Telecommunications and Other Matters Amendment Bill

on behalf of the Minister for Media and Communications: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I present a legislative statement on the Telecommunications and Other Matters Amendment Bill.

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Teanau Tuiono): That legislative statement is published under the authority of the House and can be found on the Parliament website.

Hon CHRIS PENK: I move, That the Telecommunications and Other Matters Amendment Bill be now read a first time. I nominate the Economic Development, Science and Innovation Committee to consider the bill.

I’m pleased to introduce this bill on behalf of the Minister for Media and Communications. This is one of two telecommunications bills that make targeted changes to support competition, foster innovation, and help stimulate economic growth. The Minister sought for these bills to be associated, but the request was not successful. This omnibus bill will ensure that overseas telecommunications providers are explicitly subject to telecommunications regulatory obligations, where relevant, to create an even playing field between our home-grown telcos and those offshore.

Like many of us, the telecommunications regulatory regime did not anticipate that we would be buying mobile and broadband services that aren’t in New Zealand, but the market is evolving quickly and it is expected that more and more telecommunications services will be delivered to New Zealand by offshore providers. The fact that our telecommunications legislation doesn’t explicitly capture these providers creates uncertainty for the telco industry, regulators, and, of course, consumers. While existing telco providers operating in New Zealand are committed to complying with our telco law where it applies to them, this gap could create problems for us in the future, particularly if a regulator ever wanted to enforce a breach against a provider that was not cooperative.

This bill makes it clear that telecommunications providers that offer services to Kiwis can be subject to our telco law. This has two main benefits. One, an even playing field supports competition in the New Zealand market. It means that a Kiwi company won’t have more regulatory costs than an offshore company that might be able to skirt beyond the rules. Two, it also provides an additional layer of consumer protection for Kiwi consumers, because it will be clear to anyone retailing to New Zealanders that they must comply with relevant consumer protection obligations in the telco Act.

The bill also creates a bespoke enforcement mechanism to address non-compliance by using radio spectrum licensing. While our preference is to use existing enforcement mechanisms for breaches of telco law, which means that action is taken through the courts, some offshore providers may not be willing to engage with these processes. This new power is intended to be a last resort, and the bill includes a number of considerations before the power can be used.

We welcome new innovative technology providers, particularly ones that provide high-quality connectivity services for New Zealanders. This bill is about making sure that our regulatory regime, which is about promoting competition and protecting consumers, keeps up to date with the rapid pace of change in the market. I encourage members and the public to have their say on this bill through the select committee process, and in the meantime, I commend the Telecommunications and Other Matters Amendment Bill to this House.

The question is that the motion be agreed to.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. It’s a privilege to stand and take a call on the Telecommunications and Other Matters Amendment Bill, and it’s a privilege because we know that connectivity is absolutely critical. We know this is an important part of our resilience across New Zealand. We are vulnerable to ever-increasing changes in weather patterns, and that resilience of connectivity becomes critical in those times of response, but it’s also critical for us so that we can take our place on the world stage. There are opportunities across New Zealand, opportunities that often look like jobs and industries that can continue to grow. Now, these can and should be able to be based anywhere in New Zealand, and connectivity is often the barrier that allows that to happen or not.

We know that the world seeks us out. It seeks New Zealand out for our innovation, for the kinds of things we can create, for the kinds of products and services we can provide. So we should do everything we can to remove the barriers that isolate us and instead do what we can to enable New Zealand and New Zealanders to deliver to a world that is waiting. So Labour does support the efforts to modernise the regulation of the telecommunications sector.

New Zealanders, especially, as I’ve said, in those rural areas, are increasingly reliant on extraterritorial communications or telecommunications infrastructure, such as our low Earth orbit or LEO satellite services, and we’re seeing those both from Starlink and also from Amazon Web Services with Project Kuiper coming online here in New Zealand, ahead of many other parts of the world. We need to make sure that these providers are subject to the same regulatory obligations as the companies with greater physical infrastructure here as well. And we need to make sure that those who live in rural or remote places are not left behind as a result through their use of the kinds of technologies, and in many cases the only kinds of technologies, that are available to them by virtue of their geography.

This bill is part of a programme of regulatory reform to ensure that the environment the telecommunications sector operates in is fit for purpose and in line with changes that are occurring, and occurring rapidly, in the market. This bill amends the Telecommunications Act 2001 to ensure that overseas telecommunications providers who provide services to end users here in New Zealand are subject to the regulatory obligations regardless of whether they or the infrastructure they rely on is based in New Zealand or not. If we’re talking about low Earth orbit or higher, then often a large part of that infrastructure is not based here in New Zealand.

