Crimes (Countering Foreign Interference) Amendment Bill

Members, we come now to the final debate. This is the debate on clauses 1 and title, “Title” and “Commencement”.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I would like to ask the Minister some questions around clause 2, with regards to the commencement—noting that the commencement is the day after Royal assent—both in terms of the conversations that we’ve had during this committee stage on some of the uncertainties around the definition of some of the clauses but also, I guess, the breadth of what could potentially be covered.

For example, while this covers everything, what is, then, the scope of what we considered? Some of the scenarios weren’t actually teased out in the select committee as well. One of the examples of that is, for example—when we’re looking at the commencement date being the day after Royal assent, in the context of some of the things we have seen—the way that we’ve seen the FBI, potentially, as a foreign agency interfering with Aotearoa New Zealand. We have seen things like the Atlas Network, as a public organisation, interfering with some of the things in New Zealand. We have seen trans-exclusionary radical feminists coming from other regions, such as the UK, putting harm on some of these things. These are the potential scenarios that are considered under new sections 78AAA and 78AAB. It doesn’t seem to me that having the commencement date as the day after Royal assent is something that allows our court system and the justice system to fully engage with this new offence.

Now, the previous Crimes Act bills we have seen that have gone through the House have all—as far as I can remember, and the Minister may be able to correct me—had a commencement date three or six months after Royal assent, but this one does not. Considering that this is creating a new criminal offence, which is incredibly serious—imprisonment of up to 14 years is a serious matter—I ask the Minister to consider doing just a little bit more work both in terms of teasing out some of the scenarios but also giving the Ministry of Justice and, as the Minister mentioned before, the Ministry for Ethnic Communities, who have had some work done in terms of the education programme, the ability to actually let the public know what the new offence is going to be.

Again, I’m speaking as someone from an ethnic community, and for those for whom English is not their first language and particularly for those who may not be able to speak English fluently, this new offence may be meaningless to them until something comes up. Because the commencement date is the day after Royal assent, immediately it then creates an offence. I do ask the Minister to consider seriously whether there can be a grace period that allows the ethnic communities, in particular, to understand what the new offences are and what the consequences are. That’s going to be my only contribution for this section, but I think it’s a really, really important one for the Minister to consider.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I also have some concerns about the time in which the bill will become law. I’m mostly concerned about young people and the behaviour of young people and what they would expect to be an offence or not, just remembering that we do have some quite broad provisions here, including the new section 69A in clause 8, which includes the offence of aiding, inciting, or counselling—so not necessarily being the one who passes on information but being that one step back.

I note that when we were discussing the Schedule to the bill, one of the amendments was an amendment to Schedule 1A in the Oranga Tamariki Act. Schedule 1A is a specified list of offences for young people aged 17, and so these are still young people and, yes, there is a list of offences that they would be subject to. It adds this bill to that space. I imagine that there would be a number of young people who are just starting to explore the world of protest and international affairs and who are understanding how to interact with international issues and with conflict, and, ideally, it would be good for us to ensure that they are well-educated on what this means for them, whether they are the individual who passes on information or whether they are one step back and they are counselling, inciting, or—under those provisions that I’ve read earlier—directing someone else outside the country to do something or to pass on information.

Ideally, I wouldn’t argue this for all pieces of legislation, and I think it does make sense for many of our bills to become law immediately. I do think that there are times when we need to consider whether there’s a valid reason why we would want to have a period of education to ensure that it’s not catching people who otherwise wouldn’t step into this area, at all. I ask whether that is a consideration for the Minister.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Just really briefly, my understanding is that the issues have been well articulated and canvassed, including by agencies, through the six-month Justice Committee process—for which I congratulate all members involved—I think, as well, with some of that outreach conducted by the Ministry for Ethnic Communities. Respectfully, I think it’s unlikely that there won’t be a level of understanding that’s necessary in the community as to what the implications of the new legislation might be.

I respectfully disagree with Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan in terms of a lack of clarity within the legislation. As to courts having the ability to consider how these scenarios might play out, the scenarios that they will see are cases that will be brought before them in due course, and, on that basis, they will have the opportunity to consider how the law should be applied. It’s no grace period; otherwise, we provide a window of opportunity—a mixed message—in terms of the kind of behaviour that we consider to be appropriate in this country. All relevant parties have had an opportunity to understand it, and we look forward to it coming into effect as soon as possible.

I move, That debate on this question now close.

The committee has further considered the Crimes (Countering Foreign Interference) Amendment Bill and reports it without amendment. I move, That the report be adopted.

Motion agreed to.

Report adopted.