Crimes (Increased Penalties for Slavery Offences) Amendment Bill

Members, the House is resumed. We are on the first reading of the Crimes (Increased Penalties for Slavery Offences) Amendment Bill. We are up to call No. 2, the Hon Dr Duncan Webb.

Mōrena, Madam Speaker. Thank you for that. We support this bill; I think that comes as no surprise. We don’t like slavery and it’s a pity in some ways that this bill only goes as far as it does, because what it really does is it looks at the slavery offences, and there’s some that have been around for a while, some a little bit more recent, and it aligns their penalties—all well and good. That’s fine. It’s just a bit of a pity that the Government hasn’t taken on some of this work and looked at the problem of modern slavery, which we—

James Meager: Oh, come on!

Hon Dr DUNCAN WEBB: Oh, well—you know, we’ve got a Minister for workplace relations who says she has other priorities, whilst in Gloriavale we’ve got people who are, basically, in bonded servitude. That’s the attitude of this Government.

Good on the member. I understand members’ bills in Government are a bit tricky because senior members don’t like you to step on their turf. I have no doubt that Brooke van Velden wouldn’t want the backbench members to be showing up her lack of attention to modern slavery, because she’s got more important things to do, like giving workers a pay cut with a 1.5 percent minimum wage increase.

Look, I’ll stop there, because it’s a perfectly reasonable bill. It does something which is a good little tidy-up. It’s a common-sense change. Of course, we do want to set slavery apart as a really egregious crime, not one that you’re three strikable for—the ACT Party’s three-strikes bill—but nevertheless one of the most serious crimes that really you can imagine. Good on the member. I suspect it will get support around the House, and I see no reason to delay it on that process. Kia ora.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Dr Duncan Webb’s suspicions are correct: there is support for this bill from the Green Party. Just to acknowledge, as a country we should always be opposing slavery. I mean, it seems like a fairly obvious thing that we should be doing: upholding human rights and fairness is something we should always encourage. I also do take the point that this bill doesn’t go far enough, and I think the member acknowledged that in his first reading speech as well.

The bill itself amends sections 98 and 98AA of the Crimes Act. In that Act, there is some pretty heinous stuff in there. It deals with people under 18 in terms of sexual exploitation, removal of body parts, and engagement in forced labour—it’s terrible and heinous stuff. What this bill does is make sure that there is alignment for those penalties—so, consistency. When we were thinking about this bill and looking through it, we couldn’t see any reason why there was that inconsistency, so making sure we are consistent with our approach is incredibly, incredibly important.

I do note that there were mentions in the member’s first reading speech around there being companion legislation around modern slavery, which is incredibly important, because this is something that Parliament should actually have consensus on. I do take the point that the Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety didn’t consider this a priority, even though, in 2022, the now Prime Minister and then Leader of the Opposition said he would march in the streets for modern-slavery legislation. There’s been a lot of marching in the streets. I’ve yet to see the Prime Minister out there joining us.

I think it’s important to note that there was actually work that was already being done by the previous Government. There was a working group that was looking at bringing modern-slavery legislation to the House, and all of a sudden it’s not a priority—it’s not a priority for this Government. I do want to acknowledge the member Greg Fleming, who does see this as a priority, and I would continue to encourage him to work right across the House to bring in those more substantive pieces of legislation.

I do want to acknowledge the work that has been happening in terms of getting that companion legislation together, and I was actually reading the report. Part of that companion legislation will bring in a number of different positions. One of them is around having an independent commissioner and getting a definition of actually what “modern slavery” is, because it’s a bit bitsy—here, there, and everywhere—and so I think this is a good move forward.

There are some things I think we can do in the mid-term and short term about things that we can do to curtail exploitation, because this is what is at the heart of this type of legislation, or should be at the heart of this type of legislation. I think of, for example, migrant exploitation, de-coupling work visas, and offering amnesty for overstayers, because there is always the power imbalance, and the member previously mentioned workers at Gloriavale. It is all about making sure that you can balance that out so that people have those protections, so that when they find themselves in particular positions where they are vulnerable, there is legislation to protect them, which we do not have at this particular point in time.