These regulations include the telecommunications development levy, minimum requirements for emergency calls. We need to make sure that those dangerous black spots where you cannot seek the support or assistance that you will often need—need to be able to provide that for us. The bill also amends the Radiocommunications Act 1989 to create an enforcement mechanism to provide that radio or spectrum licences may be revoked, suspended, or restricted when or if telecommunications providers do not comply with their obligations.

Now, as the introduction speech from across the House alluded to, the Minister for Media and Communications asked for this bill to be wrapped into the other Telecommunications Amendment Bill that had its first reading last week, but the proposals in both bills are qualitatively different. I must admit there were two reasons I was surprised that the Minister asked to associate the bills: the first because the area and scope of each bill is so different, and the second because for a Minister who promised immediate action 18 months ago and has done next to nothing since, I would’ve expected keeping the bills separate would’ve at least kept up the premise that he’s busy and doing things in this portfolio space when, in fact, he is doing very, very little.

I think, because we support this bill, it’s important to come back to why. We support this bill because it’s critical that we keep New Zealanders connected. It’s also critical that consumers are on a level playing field. So we will support this bill to make sure that happens, but we do expect to see more from the Minister in this space.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. The Green Party is supporting the Telecommunications and Other Matters Amendment Bill. We also note that there could have been an opportunity to have this bill grouped with the other telecommunications bill that is in front of us, but we agree with the previous speaker that there are two distinct issues here that we need to address.

In relation to this bill, we support it, and we note that it is important that Parliament is able to adapt as new technologies emerge and key services change the way that they provide things like internet to our communities. For example, we’ve got services like Starlink, which can provide internet in some parts of our country. While I acknowledge that right now, through gaps within the sector, Starlink has become a relatively big player when in areas where perhaps there is little internet access, there is now a gap because there could be—and providers that, effectively, don’t have to set foot into the country for people to be able to access those very same services. Those providers may be owned by billionaires who may not always be seeking to represent the best interests of our communities.

I think it is important that this bill helps us create regulatory requirements that, basically, bring those in line with providers that would be operating, literally, physically onshore. Some of these include contributing to telecommunication levies, where the provider meets existing liability tests and legislation; complying with relevant retail service quality requirements, for example—and this is an important part—complying with Commerce Commission codes or the requirement to join a dispute resolution scheme. This is where there’s a new obligation seeking to be established in the other telecommunications amendment bill. That part will, in my view, help support consumers as well, and I think it’ll be important to see in the select committee how this could be tested out in complying with obligations of the Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Act, including those relating to interception capability and network security.

The bill also has some related enforcement mechanisms being put in place, and we think that this will be useful to also test out at the select committee stage. The reality is that telecommunications services are becoming more and more essential for people to, literally, be able to move around their daily lives. Access to the internet would have been seen as a “nice to have” a few decades ago, but nowadays, literally, as our Government moves to digitise more of its Government services, access to things like the internet are, literally, essential services. I think the legislation that we had previously would have not adequately recognised this nor would have anticipated that many of these telecommunication services, as I mentioned earlier, would have been set up in a way that meant some of these internet providers, for example, would not have to set foot in the country. Yet what we do have is, for example—say that you’re a person on income support, living in an area that’s deprived of internet through ordinary means.

These services could provide a lifeline for people to have the means to, literally, survive. That is power that, therefore, is handed over to, often, corporates that would be running these telecommunication services. Having these regulatory frameworks and requirements being placed upon them is important, because it’s critical that these corporations are subjected to the very same requirements that telecommunication providers onshore would. That’s critical, as well, because when it comes to contributing to telecommunication levies, we know that some of these providers, like Starlink, are owned by people who have a huge amount of wealth, who clearly have huge amounts of resources, and they should be contributing through those levies. We should not be creating them to be exempt from them. It will also be interesting to evaluate, at the select committee stage, how much these levies are likely to provide to the country. So we also look forward to further analysis being made and unpacked at that stage for us, to be able to evaluate the benefits of this bill.

The Green Party is supporting this bill because we recognise the need for us to build cross-party consensus to modernise our legislation in light of new technology and services. We look forward to our colleagues evaluating this in the select committee.

