evolve, and to ensure that we remain able to best respond to this ongoing threat to our society—and, indeed, it is a significant impact on our society. You can look all around the country and, unfortunately, see the negative impact of drugs in our communities. I think every member here who represents an electorate would be able to agree with that and point to instances in their areas. Certainly in the Waikato we are not exempt, either, despite some of our areas being some of the most inland in New Zealand.

That aside, what we’re looking at, just to recap here, is providing the additional discretion to operate outside current jurisdictional boundaries and to respond in an appropriate manner. Now, this is quite succinct, around seizure options, boarding vessels, to ensure that, actually, there is some restriction to what we’re proposing when we’re operating outside our boundaries, because that is important to give context and confidence internationally that we’re operating in accordance with international law in this regard.

I think that’s probably about enough on those aspects, but I just want to recap that we are here, really, trying to evolve and to adapt, to ensure that we can continue to provide the best options to our team and to customs to carry out their great work. And I’d just like to finish on a wee trivia point if I may: customs was actually the first Government department in New Zealand, set up in 1840, actually—around the time of the Treaty signing, I believe. So it was really interesting to see that as the first department. Here we are now, continuing to evolve, continuing to ensure their relevance and their ability to conduct their duties in a professional and succinct manner. So I commend this bill.

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. It’s a pleasure to get bills come through the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee and connect this Parliament to international law in that way, so I do look forward to hearing submissions on this bill. As others have said, this is a law that proposes to bring our domestic law and the powers that we have for monitoring this area in line with two UN conventions: article 108 of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, and article 17 of the UN Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances.

It is a technical bill, and it will amend the Customs and Excise Act and the Misuse of Drugs Act in a way that just extends the jurisdictional area of those two Acts. One of the things that was important for me to look into was that we weren’t, in fact, substantively extending the powers to search. So I was pleased to see that the bill only proposes to extend the powers in terms of the geographic area and customs are still required to show a reasonable belief that one of the offences under their ordinary powers has been committed.

So in terms of search and seizure law, when that reasonableness standard is applied it means that there is an objective standard, where customs, just like New Zealand Police, would have to meet an objective evidential standard if they were tested, and the “belief” rather than “suspect”—all these words, very technical, but they do mean a lot in terms of the power to search. So I was concerned that we weren’t allowing a broad power to just board vessels and search them based on, sort of, a hunch. But we are still upholding the rule of law in terms of search and seizure law at sea; we’re just extending the geographic area, which is something that we have agreed to do in terms of doing our fair share to monitor an area of the sea in our neighbourhood—essentially, in our Pacific neighbourhood—based on our agreement in assenting to those UN conventions.

As others have said, this is something that will protect our Pacific neighbours who are being used, at the moment, as sort of transiting points for the dealing of drugs at sea and importation of some seriously expensive narcotic drugs, as we’ve heard over and over again. So this is something that we know: if drug trafficking is happening in a country, it will give rise to other types of criminal activity as well, and our Pacific neighbours are vulnerable to that.

Working on the defence portfolio, I learn every day that a lot of the work of the New Zealand Defence Force is done in monitoring in the Pacific for things like fishing and environmental offences. So that’s something that New Zealand is really active in, and this is extending that role for customs, which is important because we have those resources here, and we’re going to be cooperating more with our Pacific neighbours and also with our Australian counterparts to keep the area safe.

So we have heard over and over again that drugs cost New Zealand an estimated $1.8 billion in social harm annually. So it is important that we make sure that drugs aren’t imported regularly into New Zealand and into the Pacific. It is something that we do need to invest in, but it is only part of a more nuanced approach, as we know this Government has to all criminal offending but especially to drug offending.