The Greens will be supporting this bill. I’m looking forward to that more substantive work in terms of the companion legislation. Good luck to the member in convincing the rest of the Government parties, given that this, actually, in my mind, should have been a Government bill—we should have had modern-slavery legislation that the whole House can support—but acknowledging the initiative here to try to get something done through the backbenchers as a member’s bill. On that note, I commend this bill to the House.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise on behalf of ACT to support—we will be supporting it—and also to talk to the Crimes (Increased Penalties for Slavery Offences) Amendment Bill.

I want to acknowledge Mr Fleming for getting this bill drawn and getting it to the House and for having this first reading, at which it looks likely to pass, given the indications from the other members this morning. It’s quite exciting to have your member’s bill drawn. I’ve had that myself, and I can assure Mr Fleming that his bill will be in good hands, as it is being referred to the Justice Committee—that very hard-working committee that looks at issues like this. We will be very careful in our consideration of this and look forward to adding it to our very busy work agenda.

This is a simple but important bill, and I don’t want to get mixed up with discussions on modern slavery, which are an entirely different topic from what this bill actually tries to address. In ACT, as I said, we’re very happy to support this, because it is a simple but very effective and required bill. It is bringing New Zealand into line with other jurisdictions around its penalties for slavery offences, and I think it is good that this has been brought forward and that we are going to have support across the House to deal with this.

It is concerning when you actually have the US calling you out for your slavery offences not being top-notch and not where they need to be, and that was, obviously, done in 2001, when the Trafficking in Persons Report by the US State Department said we had dropped down to a tier 2 standard, and so we needed to do this to get our standards back up and aligned with our very important partners.

Actually, human trafficking and slavery isn’t something that just happens in other places; actually, since 2015, there have been four human trafficking prosecutions in New Zealand, and a number of victims identified. It is important that our local laws do keep up with what is happening out there and making sure that we are aligned. The New Zealand Government actually does have some plans in this area to make sure that we are trying to stop slavery and people trafficking and things in this area, and so, obviously, we’ve got a plan of action against forced labour, people trafficking, and slavery. That, obviously, has some key pillars, which Government agencies are working on.

We’re also very active in the international community, cooperating with like-minded countries, including in the Indo-Pacific. We are in international forums, like the Bali Process on People Smuggling, Trafficking in Persons and Related Transnational Crimes, the Pacific Immigration Directors Conference, and the Migration 5 meetings. We are an active partner and participant in this area, and Mr Fleming’s bill is actually good, to ensure that we are doing our part with our local Crimes Act, actually reflecting what it should and what other countries are doing.

The last point I would make is that ACT—and, in fact, the Government—has a law and order agenda, and I think it’s good that this fits nicely into what we are doing in our broader law and order agenda. Other members across the House have already mentioned some of those things, like three strikes. Later this morning, we’ll actually be talking about another bill around victims’ rights. We are a victims’ rights, principled Government, ensuring that victims’ rights are placed at the forefront and actually ensuring that people are punished appropriately for the crimes they do against others. Again, I think Mr Fleming’s bill very nicely fits into the Government’s broader law and order agenda. We are very happy to support it, and I commend this bill to the House. Thank you.

I rise on behalf of New Zealand First to speak in support of the Crimes (Increased Penalties for Slavery Offences) Amendment Bill. This is a necessary step to ensure that there is some consistency and clarity around our penalty requirements around this area of how we treat workers and those that are exploited.

New Zealand has had only a recent involvement with a conviction of slavery, and my knowledge of that case was quite intimate. I appreciate the challenges and difficulty we had bringing those charges of slavery. The reality is that slavery has been in existence as long as people have been living in societies, and it is a scourge on those societies, but we have to be realistic and practical in our approaches to deal with this issue. Fundamentally, we have to ensure we drive a level of consistency and priority in this area.

I have been very pleased to announce the establishment of a ministerial advisory group looking at organised crime, because organised crime is a massive driver of slavery and exploitation across the world and in New Zealand. I have intimate experience of managing those investigations and dealing with the reality of what that looks like for workers in New Zealand.