What an exciting time we live in. Who would have thought, only a few years ago, that this little device [Holds up cellphone] could connect to a satellite in the sky, and, actually, anywhere in New Zealand, you could send a message and soon you’ll be able to speak on it. It really is an exciting time. It’s great to know that, today, I think, we’re going to have cross-party support to send this bill to a select committee so these issues around overseas providers of telecommunications technologies can be looked at. It’s really great.

We have already heard that we have a company like Starlink, for example—we have a very high uptake of Starlink connections per capita in New Zealand. That is because of our unique geography, but it does mean that more and more New Zealanders have access to very fast internet regardless of where they live in the country. We are going to soon also have the ability for Amazon Leo, which will be launched next year. I really am looking forward to the Economic Development, Science and Innovation Committee looking at this, so let’s get the Telecommunications and Other Matters Amendment Bill linked back up with the other bill we passed in the House. I commend this bill.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I’m pleased to rise on behalf of New Zealand First in support of the Telecommunications and Other Matters Amendment Bill. As the Parliamentary Under-Secretary to the Minister for Media and Communications, it is a pleasure to stand to speak to this bill, acknowledging the Minister’s contribution in the first reading of this bill.

Now, this bill is really important, because it provides clarity to ensure that overseas companies who provide telecommunications services to New Zealanders are, in fact, subject to our telecommunications laws and obligations, regardless of whether they or the infrastructure they are using is based in New Zealand or overseas. The bill will provide a mechanism to also address non-compliance or any breaches of that. It’s an omnibus bill; it amends three pieces of legislation, the Telecommunications Act 2001, the Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Act—also called TICSA—2013, and the Radiocommunications Act 1989. These amendments are primarily targeted to satellite providers, but they could in fact apply to future types of delivery that are yet to be developed.

Some have mentioned Starlink. Currently, there are about 7,000 active satellites in their constellation. We’ve seen remarkable growth in New Zealand—a significant satellite market uptake here. In 2024, the Telecommunications Monitoring Report noted that satellites serve around 50,000 rural customers; 19 percent of all rural connections are via satellite, and it’s the fastest-growing broadband service in New Zealand at the moment.

We’ve heard about Amazon Leo, and although there is no start date yet for it, they’ll be launching about 3,000 satellites into their constellation when they begin operations. While there’s no confirmed start date, as I mentioned, it is expected to be a major competitor to Starlink, which will provide excellent competition for price and also performance—so that’ll be good competitive pricing for customers in New Zealand.

If overseas providers are delivering services to New Zealanders and to New Zealand households, they need to fulfil their obligations, and there are three obligations under telecommunications. One is that if they have a gross income of more than $10 million, they need to be contributing to the Telecommunications Development Levy. That levy contributes towards the 111 system and also to the relay service for the deaf, so it’s important that they contribute as a levy for that. The second obligation is that they need to be part of the Telecommunications Dispute Resolution Scheme. Over the last three years, every year, about three and a half thousand people have laid a complaint for some problem with their telco service. Starlink currently doesn’t—there’s nowhere to go for people to complain, so bringing them in under this obligation would be a good thing for those who have a Starlink service. The third obligation is relating to regulations for emergency calling, and including our overseas providers simply makes absolutely logical sense given the essential nature of telco services.

Finally, the bill provides clarity for the overseas providers’ obligations under the Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Act, or TICSA, and it makes it explicitly clear that New Zealand legislation applies, and the overseas provider must follow lawful intercept and security requests under TICSA. For these reasons, I commend the bill to the House.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. It’s a pleasure to speak on the Telecommunications and Other Matters Amendment Bill in this first reading. This bill is an omnibus bill, as has been described earlier, and it is bringing together a range of modernisations to bring communications Acts into the modern era. I commend the bill to the House.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Obviously, we’ll support a bill that brings a bit of equity out there. It’s a fair-paying bill. It’s going to ensure that our rural communities are all set up. So, obviously, Labour will support this type of bill.

I think the real question is how useless the Minister for Media and Communications really is—so useless that he can’t even turn up to actually speak on his own bill. The other question is how useless is Jenny Marcroft, but, I mean—

Jenny Marcroft: Point of order, Mr Speaker. It’s not appropriate for a member to call out whether a member is in the House or not in the House, as the case may be, as Willie Jackson just did.

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Teanau Tuiono): Yeah. Can I ask the Hon Willie Jackson to refrain from talking about the absence of members in the House.

Hon WILLIE JACKSON: Oh, OK. Thanks, Mr Speaker. OK, well, the real question, then, is how useless is the member for New Zealand First, because she was speaking on the wrong bill. So I’ve just got to ask that question.

Jamie Arbuckle: Point of order, Mr Speaker. That is unparliamentary, and we take offence to those types of comments.

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Teanau Tuiono): Just to clarify, you can’t take personal offence on behalf of somebody else.

Jenny Marcroft: Point of order, Mr Speaker. I take offence at being called useless. I think that’s something where the member clearly was looking in the mirror at himself.

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Teanau Tuiono): I’ve got a mind to make you both withdraw and apologise, to be honest, but I’m going to call it a draw and go back to the Hon Willie Jackson.

Hon WILLIE JACKSON: Oh, thank you. Thank you, Mr Speaker.

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Teanau Tuiono): Please refrain from calling people useless, Mr Jackson.

Hon WILLIE JACKSON: Yes, Mr Speaker.

This bill is really important, because in terms of broadcasting—and I want to talk about this in a broader sense, and this is a bill we’ll support, obviously, because they’re both part of a programme of regulatory reform to ensure that the regulatory environment of the telecommunications sector operates in a fit-for-purpose way. So, obviously, we’re going to support the bill.

I question and challenge what this Government is doing in this area. We’ve got a spokesperson for broadcasting here who has challenged this Minister to come up with something, to do something, in terms of broadcasting. Still on the Order Paper, we’ve got the Fair Digital News Bargaining Bill. If you really want to help broadcasting, do something, actually do something, for media outlets out there, now, the Fair Digital News Bargaining Bill, which I actually championed in terms of this House, when I was the broadcasting Minister, looks after communities, makes sure that big companies pay their way instead of taking news from the local newspapers. This useless lot on the other side, they’ve got their local newspapers, who’ve been ripped off by big corporate companies, and they don’t care. The Minister of broadcasting doesn’t care, despite giving assurances to the broadcasting world that—

Jenny Marcroft: Point of order, Mr Speaker.

Hon WILLIE JACKSON: —the digital bargaining bill was on the line. Oh, useless again. OK.

Jenny Marcroft: Just bringing the member back to the bill, it’s the communications bill—

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Teanau Tuiono): Sit down. I will determine whether he is on par with the bill, is that understood?

Hon WILLIE JACKSON: Thank you, Mr Speaker. For that member, she should know, having been a spokesperson for broadcasting, that the media people around the country are crying out for support. The little people that that member and these members on the other side purport to represent, they are all losing their jobs. The journalist and media industry has halved in the last few years. Newspapers have closed up everywhere. Why? Because this useless Government is doing nothing. All they’re doing is amending bills like this, which anybody could do. You don’t even need a broadcasting Minister to amend these types of bills. A blind man could change these bills. But here’s the question. Do something for the people. We had the digital bargaining bill, we had Newshub close down, and we had all these journalists knocked off or lost their jobs because of this useless broadcasting Minister, who didn’t come up with a plan, didn’t come up with a—

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Teanau Tuiono): Mr—

Hon WILLIE JACKSON: Come back to the bill?

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Teanau Tuiono): Come back to the bill. I’d be grateful if you came back to the bill.

Hon WILLIE JACKSON: I was coming back to it, Mr Speaker.

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Teanau Tuiono): Yeah, come back to it right now.

Hon WILLIE JACKSON: OK, just for you, Mr Speaker.

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Teanau Tuiono): Just for me—just for me.

Hon WILLIE JACKSON: The bill also amends the Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Act 2013—

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Teanau Tuiono): Oh, he’s reading it. This is great.

Hon WILLIE JACKSON: —to ensure that the existing provisions of that Act apply to network operators who provide services to New Zealanders—who’ve been ripped off by this Government, ripped off by this Minister of broadcasting, who has done nothing in terms of providing a strategy for journalists, for media people. All he’s done is taken funding off Radio New Zealand. What’s happened in Māori broadcasting? No funding. Why? Because you’ve got a useless Minister for Māori Development—

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Teanau Tuiono): Back to the bill.

Hon WILLIE JACKSON: Oh, I’ll come back to the bill, Mr Speaker.

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Teanau Tuiono): Try reading some of it. There you go.

Hon WILLIE JACKSON: But the bill ensures that both domestic and overseas providers operate on a level playing field. Now, we all agree with that, don’t we? We all agree with that. It would be a better a playing field if this useless broadcasting Minister could actually do something for our media people, for our journalists all over the country. Shame on him and shame on this Government. Thank you, Mr Speaker.

Well, that was an incredibly long five minutes.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Not only was it long, it was abysmal for someone who should know better. The only thing the former Minister can broadcast is hot air. I am glad to stand in support of the Telecommunications and Other Matters Amendment Bill. Telecommunications is very important. We saw with the previous National Government the introduction of the ultra-fast broadband programme, and by 2033 it’s projected to add $163 billion to our economy. That highlights how important telecommunication is. But we need a level playing field and that’s what this bill does. I commend it to the House.

Tēnā koe e te Māngai o te Whare. I think we can all agree that no matter what I say, I’m going to look calm and collected—though I agree with everything that the Hon Willie Jackson said. Heoi anō rā, e tū ana au ki te tautoko i tēnei pire; I do stand in support of this bill, because, at the heart of it, this bill is about connection and, of course, ensuring good quality governance of excellent connection.

I want to talk about a place in Ikaroa-Rāwhiti I haven’t been to for a very long time: my house. Where I live, I live up a dirt road on a farm—where I actually do drive a Personal All-Terrain Vehicle, actually, whānau. Heoi anō, where I live on Maraehara Road, there is no cellphone coverage, and recently, landlines have been disabled. Some might say that’s the price of living in paradise, and while I agree we live in paradise, it is also a significant safety risk—you know, to not be able to ring 111. So over the years, we have become increasingly reliant on the internet for things such as Wi-Fi calling to stay connected and continue to make phone calls.

It’s also appropriate that our marae—symbols and hubs of connection throughout Ngāti Porou—provide connectivity for whānau through providing internet services, particularly in our rural areas. The issue of connectivity became absolutely undeniable during Cyclone Gabrielle. Not only were we physically cut off with roads closed in and out, stopping delivery of food, etc., but all telecommunications were gone. The only means of communication we had were (1) me physically going around knocking on people’s doors to tell them what the civil defence plans and instructions were, and (2) good old Radio Ngāti Porou—Te Reo o te Iwi, who’s been bringing people together for years.

While disconnected, there was no EFTPOS, we couldn’t access online banking, so I just want to acknowledge the local businesses, particularly supermarkets, who showed the locals goodwill by offering them credit. Then came saviours by way of our own iwi and iwi from across Aotearoa and whānau from across Aotearoa, some not even related to those of us cut off—they came and provided aid through the provision of Starlink.

So there we were: we were back in business and we were back connected. Whānau were able to contact their relations around the world to say, “Kei te pai mātou. Kei te ora mātou.”—we’re OK. We’re alive. We’re safe. We are cut off, but we don’t mind being isolated off the East Coast. It became the norm throughout the East Coast. We had marae, we had fire stations, we had community hubs with satellite dishes outside, keeping us all connected.

While we love that service, we all know that fairness is the Kiwi way, and this bill will clarify that although offshore, these services being provided for in Aotearoa must be subject to the same regulations as domestic providers. That includes paying levies to help support ongoing development and—one of our favourite words up the coast—infrastructure, which is sorely needed throughout Ikaroa-Rāwhiti.

Of course, in a time of increased cybersecurity awareness, of course there has been some scepticism about what’s going on with all these satellite dishes. Who’s watching us? Who’s in control of us? The stronger enforcement powers enable—

Hon Judith Collins: You’d be surprised.

CUSHLA TANGAERE-MANUEL: Oh, what’s that?

Hon Judith Collins: I said you’ll be very surprised who’s watching you.

CUSHLA TANGAERE-MANUEL: No, I wouldn’t—I wouldn’t. After sitting in this House with you guys for two years, I would not be surprised.

The increased security is something we do support. But like I said, at its heart—and the reason I support it on behalf of Ikaroa-Rāwhiti—is that this is about connection. It’s about keeping people connected in a quality way through quality infrastructure and providing quality governance. I commend this bill to the House.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. This bill ensures that telcos based overseas will be subject to New Zealand’s regulatory regime. It strengthens oversight. I commend this bill to the House.

Motion agreed to.

Bill read a first time.

The question is, That the Telecommunications and Other Matters Amendment Bill be considered by the Economic Development, Science and Innovation Committee.

Motion agreed to.

Bill referred to the Economic Development, Science and Innovation Committee.