We know from recent reports that came out in the annual reviews that the class A controlled drug methamphetamine is about to, this year, overtake its prevalence in our criminal justice system—it’s about to overtake cannabis. We’re not just talking about possession of small amounts; the kind of methamphetamine offending that’s coming up as being so prevalent as to take over cannabis is the supply, manufacture, and importation offending. This is a type of offending that has life imprisonment as its maximum penalty, and, regularly, we are sentencing people to imprisonment of up to 20 years, 18 years—and that is enormously costly. Drugs, once they’re imported into New Zealand, of course, then draw in all sorts of other counterparts to the offending that kind of disseminates drugs throughout the community, and our criminal justice system bears the brunt of that.

It’s costly in terms of policing. It’s costly in terms of the court system, which affects access to justice for victims of other types of offending. It is, in fact, one of the only criminal offences outside of homicide that our High Court hears any more. Everything else has been relegated down to the very busy District Courts because class A drug offending is now so prevalent. And it is costly in human terms. It’s costly to our communities. It’s costly to victims of addiction. It’s one of those types of offences that have as their victims the actual user as well. So we know that this is happening, and this monitoring of our seas is part of the way that we’re going to keep our communities safe but also our Pacific neighbourhood.

But beyond that, I do want to highlight that this isn’t the only kind of remedy that this Government will be looking to. We’re not only going to be policing the seas, and we’re not only going to be policing even within New Zealand. What we are going to focus on is addressing the causes of drug offending, which, actually, is the demand point. So we are going to invest in drug and alcohol addiction services and mental health services. We know drug addiction is often caused by more serious mental health concerns—anywhere from anxiety to behavioural disorders to mental illness to brain injury, that cause people to become addicted—and we’re going to invest in addressing those causes of this type of offending as well as creating jobs and housing and all of those things that keep our communities connected enough that they don’t fall prey to drug offending.

As we do all of that, we are also committing to passing this rather technical bill that does that little bit which is actually incredibly important in terms of monitoring and controlling the transport and the dealing of drugs internationally. It is part of what we’ve signed up to do. It is doing our fair share, so I am very pleased to commend this bill to the House.

I rise to speak on the Maritime Powers Extension Bill at this, its first reading, with National in support. Before I speak on this bill, I do want to acknowledge our new colleague Dan Bidois, who gave a wonderful maiden statement this afternoon, and it has been a pleasure to be able to celebrate his entry into the House—and, in fact, to have Minister Ron Mark, as well, comment on the contribution he will make.

I, in speaking about this bill, also want to acknowledge former National Party Ministers—in particular, Tim Macindoe and Nicky Wagner—who had a hand in bringing this legislation to life. It is a sign of the goodwill of this House that we do have a tradition of this sort of legislation shifting from one Government to the other where it is to the benefit of New Zealand. If only Labour could see fit to do that with a few more bills which New Zealand could benefit from.

Now, what this bill does, of course, is empower the good people of the New Zealand Customs Service. It is very important that, where we have people who we are putting into enforcement roles on behalf of New Zealand, we ensure they have clarity over the powers they have, the jurisdiction in which they can use them, and the circumstances under which those powers are lawful. There is nothing worse than being someone in possession of powers that are vague or ambiguous, because this means that expectations are unclear and people aren’t sure about what actions they can take. In this instance, the bill makes powers explicit, giving additional options to disrupt drug-smuggling, and establishing clear jurisdiction over offences under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975.

It goes without saying, and has been acknowledged by previous speakers, that drugs are a global issue. They’re not an issue that New Zealand can overcome by acting alone; we have to act in cooperation with other nations. It’s here that we see, in this bill, a very good working example of New Zealand being a member of a rules-based international order in which we seek to cooperate with other countries, through international conventions, to ensure that rules that are to the benefit of people across the world can be enforced.

In reflecting on that, it’s appropriate that we have come from a GLOBE-NZ conversation this afternoon, where we have had members of the House, across the Parliament, talking about how the international rules-based order applies when it comes to climate change legislation. Here we can see that, in New Zealand, we are giving effect to our rights and obligations under article 108 of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. Of course, that these conventions are in place and that we, as a good State actor, adopt them shows, I think, the relevance of the UN continuing throughout the world. Similarly, it allows for the adoption of article 17 of the UN Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances—the drug-trafficking Act.