There is good legislation, there is good existing frameworks to work under, but what we have to do is deal with the practical priorities of how we investigate these offences. What is important is that we provide consistency of the penalties to ensure that we establish that one is not greater than the other, that slavery is considered an abhorrent offence, and this is one step to deal with that positioning of our legislation. Yes, as stated, there is lots of work to be done in this space; it’s how we prioritise that workload. There are significant steps that are already under way in this space, and I commend this bill to the House.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Look, it is a real honour to get up today and speak in support of Greg Fleming’s bill—my colleague Greg Fleming. It’s quite disappointing that it took about 30 seconds this morning from the Opposition before they had a crack at Mr Fleming and at the current Government. I’m not sure how short Dr Webb’s memory is, but he was part of a Government that for three very, very, very long years had an absolute majority in this House and did absolutely zip about this issue. If we’re going to get a lecture about why it took so long for certain Governments to prioritise certain bits of legislation and for the Leader of the Opposition to say he’d march in the streets for this and then spend six years doing nothing about it, I’m not going to take lessons from Dr Webb, 30 seconds into the morning, about what did or didn’t happen last term of Government and what is or is not a priority this term of Government.

Of course, other members have mentioned about members’ bills and said that this member’s bill doesn’t go far enough. Well, of course, those members have been around long enough to know how members’ bills work, in particular how members’ bills work when you’re in Government. The goal of members’ bills in Government is for backbenchers and for people who don’t have the ability to put bills through Cabinet, like some of the members opposite who were in Cabinet—or, actually, some of them didn’t quite make it to Cabinet—and who were Ministers in the previous Government and who had the chance to get bills like this on the legislative agenda but did not do it.

All the lessons in the world from the members opposite about whether or not they prioritise this bill—they should look at themselves first before they sling arrows at Mr Fleming. Mr Fleming has done a brilliant job bringing this bill forward and is actually, I understand, working very constructively with members of the Opposition on this bill and on other pieces of legislation to go further on this bill and to try and get cross-party consensus on it. It was incredibly disappointing that, 30 seconds into the morning, that consensus seems to be undermined by members who want to, at 9 o’clock in the morning, have a crack at the Government. There you go; that’s the standard that we’re setting today ahead of a very, very long morning and long afternoon.

I am standing in support of the bill. The bill does one very simple thing: it increases and improves the penalty regime for what we call modern slavery offences. It’s important because, as members have noted, there was a report in 2021—not sure who was in Government at that point, but, in 2021, a report noticed that New Zealand dropped from being a tier 1 nation in this area to a tier 2 nation. At that point there should have been a wake-up call for the New Zealand Government about doing something in this area, but yet nothing was done. We do have to take some steps, and if we have to do it in Government or we have to do it as backbenchers, we will do so.

This particular bill takes that first step, and it is about increasing the penalties in sections 98 and 98AA about trafficking people—about trafficking humans. Of course, human trafficking is one of the world’s most insidious crimes, but it’s also one of the fastest-growing crimes that is happening globally. Of course, these actors are becoming increasingly sophisticated as countries around the world get to grips with increasing global conflict and some of the issues around the increasing numbers of refugees coming in and out of different nations There are insidious actors and there are insidious operatives around the world who will take advantage of global instability and who will take advantage of incredibly vulnerable people and try and put out an offer of hope or an offer of a better life when, actually, what they’re doing is they’re trafficking these vulnerable people. We need to step up as a country, and Mr Fleming is taking the lead on this particular issue. He’s also, I understand, working with members opposite about trying to improve the regime overall, so I do congratulate those of us who are willing to work together on this.

I wanted to also touch on the fact that one of the members did mention that the Leader of the Opposition said he’d march in the streets for these kinds of issues. Well, that’s all well and good, but we have a very special privilege in this House; we do have the ability to actually change the law. It’s all well and good to stand there and march in the streets for a cause that you do or do not support, but, actually, we have a very unique ability to actually change the law. I think we should do the talking in this House and do the convincing in this House about what laws should or shouldn’t change, rather than spend all our time outside marching for causes that we may well feel very strongly about. Then we get in the House, and we actually need to make those decisions about laws that we change.

We have the ability to change the laws, so why spend all our time walking around outside, marching in the streets when we can actually sit in the House, put members’ bills forward, work constructively across the backbench to try and get consensus around these issues, and actually change the law for the good, rather than have cheap little snipes at the Government backbench at 9 o’clock in the morning just so that the members can pad these speeches out because they haven’t done their reading from the notes overnight?

This is a great bill. It’s a good bill. It’s going to be supported across the House. I will certainly be supporting it. Our side of the House will be supporting it. I hope that all members in the House will be supporting it throughout the morning.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. It is a pleasure to be able to take a call on the Crimes (Increased Penalties for Slavery Offences) Amendment Bill. I wonder if I could just take the debate up a notch a wee bit. It is close to Christmas, we are debating a bill that most people in this House agree with, and it is on a serious matter. It’s with that in mind that I will make my comments today.

This bill is a good start into addressing some of the shortfalls that, I think, around the House, we can recognise and have not just in our law but also in our country in relation to our practices in relation to servitude and slavery. I want to start by acknowledging the people who first brought this idea to the House, and that was acknowledged by the member Greg Fleming, in whose name this bill is. Kaylee Hill and Alex Prendergast first went, I understand, to Nicola Grigg and brought this to her attention. It’s always commendable when members of the public see an issue with the law, bring that to the attention of representatives, and then see action as a result, and it’s one of the reasons that I’m in politics—that type of way of changing problems and issues within society. I want to acknowledge them, and also Nicola Grigg and Greg Fleming, for bringing this particular bill.

I think there was an acknowledgment from the member in his first reading speech that this bill didn’t go far enough in two ways. The first way is foreshadowing some amendments that I understand he wishes to make, to make this more substantive. Obviously, we’re not privy to exactly what they may be, and I understand that they will need Government support, like so many things that require change in this House. I wish the member the best of luck with that, and we’d like to work constructively to ensure that practical, meaningful changes can be made to this bill, as well.

Also, it would be remiss of me not to mention the added need for increased measures in relation to modern slavery. There are a few tos and fros around the House on this, but the clear issue is that New Zealand is well behind in where it should be regarding modern-slavery reporting. We know this. That’s why the Labour Government set up an excellent group to build consensus around this issue, and why we proposed legislation to bring this into the House and make this law, to make sure that our supply chains were free of the insidious crime that is slavery, no matter where it happens in the world.

Hon Dr Duncan Webb: What happened to that group?

CAMILLA BELICH: Unfortunately, that group was disbanded, but we have tried to make sure that this issue is not lost from the agenda of this House or from the leaders of this House, and I think it is good to be reminded that the Prime Minister did state that he would march in the streets for modern slavery. I agree with the member James Meager when he said that we have a special role in this House in terms of debating and making laws, and my request to the Prime Minister would be to make good on that promise with his special role that he has in this House to work with parties across the House, the majority of whom, I think, want to see this legislation come forward. That would be my plea. This bill is a good start.

Before I conclude, I just wanted to mention something that many of us in this House—myself, Duncan Webb, and James Meager—have been looking at, which is Gloriavale, which is of concern to many of us in the House. It is concerning when we read of situations that may be very similar to what we are trying to prohibit here, happening in our own country. I think that more needs to be done in that area. That is another area where I do believe there needs to be cross-party support for an ongoing solution for those people in that community, working with people like the Gloriavale Leavers’ Support Trust. It was great to be able, along with James Meager, to host them in the House recently and to hear of their concerns and to hear about what’s happening currently.

For me, the key thing that I saw from that, in my workplace relations role—and there are many other concerns in that community that leavers will articulate—was hearing that six-year-olds are employees there. For me, that is not right, and it does mean we need to look at the work and the type of work and the nature of the work that happens in that community. I would implore the House, with my final comments, to see if we can find a way forward that works for the people who are there, the people who have left their families, and, indeed, all of New Zealand so that we can be sure that no corner of this country is left without the human rights that they deserve.

It’s great to hear the more conciliatory comments by the previous speaker, Camilla Belich, towards this bill, calling it a good start. I know the work she’s done with the sponsor of the bill, Greg Fleming, even co-hosting, on the morning of his first reading on 20 November, a gathering of UNICEF young adults. I know that if there’s anyone that’s going to be able to get across the political aisle, it’ll be Greg Fleming, the sponsor of this member’s bill.

Greg comes to the House with a background steeped around working with young people, around working with Māori, around working with humanitarian causes and charitable organisations, so he is perfectly placed to strengthen up this bill, as has been indicated, through the select committee process, the Justice Committee process, in the coming months. I also note that this will be—it might be the 28th or 29th Justice Committee—

James Meager: 29th.

CAMERON BREWER: 29th Justice Committee bill, and we look forward to processing the submissions.

I also note from earlier comments, particularly from the Green Party member, that this should have been a Government bill and that the Government’s not taking it seriously and that a member’s bill was not the right forum or right format. Well, as the chair of the Justice Committee, James Meager, just reminded us—and there’s been threats of marching in the street and everything else by the Opposition—that they had six years and an absolute majority of 65 MPs. Now they wake up, one year into Opposition, and they’re full of despair that our good member Greg Fleming is advancing this Crimes (Increased Penalties for Slavery Offences) Amendment Bill. They didn’t manage it themselves when they had 65 MPs.

They could have sorted it out in the caucus party; they didn’t even need to pick up the phone to anyone in the House. They had absolutely every opportunity, and they let that one go, so thank you to Mr Greg Fleming. He hasn’t managed, just yet, to convince Auckland Council to dredge the Onehunga lagoon—I thought I’d give that a plug in case Mayor Brown’s watching—but he has managed—

Hon Member: Highly unlikely.

CAMERON BREWER: He’s going to do that—he’s going to do that. Mr Brown’s going to do that. Mr Fleming has managed to get this member’s bill into the biscuit tin and, even more importantly, drawn.

That comes before the Justice Committee for interrogation and for submissions, and I invite anyone who takes an interest in the international context and legislative framework around modern-day slavery and human trafficking to have a look at this bill and front up to the Justice Committee and have their say, because we across the Justice Committee will be all ears. The member in charge of the bill, Greg Fleming, has indicated that he wants to strengthen up provisions around the prosecution and against previously used defences.

We are thrilled that this has come, that this has been drawn, that the member who is responsible for it comes with the context that he is the right person to work across the aisle. He is the right person that comes with the lens into this Parliament, steeped in humanitarian causes and charitable organisations. He brings compassion to this Parliament and he will be the right person to shepherd this through the Justice Committee.

The overall aim of the bill, for those who might have just tuned in to Parliament TV or Truth Radio—this bill aims to achieve a cohesive penalty regime that is a step forward to achieving New Zealand’s hard stance against human trafficking. This is all about toughening up, and as previous speakers have said, some might be surprised in the public that we’re not as tough as we should be and we’ve been sliding down the international scales. We can do a lot better, and this bill will get us there. I commend the bill.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. We’re happy to support this member’s bill brought to the House by the liberal conscience of the National backbench. He’s a kind of lonely ambassador, is Greg Fleming, sent out from the National caucus to try to make contact with the civilised world on behalf of his lost tribe, who are unkindly referred to as “the Taliban” and other uncharitable expressions. He is welcome to come and talk to the civilised world any time he likes, and we’ll see what we can do to build consensus.

This bill, as colleagues have already said, increases and aligns the penalties for slavery offences, and it’s a modest but worthwhile technical bill and we’re glad to support it. But, having said that, it’s inevitable when a member brings a bill like this to the House—

Andy Foster: But.

Hon PHIL TWYFORD: —yes, there is a “but”—a modest technical bill, that it inevitably shines a torch light on the yawning absence of action by the Government on related matters. My colleagues have already talked about the Gloriavale issue, which desperately needs intervention by this Parliament and by the Government on the related issue of forced labour at Gloriavale. The celebrated quote from the Prime Minister that he would march in the streets for modern slavery—not a threat from this side of the House to march in the streets; he said it. He wanted to march in the streets. What have we heard on modern slavery since then? Crickets—crickets.

There’s a lot of appetite elsewhere in the House across a number of parties to see action on the global supply chains that sustain modern slavery at scale in the world today, and New Zealand needs to do its bit. I know that the liberal conscience of the national backbench would like to see action on this, and I just wish he could get enough of his colleagues in the caucus to take the issue seriously so that we could see some action.

There’s a third issue that this debate puts the spotlight on, and that is human trafficking. Now, we have a serious problem in this country with the exploitation of migrant labour. There are a number of cases recently that have come very close to human trafficking and quite possibly do meet the definition of “human trafficking”, which is the transport, the transit, the receiving of workers, often for forced labour or sexual exploitation, by fraud or coercion.

If you accept that people are being fraudulently moved across State borders for the purpose of working here and then find themselves smack bang in the middle of extremely exploitative circumstances, we arguably have cases right now of human trafficking in New Zealand and we need action on that. Unfortunately, what have we seen from the Minister who was very vocal on these questions when in the Opposition? We’ve seen the cutting in half of the ability of exploited migrant workers to get an open work visa to try to regularise the situation or at least find another job. That’s the single most significant thing that’s been done—a halving of their ability to get an open work visa for the time period.

Yesterday, we saw the removal of the median wage requirement for migrant workers which, in one fell swoop, shifts vast amounts of money out of the pockets of migrant workers who come to New Zealand, in order to reduce the bottom line for employers. It will inevitably undermine the incentive for employers to hire local workers. It takes money out of the pockets of migrant workers and reduces their bargaining power.

We do support this bill, but the other side shouldn’t be defensive about these things. Just take it on the chin and get on with the job.

Madam Speaker, thank you very much for this opportunity to close out this debate, my first member’s bill. I do just want to acknowledge once again the original sponsor of this bill, the Hon Nicola Grigg, and as has been mentioned today by Todd Stephenson, it was a real honour to have this bill pulled out and then be able to guide it through.

On that one, I do just want to acknowledge the importance of members’ bills as part of our legislative process. I understand why there has been a lot of mention about my own leader’s comments before we became Government about this, and I can assure you that he remains a strong advocate for this kind of legislation. The reality of it is that this bill is in play, and this is a legitimate way of attending to some of the deficiencies in our law. I’m keen for us, as a Parliament, to run this process through, get as many changes as we possibly can through the select committee process, which is going to be chaired by my good friend and colleague James Meager. Thank you for your encouraging comments, and also to Cameron Brewer as well.

I’m confident that, by the time we get to that end of the process, we will actually have a far more robust framework within section 98 of the Crimes Act, which is that area of our law that provides us with the ability to be able to seek out cases of domestic human trafficking and prosecute effectively. I would just encourage us, as a House, to not diminish the place of members’ bills. There have also been some helpful comments and actually a great invitation there from Phil Twyford for me to strike out to new and undiscovered lands. I certainly intend to do that. In fact, I’m pleased to say that I’ve already been doing that.

Hon Member: Tell us when you find “Planet Labour”.

GREG FLEMING: Ha, ha! And to that one, I do want to acknowledge my colleague and friend Camilla Belich for her thoughtful work in this area. She’s laboured away in this area for a long time. I’ve really enjoyed working with Camilla in these recent months as we’ve continued to look at what might be possible in terms of companion legislation—that’s in the area of modern slavery and reporting, which Todd Stephenson mentioned. He drew a helpful distinction between that kind of legislation, that kind of work, and what this particular bill at hand does. The way that I would distinguish those, I think, most succinctly is to say that this current bill focuses on cases of domestic trafficking, of migrant exploitation.

A number of the members opposite have helpfully raised issues currently before us in New Zealand. In fact, the Hon Casey Costello spoke of her experience in that area. I hadn’t realised that, Minister, until I began my own research in this—that this is part of your very wide work in this space. I’m excited to hear of the working group you’ve put together, and I’m hopeful that this piece of legislation can contribute helpfully in that space as well. There’s no doubt at all that we do need some changes in this country, particularly around section 98, and that’s what this bill aims to do.

Then the companion legislation is the area of modern slavery reporting. To that extent, I’ve been looking to build on the excellent work of the Modern Slavery Leadership Advisory Group, the research group that met for a couple of years. They and other groups, including World Vision, TEAR Fund New Zealand, and a host of other advocacy groups in New Zealand have done an enormous amount of helpful work looking at international jurisdictions. That is informing a piece of legislation that, hopefully, will be brought to the biscuit tin in the coming year.

With that, I thank the House for their considered support of this bill. It does look like it’s going to go through to the select committee, which I’m very excited about. At that stage, there will be a raft of amendments brought to make that section 98 even more robust. To that extent, thank you to the House, and I commend this bill to it.

Motion agreed to.

Bill read a first time.

The question is, That the Crimes (Increased Penalties for Slavery Offences) Amendment Bill be considered by the Justice Committee.

Motion agreed to.

Bill referred to the Justice Committee.