Now, of course, the reason this is necessary is that we have a difficult context, and it is good to hear the acknowledgment by the Greens speaking just now that drugs, illicit drugs, do considerable harm in our community. It is therefore to the dismay of us all, I am sure, that the number of attempts to smuggle drugs into New Zealand and past our maritime border have increased significantly in recent times. We know that behind these efforts are transnational criminal groups, and, of course, they are becoming increasingly sophisticated in their efforts to bring illicit substances into New Zealand. It’s therefore appropriate that we update our law to ensure that, just as those criminal groups become more sophisticated, our enforcement agencies have clear and unambiguous jurisdiction with which to go against them.

So, with this bill, the customs agency has an enhanced tool kit that will allow them to fight against those international drug traders. The clear framework is really explicit about how customs can stop and in what circumstances, how they can board vessels and under what circumstances, and how they can search those vessels and then what enforcement actions they can take. And, of course, it’s very important that those are set out in law so that there aren’t questions after the fact about whether or not actions have been appropriate or not. The rules apply in both New Zealand’s territorial waters and in our contiguous zone. Of course, they allow for reasonable cause to be established, and flag States have to have authorised the implementation of these laws.

In a sense, we could say that this piece of legislation allows for more preventative action by the New Zealand customs agency, and that is because it allows our customs agents to respond before a ship has entered New Zealand’s territorial waters. That’s significant because having that made explicit means that customs can make better operational decisions about when enforcement action would best occur and most efficiently occur. Of course, the bill also allows for enforcement action to be taken after a vessel leaves New Zealand’s waters, and, again, this is significant because, in some instances, evidence may only come to bear or become clear after a ship has left New Zealand’s waters and after smuggling activity has occurred.

So, ladies and gentlemen, we are in agreement across the House today, I think, that illicit drugs do considerable harm in our community. We want to reduce the amount of illicit drugs coming on to our shores. This bill empowers the good men and women of the Customs Service to take better enforcement action and makes New Zealand, once again, a good actor within the international rules-based order, and we commend this bill to the House.

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. It gives me great pleasure to be the last speaker in this first reading. I don’t want to go too much into the detail of the bill, but I do want to touch on the matter of—

💬 Hon Members: Oh, do it. Come on!

—I expected that kind of response. I want to talk about the principle underlying this bill, because it’s a very important one. It’s really a principle about freedom of navigation on the high seas. What this bill does is it, essentially, curtails freedom of navigation. It says, “Yes, everyone has freedom of navigation on the high seas, except in certain instances.” I want to sound a word of caution, because freedom of navigation has been a pretty fundamental element of international law since it was first propounded by Hugo Grotius in 1609. The idea that trading nations can freely ply the seas is absolutely pivotal. What we have here is a recognition that trafficking in drugs, along with some other serious maritime offences, is an incursion into that.

The bill, as we’ve heard Minister Mark explain, has some constraints—the fact that a flag State must give consent for a vessel to be boarded—but, nevertheless, what we have is an extension of sovereignty of one State on to the high seas. I’m sure that, when this matter comes before the courts, as it inevitably will, that will be viewed with caution, that any extension of a power to encroach on this freedom of the high seas will be restrictively interpreted.

This is the interface between both the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and the United Nations Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances. It’s recognised in the UN convention that, firstly, there is freedom on the high seas, but that that is for peaceful purposes—it is for navigation, for trade—and that no State can exercise sovereignty on the high seas. However, that convention itself recognises that there are limits on that, in terms of piracy and also in terms of narcotics.

So, really, all I want to do in this final contribution on this bill is to say that this is an important piece of legislation. We do absolutely want to confer these powers on our customs officers, in cooperation with other States, but let us also recognise the very high value of these ancient principles of navigation. On that basis, I commend this bill to the House.

Bill read a first time.

Bill referred to the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee.