Hon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU (Minister for Disarmament and Arms Control) : I move, That the Cluster Munitions (Prohibition) Bill be now read a first time. The Cluster Munitions (Prohibition) Bill implements New Zealand’s obligations under the Convention on Cluster Munitions that require legislative implementation to enable New Zealand to ratify the convention. The convention was adopted in Dublin on 30 May 2008 and was signed by New Zealand, in the company of 93 other States, in Oslo on 3 December 2008. It establishes a wide-ranging prohibition on the use of cluster munitions that cause unacceptable humanitarian harm.

Cluster munitions are canister-like weapons that encase a large number of smaller explosive devices that are dispersed over an area. They are designed to explode on impact, but many fail to do so and remain on the land, killing and maiming civilians for years following their use. This can be witnessed at present in the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, where people are still dying as a result of cluster munitions used decades ago.

Clause 11 of the Cluster Munitions (Prohibition) Bill is the key provision of the bill. It prohibits the use of cluster munitions, and other activity including the development, production, acquisition, possession, retention, stockpiling, and transfer of such munitions. Clause 11 also prohibits any person from assisting, encouraging, or inducing the prohibited conduct I have just described. The maximum penalty on conviction of a clause 11 offence is a prison term not exceeding 7 years or a fine of up to $500,000, or both. This penalty is in line with similar existing legislation.

Further, and in line with the convention, clause 11 of the bill prohibits certain additional conduct involving cluster munitions by members of the New Zealand armed forces when engaged in operations, exercises, or other military activities with the armed forces of a State that is not a party to the convention. This specific prohibition, combined with the general prohibitions outlined earlier, implements article 21 of the convention, which was one of the more contentious issues during its negotiation. That important article outlines the obligations on State parties to promote the norms that the convention establishes. They must also make best efforts to discourage States that are not party to the convention from using cluster munitions. The armed forces of States party to the convention are not barred from engaging in operations, exercises, or other military activities with the armed forces of States that are not party to the convention. However, they may do so only if, while so engaged, they do not undertake any of the specified prohibited conduct.

Clause 9 of the bill extends the reach of the clause 11 prohibitions to certain acts or omissions outside New Zealand, in line with the intent of the convention. This means that in certain circumstances a person can be prosecuted in New Zealand even when he or she commits these offences abroad.

Clauses 12 and 15 provide a limited set of exceptions to the general prohibitions. These exceptions include where a decision is taken by the Minister for Disarmament and Arms Control to allow the importation of the minimum number of cluster munitions that will suffice for the purpose of developing and training New Zealand Defence Force personnel in cluster munitions detection, clearance, and destruction techniques. Members of our armed forces have certainly been involved in that activity, particularly in Lebanon, in recent times.

Clause 17 of the Cluster Munitions (Prohibition) Bill requires people who acquire, possess, retain, or transfer cluster munitions to provide information and keep records as specified, and it creates applicable offences for failing to comply and for false disclosures. Clause 17 is required so that New Zealand can meet its reporting obligations under the convention.

New Zealand has a profile on disarmament and arms control issues far above our size and place in the world. We have taken a strong position on the humanitarian impact of cluster munitions, and I am extremely pleased to continue that tradition with this bill. The convention is an excellent example of what New Zealand can achieve on the international stage. New Zealand took a central role in the development of the convention, as a member of the core group of countries—along with Austria, Ireland, Mexico, Norway, the Holy See, and Peru—that led the negotiations. New Zealand also hosted the penultimate round of negotiations in Wellington in February last year, and I acknowledge the Hon Phil Goff, who is in the House this afternoon, who, no doubt, was influential in those negotiations, as well. It is fitting that we now work to ratify the convention and take our place among the first 30 State parties required to bring the convention into force.

I also pay tribute to the non-governmental organisations that have had an active role in the negotiation of the treaty. Their commitment to this convention continues and they are now also working to bring the convention into force. I know they will be pleased to see that this bill is having its first reading here this afternoon.

I note that the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee, during its examination of the convention earlier this year, called for the House to progress this bill expeditiously. The Convention on Cluster Munitions represents a significant development in international disarmament and humanitarian measures. I, too, urge swift passage of the Cluster Munitions (Prohibition) Bill to enable New Zealand’s ratification of this important convention. This urging is entirely consistent with our country’s reputation as a strong proponent of international disarmament and of arms control more broadly. Most important, a well-supported convention has the greatest potential to help prevent the unacceptable and unspeakable humanitarian harm caused by the use of these weapons, for which there is no place at all.

I move that the bill be referred to the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee for consideration, and I commend this bill to the House.

Hon PHIL GOFF (Leader of the Opposition) : The Labour Party supports and warmly welcomes the introduction and passage of the Cluster Munitions (Prohibition) Bill. As the Minister for Disarmament and Arms Control has acknowledged, this legislation implements the outcome of an international process in which New Zealand played a pivotal role under the previous Labour Government, and in which I, as Minister for Disarmament and Arms Control, had the privilege to be involved. I thank Georgina te Heuheu for acknowledging that fact.

I in turn, pay particular tribute to the enormous and effective role played by New Zealand’s ambassador for disarmament in Geneva, Don MacKay. Don is one of the finest civil servants whom I have had the pleasure of working with. He is held in such respect that he was appointed to chair the critical committees during the negotiations that took place both in the Wellington conference and in the Dublin conference.

I also acknowledge the critical role played by non-governmental organisations in this. They worked under the umbrella of the Cluster Munition Coalition. In particular, I acknowledge the role played by Mary Wareham of Oxfam as the convenor of this process. I believe that the non-governmental organisations helped give real momentum to it. I was hugely impressed with the determination and enthusiasm they showed worldwide in pushing this cause forward at a time when countries around the world, through the United Nations process, were incredibly reluctant to move forward on it.

Cluster munitions, as the Minister has pointed out, are, effectively, unexploded sub-munitions that act in very much the same way as landmines. There is a high rate of failure to detonate on impact, they then lie dormant in the soil, and they can lie there for decades, still causing a threat to civilian life, long after the conflict in which they were fired. In that sense they are very similar to landmines, and, indeed, this treaty that we are moving to ratify by legislation today is the biggest advance in the area of disarmament since the Ottawa Convention on landmines.

The tragedy of lost lives and horrific injuries is evident right across the world, in the Balkans, South-east Asia, Africa, and the Middle East. But the event perhaps more than any other that stimulated us to move against cluster munitions was the conflict in south Lebanon between Hezbollah and the Israel Defense Forces. It is estimated that a million sub-munitions lay in the soils of south Lebanon after that conflict, resulting in casualties of more than 200 maimed and killed; a very high percentage of those casualties were children.

I was enormously proud of the role played by the New Zealand Defence Force in helping to clear those sub-munitions. We made the decision to send it up to Lebanon. It did an excellent job, as indeed, I had witnessed it doing beforehand, in places as diverse as Laos, Cambodia, and Mozambique. But it occurs to anybody who watches the painstaking clearance, metre by metre, of those sorts of munitions that it is far better to have the fence at the top of the cliff than the ambulance at the bottom. We saw the need to deal effectively with the phenomenon of cluster munitions.

For 5 years in Geneva the countries of the world failed to effectively solve this problem. We worked through the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons. Countries with vested interests that controlled, used, and stockpiled cluster munitions blocked the consensus process. We were getting nowhere. A group of seven countries, all of them small nations, came together to find an alternative path forward. They were Norway, New Zealand, Ireland, Austria, Peru, Mexico, and, to its credit, the Vatican. We set up what was called the Oslo process, and we set out to create a treaty that would outlaw the use of cluster munitions, which have such an unacceptable effect on civilian life. That Oslo process was significantly advanced when New Zealand itself, early in 2008, hosted the Wellington conference. I had the pleasure of hosting delegates in the Grand Hall next to this Chamber. That conference laid the framework for creating an agreement that in Dublin would lead to a treaty to outlaw cluster munitions that would bind the signatories to it. Again, I pay tribute to the role of Don MacKay in Ireland in playing an integral part in that process.

What we achieved was a huge number of countries, I think in excess of 90, signing up to the Dublin convention, which bans cluster munitions causing harm to civilians, and 99 percent of all sub-munitions - based weapon systems. It requires stockpiles of cluster munitions to be destroyed within 8 years. It requires contaminated sites to be cleared within 10 years. It sets out clearly the rights of cluster munitions victims, and with the obligations that States have towards them. It requires States to provide international cooperation with, and assistance to, those countries affected by cluster munitions, where they are in a position to do so.

In Oslo in December of last year 93 countries signed the Convention on Cluster Munitions. They did not include countries such as the United States, Russia, China, Israel, India, and Pakistan, which have used and do stockpile cluster munitions. But I believe that the impact of this treaty will be very much the parallel of the Ottawa Convention. It will create a stigma around the use of cluster munitions, which will mean that even those countries that have not signed this treaty will feel constrained from using the weapons. Therein lies the importance of this treaty and this convention that this legislation will enable us to ratify.

We need to pass this legislation to implement certain obligations under the treaty. I think that will be relatively straightforward for New Zealand. We do not have, we do not use, and we do not stockpile cluster munitions. We have no plans to acquire them, though there is a provision in this legislation that allows cluster munitions for the purpose of training our Defence Force, which may be again deployed to disarm those munitions in countries around the world. That makes sense. Nor are there any areas under our jurisdiction and control where we have the obligation to clear such munitions. There are interoperability provisions that would enable us still to work with countries like the United States that possess cluster munitions. The treaty, nevertheless, puts us under an obligation to encourage non-State parties to sign up to the treaty, and to use our best efforts to discourage countries that have not signed up from using cluster munitions. I see no difficulties in New Zealand fulfilling those obligations.

I support this legislation as a necessary step for New Zealand to ratify the cluster munitions treaty and convention. This is a step forward for disarmament and for humanity. It is a clear sign of the world moving forward in an area in which, for the last decade, far too little progress has been made. This treaty will protect tens of thousands of people whose lives would otherwise have been constrained or blighted by the future use of such weapons. New Zealand can be truly proud of the role it has played again in the field of disarmament. I feel personally privileged to have been able to play a part in helping to achieve a ban on the use of these weapons. The world will be a better place in the absence of cluster munitions.

Hon Dr WAYNE MAPP (Minister of Defence) : As Minister of Defence, I specifically asked to speak in this debate. I acknowledge today that the Leader of the Opposition, Mr Goff, in his former role as Minister of Disarmament and Arms Control and also as Minister of Defence was, as we heard in his speech, fully and passionately committed to the effort by New Zealand to lead in the banning of cluster munitions.

It is important that Parliament, on behalf of the people of New Zealand, reinforces not just for our own country but, much more important, for other countries the need to reduce the terrible effects of war. This is a moral issue, and it has impelled New Zealanders across the political spectrum and, most important, amongst non-governmental institutions, in particular the Cluster Munitions Coalition. They lobbied individual members of Parliament intensely, and ensured that when this issue came to Parliament all parties were part of it. I recall full well the negotiations that were held in Wellington at that time, under the leadership of Mr Goff. New Zealand took a leading role in this issue, which conformed to the position we had taken previously on the landmines convention as well. As has been noted by both the Minister for Disarmament and Arms Control and Mr Goff, the Cluster Munitions (Prohibition) Bill follows directly from those negotiations.

As was also noted, the use of cluster munitions in Lebanon in 2006, primarily by Israel, was the spur for action. More than 1 million sub-munitions were used. Many of those were used in areas occupied by civilians, and it has taken years and years to clear them. Even now, fewer than half have been actually cleared: 195,000 have been cleared to date in one-third of the area. Even today, civilians continue to be killed and maimed by those munitions, and those civilians particularly include children. They are amongst the principal victims of those munitions. As with the Ottawa Convention, that fact compels an urgency of action by us.

I note that, as Mr Goff acknowledged, the New Zealand Defence Force was deployed for 12 months during 2007 when he was Minister of Defence. In fact, he answered a question in Parliament on this deployment. The New Zealand Defence Force, which is highly trained in this area, cleared 1,800 sub-munitions. I should also say that this treaty was negotiated in such a way that it tried to embrace the concerns and interests of the States that have cluster munitions. It is worth noting that parties that sign up to it will want to put pressure on States that use and have stockpiles of cluster munitions to sign up to it; their concerns are specifically addressed within the convention. I, for one, certainly hope that the United States will be able to see its way clear to accede in due course to the convention.

It is hardly worth stating that the 20th century, perhaps more than any other, was beset by war that affected civilians, most particularly in the latter half of the century. Much of that damage was caused by landmines and cluster munitions that were specifically aimed at people, whether they were in uniform or were civilians. Because of the persistent effects of both landmines and cluster munitions, civilians become a particular target—not necessarily because people intend that to be the outcome, but because of the nature of the weapons themselves. The weapons remain in the place of conflict long after the conflict has ended. Many parts of the world, decades and decades after the conflict has ceased, still have live minefields. There are still cluster munitions in southern Lebanon and it will take decades to clear them. The objective in the convention to clear all of those cluster munitions in 10 years can, perhaps, be achieved, but I suspect it is something of an aspirational goal. It will take a great deal of effort to achieve it.

I specifically acknowledge the members of the New Zealand Defence Force who make clearing munitions their profession. We can hardly imagine a more dangerous thing to do than to clear cluster munitions or landmines. People put themselves at literally daily risk. New Zealanders have been deployed for two decades now to clear out munitions, which are the after-effects of war. In the Balkans, Kosovo, and Afghanistan in the 1990s, and, in relation to landmines, in Lebanon in the 1980s, this has been an enduring commitment. The New Zealand Defence Force has made it part of its kaupapa to build its skills in this area. In a contemporary era when people are looking to defence forces to assist civil society, this is greatly valued.

I want to speak on that point in particular. The modern ethos of the New Zealand Defence Force is to assist States in trouble. There is much less inter-State conflict and there are many more States in internal turmoil. Of course, some of that internal turmoil can then spill over to the rest of the world. We only have to look at the effects of al-Qaeda basing itself in Afghanistan to understand that. It is worth noting that eight New Zealanders have been killed in terrorist incidents that had their direct origins in al-Qaeda. Three New Zealanders were killed on September 11, three in Bali, one in London, and now, most recently, one in Jakarta. Each occasion was directly sourced to al-Qaeda. That is why New Zealanders are engaged in assisting those troubled countries: because it is in our interests to do so.

I think New Zealanders across this House have expectations that the New Zealand Defence Force will undertake this kind of work. Our Defence Force has gone through enormous training in the understanding of failed States, their peoples, the populations, and their cultures in order to be able to play our part in doing this work. One particular facet of that training is our expertise in de-mining. The convention makes provisions to ensure that our skills are maintained in that area, but that they are maintained ultimately to assist other peoples so they can build their societies and live life as we would wish to live ours. Thank you.

H V ROSS ROBERTSON (Labour—Manukau East) : Kia ora tātou. Nō reira e te Whare, e ngā iwi, e ngā reo, e ngā hau whā, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou katoa. It is both a privilege and a pleasure to be able to stand in this House this evening to discuss and promote the issue of disarmament, as that is what we are doing. First of all, I want to acknowledge those who played a part in the Cluster Munitions (Prohibition) Bill: people such as the Hon Phil Goff, of course, when he was the Minister for Disarmament and Arms Control. I want to acknowledge his contribution and dedication in pursuing this issue for New Zealand. Also, I acknowledge Don MacKay, who was our ambassador for disarmament in Geneva, and the leadership he provided in putting our case on this issue. Also there is Mary Wareham, and I acknowledge the work she did with the Aotearoa New Zealand Cluster Munition Coalition. Then there are the many luminaries, far too many to name here, who have been involved in this whole issue.

Cluster munitions cause unacceptable harm to humanity, and often those who are harmed are innocent civilians: people who are going about their everyday business, whether it is walking across a field or going to see a friend. Those are the people who often end up being mutilated. There are too many deaths, disfigurements, and lives destroyed because of the indiscriminate use of cluster munitions. As a senior member of the international council of Parliamentarians for Global Action, which is an international non-governmental organisation based in New York that works with the United Nations, and as a former chair of the council of that organisation, I take a great interest in this issue. We held a number of forums in places as diverse as Georgia, in the former Soviet Union, and the Philippines, and cluster munitions were high on the agenda. Having come back from there, we had a forum here last year, and I remember Alyn Ware being there. That was to do with the Aotearoa New Zealand Cluster Munition Coalition, and there I met up with a colleague from Sierra Leone, member of Parliament the Hon Ibrahim Sorie. He related to me stories of cluster bombs, the damage they have done, and the economies they have wrecked in Africa.

It is unacceptable that the major producers and buyers of cluster bombs, the United States, Israel, Russia, and China, continue to wage war by using these maiming cluster bombs. Of course, they are not the only ones. Another 76 countries are major holders of cluster bombs, and it is time that there was a change. The United Nations has estimated that 40 percent of the victims are children, and that, in anyone’s language, is abhorrent and unacceptable, because the innocents suffer. There is an old saying that when the elephants rumble, the little people get hurt, but far too many little people are being hurt by these types of munitions. It is also estimated that between 10 and 40 percent of the bomblets released by cluster bombs just above the ground fail to detonate. That is a major concern, because it poses a threat to civilians in the area, potentially killing or maiming civilians for years following their use. These munitions are totally unacceptable in the 21st century, and it is time that people recognised that peace is the only way to go.

During the last Parliament I was fortunate to be involved with the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee. We conducted an international treaty examination of the Convention on Cluster Munitions, and appended to the report was the national interest analysis prepared by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade. The executive summary of that statement stated: “The Convention on Cluster Munitions … which bans the use of cluster munitions by States Parties, is a significant development in international disarmament and humanitarian measures. The Convention was concluded in Dublin on 30 May 2008, and opened for signature at a ceremony held in Oslo on 3 December 2008. New Zealand was one of the 94 states to sign the Convention in Oslo.” As a nation we can hold our head high.

I remember reading about that great Liberal legislator William Pember Reeves. He said that New Zealand was an edifice for radical experiments for the rest of the world. I guess this bill is not a radical experiment, but we are leading when it comes to the elimination of cluster munitions. We continue to lead with countries like Norway, Austria, Peru, and Mexico, as well as the Holy See and Ireland. We determined that it was necessary to take the process outside the United Nations inhumane weapons convention because no progress was being made. Again we stood up for what we believed in.

The national interest analysis goes on to say “The new Convention’s central purpose is to prohibit the use of all cluster munitions, which are canister-like munitions that encase a large number of smaller explosive devices.” It adds “The Convention also prohibits the development, production, acquisition, stockpiling, retention and transfer … of cluster munitions;”, and clarifies that the convention includes a provision on interoperability. It goes on to say: “There are strong reasons for New Zealand to proceed to ratify the Convention. Most important among these is that a well supported Convention will have the greatest potential to help prevent the unacceptable humanitarian harm caused by the use of cluster munitions. This National Interest Analysis concludes that the benefits to New Zealand from ratifying the Convention outweigh any associated costs. There are no significant risks or disadvantages identified that would argue against New Zealand becoming party to the Convention.” I commend the Government for continuing to take forward this legislation.

When the Hon Phil Goff was in Oslo to sign the Convention on Cluster Munitions, which bans the manufacture, possession, and use of such weapons, he had this to say: “Cluster munitions have left a deadly legacy, maiming and killing thousands of civilians, a great many of them children, often long after the war in which they were deployed was over … The tragic consequences of a million unexploded bomblets in Lebanon as a result of the Hezbollah-Israeli conflict spurred us to tackling the issue of munitions which have unacceptable consequences for civilians … It is essential to bring the use of cluster munitions to an end.” That is important.

I support our ratification of this important convention to reduce the incidence of this weapon of destruction, for it is the biggest advance since the Ottawa Convention on landmines. It is a step towards disarmament, democracy, freedom, peace, and the rule of law. As a member of the international council of Parliamentarians for Global Action, I welcome this bill, for it is something we have long campaigned on. It is always important that I carry with me the views of New Zealand in attending such meetings, for we are recognised for the contribution that we make as a small nation State to disarmament, the rule of law, better Government, and democracy. Kia ora. Tihei mauri ora!

Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM (Green) : Let me state from the outset that the Green Party supports the general thrust of this proposed legislation to ban cluster munitions, and we will be voting for the referral of the Cluster Munitions (Prohibition) Bill to the select committee. We have some views that we should like to share with this House, and we encourage the Government to consider amending the draft as it proceeds through the House to adoption. We look forward to the opportunity for discussion in select committee, but in this first reading it is appropriate, I believe, to advance a few broader reflective points.

The ban on cluster munitions, as with the ban on landmines, is an important part of humankind’s move towards making military conflict more civilised, or at least a less uncivilised activity than before. The treaties on these two types of munitions strengthen the normative framework to that end. The treaties are the twins of two parents in positivist humanitarian law: the Hague convention of a century ago, which addressed the possession of certain weaponry, and the Geneva Convention of half a century ago, which addressed the treatment of combatants. Both treaties broke new ground in this respect. A quarter of a century ago, another convention within the same normative framework banned the use of certain conventional weapons that might be excessively injurious, or might have indiscriminate effects. By the 1980s we were getting more serious and specific about what was permissible and what was not. Nonetheless, the corollary is that in the area of armed conflict certain other weapons that are selective in their application, and whose injurious effects are not excessive, but simply lethal, grace our contemporary level of civilisation. So our relatively enlightened world of international law co-exists with our relatively benighted world of armed conflict.

Be that as it may, we painstakingly plough our way towards a more humane means of controlled carnage among nations. In force since 1983, the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons banned five categories of weapons, but failure to reach universal agreement on banning all landmines prompted some countries to take an alternative negotiating route, resulting in the seminal agreement on landmines at the initiative of Canada. This latest treaty banning cluster munitions followed the same route, this time on the initiative of Norway. The political significance of these two treaties goes beyond their own subject focus, for the means through which they came into existence reflects the new trend in international relations and the strengthening of global security. This involved the perhaps unprecedented phenomenon of the formulation of international law on the initiative and through the leadership of the middle powers, leaving some of the major powers ensnared in the 19th century mindset of following when they are ready.

This is novel. It used not to be this way. That trend will reach its apotheosis when a nuclear weapons convention is negotiated and brought into force by the non-nuclear weapon States, thereby introducing a new norm of international relations that will be accepted and respected by the pariah nuclear weapons States themselves. When that happens, it will be not only the meek who inherit the Earth, but also the enlightened, presuming there is a tolerable Earth to inherit.

The process of negotiating the Cluster Munitions Convention was purposeful and swift. Following their indiscriminate and, indeed, irresponsible use in the Middle East in 2006, negotiations commenced in February 2007 and were completed in May 2008. I commend our New Zealand diplomats, and in particular Ambassador Don MacKay, for their skill and devotion in sharing the leadership with Norway, Ireland, and others in this complex and sensitive process. That included the successful fourth negotiating session in Wellington in February 2008. Now we must move expeditiously to implement the convention in domestic law. The convention was signed by some 100 States and will enter into force when ratified by 30. Some 15 have ratified already and it is important and appropriate that New Zealand ratify as one of the 30 to bring it into effect.

I ask the House to allow me also to advance a point pertaining to the international treaty on which the bill rests. It is our conviction that there is no place in the 21st century for withdrawal clauses in contemporary disarmament treaties. The international community of States is slowly but surely transforming into a global community of peoples. It is they who are demanding progress and making the global community safer, more secure, and more predictable. That is not achieved by allowing States’ parties to withdraw from treaties that ban inhumane weapons at will. The days of untrammelled national sovereignty of the Westphalian kind, when States could enter and withdraw from any treaty on a whim or pretext, are gone. Today we have a hybrid system of international relations where the vital interests of all countries, and the vital interests of humanity, are inextricably married.

Weapons of this inhumane kind are now regarded as unacceptable in customary international law. Prohibition of such inhumane weapons may perhaps be seen today as a peremptory norm of the global community. The social fabric of the global community today imposes natural obligations upon States that cannot be shed. Such obligations derive purely from membership of the global community and they cannot be revoked. When acknowledged in treaty form in the 21st century there should be no pretence of any right of reservation or of withdrawal.

There are a number of questions and possible suggestions for improvement pertaining to the bill that in the Green Party’s judgment it may stand to benefit from. These include issues of transit, divestment, definition, training, and interoperability. It is our intention to pursue these in the select committee and we look forward to cooperating with colleagues in the Government and other parties to that end. We support this bill being sent to a select committee for consideration.

JOHN HAYES (National—Wairarapa) : It is a great pleasure to be in the House this afternoon engaged in a dialogue between parties in which everyone agrees on the issue and on the direction in which we are headed. I think that is because everybody in this House shares a vision for a just, secure, and sustainable world. They also know that cluster munitions have inflicted unacceptable harm on civilian populations, and many, many countries have seen their deadly effects.

The legacy of contamination resulting from cluster munitions failing to detonate is huge, and it is civilians who are killed and injured by unexploded cluster munitions. For a period, brightly coloured cluster munitions were dropped, and these bright colours were attractive to children, who fiddled with them and then lost their lives. Decades after the use of cluster munitions in battle, people are still being killed and maimed by them. The tragedy of lost lives and of horrific injuries is evident right across the world from South-east Asia to the Balkans, and from Africa to the Middle East. Unexploded munitions also represent a huge obstacle to post-conflict communities seeking to rebuild their lives. Economic reconstruction and social recovery cannot take place until the explosive ordnance is cleared and destroyed; the task of clearance is a huge and daunting challenge.

In relation to New Zealand’s involvement in this exercise I particularly commend the Leader of the Opposition, Phil Goff, for his work in this process when he was the Minister for Disarmament and Arms Control, because the reality is that if the Minister is not pushing an issue, the resources will not flow to deliver this sort of outcome. I commend the team of people—because it will have been a team of people—in the ministry in which I used to work, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, for its excellent work. The whole ministry, engaged at all posts across the globe and in many of the divisions in Wellington, will have pushed this issue to the outcome that has now been achieved.

I think this exercise shows that New Zealand’s commitment to working with others to stop the human cost of cluster munitions has not been inhibited either by our size or by our remoteness from the problem. Out in the field New Zealand has sent teams of clearance experts from our Defence Force to help clear the estimated 1 million cluster sub-munitions that littered southern Lebanon after the 2006 conflict. Earlier our Defence Force personnel worked for many years in Laos, Cambodia, Mozambique, Angola, and Afghanistan clearing landmines and unexploded ordnance. The aid agency NZAID has provided support to rehabilitation programmes to assist the victims of unexploded ordnance, including unexploded cluster sub-munitions, in affected countries in South-east Asia.

But now in this House we are putting a fence at the top of the cliff by referring the Cluster Munitions (Prohibition) Bill to the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee, which I chair, and by the fact that we have signed up to the Convention on Cluster Munitions. The committee looks forward to receiving this legislation; it will process it as quickly as it can. We are doing so to put a fence at the top of the cliff, not an ambulance at the bottom.

We need to eliminate the use of cluster munitions where they have an unacceptable effect on civilian communities. When these bombs are dropped—and people tend to overlook this—they have a very wide spread. A cluster bomb can cover an area the size of roughly two to three football fields. That can cause a huge amount of damage. They cause particular damage to civilian communities, first, because of that big spread, and, second, because the unexploded bomblets remain dangerous for decades after the end of a conflict. Nobody in this House will support the sort of damage that these weapons do; in today’s 21st century the damage is just unacceptable. We have to stop the production of these weapons, the spread of these weapons, and the use of these weapons.

I think that this legislation will progress very quickly through our Parliament and through the select committee process, and as the chair of the select committee I look forward to pursuing that objective. Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker.

Dr PAUL HUTCHISON (National—Hunua) : Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, for the opportunity to speak on this very sobering Cluster Munitions (Prohibition) Bill. Cluster munitions have dealt a horrific toll on many people in many countries, especially over the last 30 years.

• Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.

Dr PAUL HUTCHISON: Prior to the dinner break I was saying how excellent it is that the House is unanimous in supporting this very important and sobering bill, known as the Cluster Munitions (Prohibition) Bill. It is appropriate to acknowledge the part played by the Hon Phil Goff in the proceedings leading up to this bill. I understand that prior to both the Dublin and the Oslo conventions a large international meeting was held here in Wellington, and that was very useful in ensuring that the technical aspects of this bill were worked out.

I think it is important, and possibly salient, to think back as far as the First World War, the famous “war to end all wars”, when mustard gas was used indiscriminately. One might say that, undoubtedly, these cluster munitions indeed have an indiscriminate effect on the population, not only immediately but for many years to come. It is almost ironic to think that it was during the First World War that that famous novel All Quiet on the Western Front was written, a novel that was one of the first to deglorify war as a way of sorting out humankind’s differences. It was only after that war, during the Second World War, that the spectre of bacterial warfare and other forms of equally horrific ways to hurt humanity arose.

Of course, the antecedents of cluster bombs occurred as far back as the Second World War. It does not say much for the evolution of our species to sort things out if this is the way that we have gone, although I think we can celebrate the very fact that today Parliament is unanimously supporting this bill. It will indeed enable New Zealand’s ratification of the Cluster Munition Convention, which was adopted in Dublin on 30 May 2008. The bill establishes a wide-ranging prohibition on the use of cluster munitions that cause unacceptable humanitarian harm.

As has been pointed out, these cluster munitions usually go with aircraft, and there is a whole spectrum of size. I understand that they can cover up to 18 square miles of area. The whole of Wellington could be covered in a particularly indiscriminate way. But the Convention on Cluster Munitions is a new international treaty that bans the use of these munitions that cause this unacceptable harm. In addition, it prohibits the development, production, acquisition, stockpiling, retention, and transfer of the munitions. It requires stockpiles of the munitions to be destroyed within 8 years, although there are certain exceptions, and it requires State parties in a position to do so to provide international cooperation and assistance to State parties affected by these munitions.

I think it is important to point out that, on being ejected from the aircraft or the missiles, they can scatter into literally hundreds of smaller bombs—sometimes the size of lemonade bottles—and create incredible damage. The International Movement of the Red Cross and the Red Crescent has called it a “persistent humanitarian problem”. Most of the cluster bombs’ bomblets are meant to explode on impact, but, again, a credible estimation of the proportion that does not do so comes to about 30 or 40 percent—again, according to the international Red Cross movement. That means unexploded bomblets lie scattered across the target area, often exploding only when handled or disturbed. Again, I understand that one of the widest areas of use was in Laos, after the Viet Nam War, and that today it is extraordinarily difficult to travel through a huge area in that country without fear of losing limb or life because of these cluster bombs.

In early 2008 a US State Department representative called it “an absolute moral obligation” to rid a battlefield of unexploded ordnance after the battle. I note that that was one of the points that my colleague the Hon Wayne Mapp made—that in many respects this is a very important moral issue. In rebuttal, the Acting Assistant Secretary for Political Military Affairs for the United States Department of State, Stephen Mull, said that the US was attempting to solve the problem through a disarmament body called the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons—or the CCW—which meets in Geneva and comprises major military powers and military trade producers. Unfortunately, at this stage of events I understand it has not made any significant progress. He defends the United States’ position by saying that at this stage cluster munitions are regarded as an important part of its defence strategy. But, undoubtedly, as other speakers have mentioned, these munitions were used in the 34-day war in Lebanon in 2006, where it is estimated that Israel dropped in the order of 4 million bomblets—1 million of which have probably not exploded.

I will end by saying that New Zealand has a very strong record in terms of similar complementary legislation that it has supported. On the other hand, with regard to this convention, we are supporting many countries like Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom, and many of the NATO countries, but notably, at this stage, the United States, Russia, China, India, Pakistan, and Israel have not yet signed up. Today’s bill is the start of a process that does need to be completed, hopefully, by the full international community signing up sooner rather than later. Thank you, Mr Assistant Speaker.

PHIL TWYFORD (Labour) : I rise to speak on the first reading of the Cluster Munitions (Prohibition) Bill. Labour supports the bill because it will save lives, because it will prevent civilians from being maimed, and because it will add another valuable international humanitarian law. It will set the rules of war that protect civilians, and make war a less barbaric thing than it otherwise is. We support the bill with pride, because it was New Zealand that played a leading role amongst a group of nations that spearheaded the Convention on Cluster Munitions. It was the Hon Phil Goff, the then Minister for Disarmament and Arms Control, who led that effort.

Cluster munitions are blights on the planet. When used in populated areas they do not discriminate between civilians and military, and their unexploded spawn lie on the ground for decades, maiming and killing thousands of civilians. According to the UN, 40 percent of the victims are children. Consider a firsthand account of a young man in Laos: “One day in 2003 I took my two boys down to the river to go fishing. I found a cluster bomb in the water and picked it up because I wanted to use it as an explosive, to blow up in the river so that we could catch more fish. But it went off in my hands and blew off my arms. Now we are getting poorer because I lost both my arms and I can’t work to support my family. I’m lucky at least, because they sorted me out with one artificial arm. My right arm was blown right off by the explosion and they had to amputate my left arm twice, because it was infected after the first amputation …. The bomb also blew up right in my face and eyes. I couldn’t see anything. My sight was blurry until I went to hospital again in 2005, when my relatives had saved up enough money again to pay for the operation. My wife and the family earn all the money to support us now. One of my sons had to leave school so that he could help my wife. He’s only 15. I help as I can. I look after the vegetables and sweep the house. I help my wife in the fields a bit but I am not much use.”

What are cluster munitions? They are weapons that scatter explosive submunitions across a wide area. Concerns have been raised about cluster munitions since the 1960s and 1970s when, in the space of a decade, the United States dropped millions of cluster bombs on Viet Nam, Cambodia, and Laos. In Laos over 260 million cluster submunitions were dropped. An estimated 80 million of them remain active and continue to claim victims four decades later.

Since World War II, cluster munitions have been used in 33 conflicts—most recently by the Russians and Georgians in South Ossetia. Large numbers of cluster munitions were used by France, the US, and the UK in the first Gulf War, and by the US and the UK in the 2003 invasion of Iraq. In 2006 Israel dropped more than 4 million sub-munitions into southern Lebanon in the course of a few days.

I do not propose to reiterate the effect of this bill and its various clauses; colleagues who have spoken before on the bill have done that. I think it is interesting to ask whether the bill will make a difference and whether the Convention on Cluster Munitions will make a difference. Cynics might say that the convention is just a bit of paper, that war is war, and they might ask how the convention can make a difference. But I believe that there is reason to think that the convention, and the bill, will make a difference. Already, 96 countries have signed up to the convention, 35 of which are countries that have used, produced, stockpiled, or exported cluster munitions. Of 28 NATO members, 20 have signed up. Fourteen of the signatories are countries that themselves are affected by cluster munitions.

The convention is off to a good start, and there is every reason to believe that, like the Ottawa Mine Ban Treaty, the Convention on Cluster Munitions will significantly reduce the use of cluster munitions. It will stigmatise their use so that, over time, this development in international law will lead to the complete elimination of cluster munitions.

Over the past decade, under the Mine Ban Treaty, the use of landmines has dwindled to use by a handful of non-State actors, rebel groups, and one nation State, Burma, which continues to use landmines against its own people. When, as activists, we began to campaign for an international treaty to ban landmines in the mid-1990s, that kind of success was unthinkable.

It is sometimes said that politics is war without weapons. The inverse is probably true, too. War is intensely political, especially so in the modern era when wars are fought and broadcast on live TV. The power of international law rests as much on its ability to articulate the ethics and morality that guide human behaviour as its ability to provide an enforceable code.

During the Israel and Hezbollah conflict in southern Lebanon in 2006, my colleague David Shearer was the UN humanitarian coordinator in Lebanon. David recalls the political storm that broke out when the United Nations emergency relief coordinator Mr Jan Egeland publicly referred to Israel’s use of cluster munitions and its indiscriminate bombing of southern Lebanon as “amoral”. The Government of Israel was outraged, and the world was outraged by the deed being referred to.

We talk too much, perhaps wishfully, of New Zealand’s ability to punch above its weight when it comes to foreign policy, but New Zealand’s contribution to the Convention on Cluster Munitions is an example of a small nation working strategically with others, both nations and civil society, to achieve its ends.

Under the leadership of the Hon Phil Goff, New Zealand was an early supporter of diplomatic efforts to achieve a ban on cluster munitions. When the UN’s consensus approach failed the idea, New Zealand and 25 other nations called for an international agreement to outlaw cluster munitions. Norway led the charge, hence the Oslo process, and New Zealand was one of seven nations in the core group that led a series of negotiating conferences. One of those conferences was hosted right here in Wellington in February 2008, and 106 countries took part. It was the last, and the most contentious, of the diplomatic conferences leading up to the Dublin negotiations. The Hon Phil Goff and Ambassador Don MacKay stared down a group of recalcitrant nations, including the US and the UK, our former allies, who wanted to water down the text. Finally, all views were incorporated in a compendium text, and, over 2 months, between Wellington and Dublin, a clear consensus emerged in favour of a strong and comprehensive prohibition on cluster munitions.

One of the features of the Oslo process, like the Ottawa Mine Ban Treaty, was the active partnership between civil society and like-minded Governments. The Aotearoa New Zealand Cluster Munition Coalition brought cluster bomb survivors and de-mining experts to Wellington to take part in the events around the negotiations. They injected real-life experience into the process. Civil society brought the conscience of global public opinion into the diplomatic negotiations. They helped to make it happen.

Labour looks forward to discussing the bill at the select committee. There are several textual matters we would like to address. We would also like to see a provision inserted in the bill to prohibit investment in the manufacture and sale of cluster munitions, in line with the decision of the New Zealand Superannuation Fund. But those are relatively minor matters in the scheme of this bill, which Labour supports unreservedly.

Finally, I acknowledge the Hon Phil Goff for his leadership in this matter; my friend Marian Hobbs, former MP and a former Minister for Disarmament and Arms Control; the work of Ambassador Don MacKay and the officials of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade; Mary Wareham, who is in the gallery today—a New Zealander, a campaigner, and an activist for Human Rights Watch, Oxfam New Zealand, and other organisations—and who coordinated the work of the Aotearoa New Zealand Cluster Munition Coalition; and the Minister for Disarmament and Arms Control, the Hon Georgina te Heuheu, for her commitment to bringing the bill expeditiously to the House. Nō reira, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, kia ora mai anō tātau.

TE URUROA FLAVELL (Māori Party—Waiariki) :Tēnā koe, Mr Assistant Speaker, tātau katoa kua hui mai i roto i te Whare kia ora tātau katoa. Tātau mā mō era o tātau kei te rapa haere i tētahi kaupapa kia taea ai e rātau te pōti mō tēnei pire, ko tāku ki a rātau me korero rātau ki ngā mōrehu, arā, ko ērā kua noho ā-kiri mate, kua noho ā-whānau pani rānei nā te pakūtanga o te matā, ko ērā ka noho i raro i te kākahu o māuiui, o mamae mō te wā roa kia tae atu ki te ora, kō ērā ahakoa kei te ora, he rahi nga mate taumaha ā-kikokiko, ā-hinengaro hoki kei runga i a rātau. I te tau 2007, nā te Rōpū Hauā o te Ao i tohu nā te pakūtanga o ngā matā whakawhāiti e 13,306 ngā tāngata i mate kia hemo. E hoa mā kātahi nei te kino mai o ēnei momo pahū. Ka pakaru mai ngā kongakonga maitai, ka werohia ko te tinana o te tangata, ngā ringaringa, ngā waewae, ngā whatu inā te kino o te weriweri. Ka ngaro te kaimahi o te whānau. Ka noho ngoikore te hapori i te mea e kore taea e te hunga whara, te whai wāhi ki te mahi i tāna mahi i mua. Nā, i tua atu i tēnā ka pirau haere te whenua, te wai hoki nā ēnei momo mate. Nā, ko ngā pahū kāre anō kia pakū mai, ka noho huna i te ākau, ā, ka kitea e te tamariki. Ko tōna mutu mai, ko mate.

Ko tā Te Pāti Māori, he titiro, he wānanga he aha te pai, te kino rānei ka tau ki runga i a tātau te tangata. Koinei te take i puta tā mātau tono kia whakaiti ngā whenua katoa i ō rātau utunga ā-pūtea nei mō ngā mahi hōia. Ko tētahi o ngā tohu whakahē pakanga i mau ki runga i ngā kākahu he kupu nā Lyndon Johnson. Kātahi te tangata nei. Koia tērā ko te Perihitini i Amerika i te wā i piki haere te kaute o te hunga i haere ki Whitināmu.

Ā kāti, ka hāngai te titiro o tēnei pire ki te tohu takanga hē o te tangata o tēnei whakatipuranga. Me kī, ko tā tātau i ngā whāinga ki te Convention on Cluster Munitions i tohungia ai i tērā Tīhema. E 94 ngā motu i haina i taua tiriti. Ko tā ngā whenua, ka kore rātau e āwhina i tetahi ake hai whakapakū ēnei momo pahū, ko tā rātau ko te akiaki kia kore ai tētahi e tuku kia pahū ai ēnei pahū. I roto i tērā kāhui, ko Tiamana, ko Wīwī, ko Hāpani, ā, me Afghanistan. He mea miharo tonu tēnei. Nā David Miliband, te hekeretari o te Manatū Aorere o Ingarangi, i whakatakoto he kaupapa hou ao whānui mō te tiriti. E hoa mā, he tino ariā tēnei. Ko te pai i tēnei wā ko te tautoko a Niu Tīreni i tēnei kaupapa hou mō te ao whānui.

Ka maumahara tātau ki te marama o Hepetema i te tau 2007. I taua wa e 137 ngā whenua o te ao i haina i te whakapuakitanga o nga iwi taketake o te ao. Mai i taua wa, he nui noa atu ngā whenua kua whakatinana i taua kaupapa. Kua hanga hanganga ture wētahi. E tūmanako ana mātau kei te haere mai te wā ka whai kaha a Niu Tīreni te haina i taua Whakapuakitanga kia Ōrite ki te Nuinga o ngā Whenua o te Ao, kia tutuki hoki ngā whakaritenga mō te ao. Ko tā mātau o te Pāti Māori kia kaua e herehere i te mea nei, tukua kia haere. Kei te whakaae ake mātau kia kōrero tahi ngā hoa haere o te Tiriti o Waitangi, mō ngā o te whakapuakitanga. Ā tēnā, koinei tētahi o ngā kaupapa o te whakapuakitanga. Me tika te whakapuakitanga i roto i te āhuatanga o ngā mātāpono o te tika, o te manapori, o te mana taurite, o te pono, o te mana kāwanatanga, o te whakaiti me te rangatiratanga mō ngā ritena o te tangata. Koinei te āhuatanga o ngā ritenga o te ao. He taumata tēnei e whakaaea ai tātau katoa o te ao. Kua whakaae mai ngā whenua nei kia mutu katoa te whakamahi i ngā taonga patu tangata nei.

He mea whakahīhī ki a mātau ko Aotearoa tētahi i para te ara kia puāwai tēnei kawenata. Ko tāku noa he whakanui i ngā mahi i tīmatahia ki Aotearoa nei i te hui i tū ki Pōneke i tērā Hui-tanguru ki te wānanga i tēnei take. Neke atu i te 120 ngā whenua i tae mai, ā, 137 ngā rōpū ā-iwi hoki i tae mai. E ai ki ngā kōrero, he pekanga tino whai tikanga te hui rā, he painga i roto mō ngā whakahaerenga mō te Tiriti o Waitangi. I whakanuia ngā mahi a John Vernon Head i te hui rā, koia tētahi i kōkiri i te kaupapa nei. I mate a John i te marama o Pēpuere i te tau 2007. I whakarewahia e John Head te kauhanga kore-pahū, tōna kaha ki te akiaki kia kore ai ngā Motu o te Moana Nui a Kiwa e whakaae ki aua pahū whenua. Nāna anō i whakahau ki te whakakore i te matā pahū whakawhāiti. Nā ka haere a Deborah Morris-Travers rāua ko Thomas Nash ki te akiaki i te Minita o te Manatū Aorere. I muri mai i tērā i kōrero rāua i mua i te komiti Manatū Aorere me te komiti o te Manatu Kaupapa waonga, i whakarite i ētahi hui mō te motu kia kōrero te tohunga a John Rodsted. He tangata matatau a John ki te kaupapa nei. I te tau 2007 ka whakatūria te rōpū e karangahia nei ko te Rōpū Whakawhāiti Pahū, matā, hei tautoko i te karanga o te ao ki te whakakore i aua mea weriweri rawa atu i patu nei i te tangata.

Ā kāti e te Whare, kua roa tonu nei taku whakamārama i te ara i takahia ki Oslo, kia mōhio mai tātau, nā ngā mahi, nā ngā kōkiritanga o Aotearoa kua kitea ai, nā tātau nā Aotearoa ngā wawata i whakatinana. Mai rānō mātau o te Pāti Māori e whakahīhī ana mō te tū o Aotearoa, inā a Aotearoa Karihi-Kau. Kei te kite mātau, ka whai mana tēnei Kawenata, ā, kia pānuihia ko tā tātau he kōkiri kia āiō te noho i tēnei ao. Engari, i tua atu i tērā, he whakahīhī nō mātou, anei a Aotearoa e kī nei kua whakamanahia e rātau te kaupapa hou mō te ao whānui. Nā, i muri mai, kia mutu motuhake ngā mamae o ēnei matā, pahū, taonga weriweri. Nga mamae ka noho ki runga tangata i te wa ka maringi mai i te rangi, ka whakarerea ranei ka noho huna i ro, i runga whenua i mua o te pahutanga hei patu tangata. Ahakoa kāre a mātau matā whakawhāiti, kai te hari koa mātau ki te whakapuaki i ō mātau whakaaro. Nō reira e te Whare, koinei te tautoko o te Pāti Māori ki tēnei o ngā pire. Tēnā koutou, kia ora tātou.

• [An interpretation in English was given to the House.]

[Greetings to you, Mr Assistant Speaker, and to us all gathered here in the House. Greetings to us all. I say to those of us searching for a reason to vote for this bill, talk to those who survived cluster munitions incidents—those who remain victims of skin ailments, who have lost a loved one due to mine explosions, those destined to a life of long-term treatment and rehabilitation and who live with severe physical injury and psychological trauma. In 2007, Handicap International confirmed 13,306 deaths and injuries due to cluster munitions. The devastation created by the cluster bomblets was lethal. Fragments of jagged steel released were impaled in the body of the person and caused injuries to hands, feet, and eyes, with the outcome being severe disabilities, and families deprived of their breadwinner. Communities become vulnerable as surviving victims are unable to play the role they formerly played. If that is not enough, farmland and water sources can deteriorate due to submunition contamination. Unexploded bomblets become hidden killers, submerged around coastlines just waiting for innocent children to discover. Death is the outcome in the end.

The Māori Party’s role is to examine and debate what good or evil tidings will come upon us as people. This, in essence, was the rationale behind our call for nations to decrease their expenditure of GDP on military activity. One of the anti-war badges that seems to say it all highlights a quote from Lyndon Johnson: “The guns and the bombs, the rockets and the warships, are all symbols of human frailty.” Lyndon Johnson, of course, was speaking from a position of authority. It was during his watch as US President that the numbers of Americans enlisted in the Vietnam War escalated.

This bill, then, seeks to target the latest symbol of human failure, in implementing New Zealand’s obligations to the Convention on Cluster Munitions signed last December. Ninety-four countries signed that treaty and vowed not to assist others to use cluster munitions but rather to discourage their use. In that cluster of countries were Germany, France, Japan, and Afghanistan. That, indeed, is quite remarkable. At its signing, the British Foreign Secretary, David Miliband, set the treaty a new global norm. This is a great concept, made better this time by New Zealand stepping up to support a new global norm.

We well remember another time, in September 2007, when 137 countries agreed to set a global norm to advance the human rights of indigenous peoples. Since that time many Governments around the world have engaged with indigenous peoples to bring the vision to life. Some countries have gone as far as to introduce legislation. We are hopeful, however, that the time is approaching when New Zealand can rightfully step up to the mark, and sign up to the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, to meet the global norm. We of the Māori Party urge that this signing will be without caveat, without qualification. Of course we accept that discussions between the partners of Te Tiriti o Waitangi will be required about many aspects of the declaration. Fortunately, the declaration itself anticipates this process. Every provision must be interpreted in accordance with the principles of justice, democracy, respect for human rights, equality, non-discrimination, good governance, and good faith. Global norms are exactly that. This is an acceptable benchmark for global norms. These countries have agreed to a prohibition on the use of cluster munitions, which cause unacceptable humanitarian harm.

We are proud that New Zealand has played such a key role in the work relating to cluster munitions. I want to particularly acknowledge the work spearheaded here in Aotearoa, particularly the conference on cluster munitions that took place here in Wellington last February. That conference attracted delegates from more than 120 countries and 137 civil society representatives. The conference was described as a critical crossroads in getting through the treaty process, as the draft text was the basis for discussion. During the conference the legacy of long-time disarmament campaigner, John Vernon Head, who had passed away in February 2007 was honoured. John Head had founded the New Zealand Campaign Against Landmines. He lobbied tirelessly for the 1997 Mine Ban Treaty to be accepted across the Pacific region. And significantly, he initiated the campaign for cluster munitions to be banned. The campaign convenor, former MP Deborah Morris-Travers, and Cluster Munitions Coalition coordinator Thomas Nash, then went on to lobby the disarmament Minister . Their next step was to appear before the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee, and to organise a speaking tour of a cluster munitions expert, John Rodsted. The Aotearoa New Zealand Cluster Munition Coalition, a group of New Zealand non-governmental organisations, was subsequently established in 2007 in support of the international call to stop cluster munitions from harming civilians.

And so to the House, I have taken some time to outline the steps that led to Oslo, because I think it is so important that we take time to celebrate the difference that Aotearoa is making on the international stage. The Māori Party has always been proud of the distinctive position we have taken, globally, in being proud to be a nuclear-free Aotearoa. We see this latest legislation, in ratifying the convention, as promoting a peacekeeping role for New Zealand defence personnel in the world. But, most important, we are proud that Aotearoa is able to meet a global norm, to put an end, for all time, to the suffering caused by cluster munitions. And although we, ourselves, do not hold stocks of cluster munitions, we are proud that we have been active in the debate. And so to the House, this is the Māori Party’s support of this bill. Greetings, and thank you. ]

Hon CHRIS CARTER (Labour—Te Atatū) : Kia ora koutou katoa. As Labour’s foreign affairs spokesperson it is my pleasure to rise in support of the Cluster Munitions (Prohibition) Bill. It is rare indeed in this House to have consensus from all political parties over a piece of legislation. The viewers and listeners of Parliament today will have heard representatives from all political parties rising to support this legislation. That is a statement about New Zealand and how New Zealanders across the political spectrum feel about the impact of these perfidious weapons on people.

Somebody just tuning into Parliament TV would wonder why, in the midst of an economic recession and the many great affairs of State that a country a faces, all of New Zealand’s politicians are rising, regardless of their political party, to support this bill and are taking every one of the speaking spots available. The reason is that New Zealanders care passionately about peace and about the protection and safety of people, particularly children. We have a long tradition of being a country that has a moral foreign policy. In this particular area of the banning of cluster munitions, New Zealand has a proud record.

Like my friend Phil Twyford from the Labour Party, who was speaking a few minutes ago, I want to acknowledge some people in this Parliament, and people who have recently been here who have played a very important role in the passage of this legislation and this international agreement. First of all, I acknowledge Labour Party leader Phil Goff, who as Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade was a very active campaigner for international action on cluster munitions. I particularly want to acknowledge my old friend and now departed colleague Marian Hobbs, the former member for Wellington Central. The Hon Marian Hobbs was a passionate advocate for this issue. She spoke about it often in this House and she played a very important role in the conference that was held in February last year, which several speakers have made reference to. That conference was attended by representatives of over 100 countries and it had over 500 delegates. It was very important in terms of setting the scene for the Oslo conference, which led to the establishment of this international agreement.

I will take a few minutes to read a motion that Marian Hobbs put to this House on 8 November 2006. She moved that the House “acknowledge the unacceptable toll on civilian lives caused by cluster munitions, and the lasting legacy of these weapons in postwar situations;”. Phil Twyford, who spoke a short while ago, read an account of an individual who had suffered personal loss through these weapons. Marian Hobbs also moved that the House “denounce the indiscriminate use of cluster munitions and their use in areas where civilians are likely to suffer disproportionate casualties, and call upon the international community to set binding standards of reliability to decrease the persistent threat to civilians caused by unexploded bomblets;”. She also moved that the House “confirm that New Zealand does not currently maintain stocks of cluster munitions, has no intention to do so …”. Sadly, that is not the case internationally. As Mary Wareham, who is sitting up in the gallery and who has been a passionate advocate and crusader for this issue, would no doubt be able to tell us, there are 56 nations in the world at the moment that stockpile these weapons and another 33 that produce them.

What do these weapons do? A number of speakers, including Te Ururoa Flavell, have talked about the effects of these bomblets. The bomblets do three different things. The steel fragments, which are at the core of the small bombs, target people and can kill them at up to 152 metres from the impact. The shaped charge inside the small bomb fires a molten slug that can penetrate 5 inches, or 13 centimetres, of steel. Members can imagine what that does to the body of an individual. Finally, the other part of the bomb, a zircon wafer, has an incendiary function that spreads little burning particles, which not only burn trucks and vehicles but do terrible things to people’s bodies.

These weapons, with their three different destructive mechanisms, are incredibly dangerous. They have quite a history. They were first used towards the end of World War II when the fishing port of Grimsby in Yorkshire was bombed by the German Luftwaffe with the first cluster bombs ever used. Interestingly enough, those first cluster bombs were a forerunner of the issues and dangers we face with these munitions. They caused chaos for weeks after the bombing raid. Some 76 people had been killed in the bombing raid, but more were killed clearing the new German-designed cluster bombs from the streets and buildings of Grimsby. It was a sign of things to come.

As Mr Twyford talked about in his presentation, cluster bombs have been used in a lot of places since the bombing of Grimsby in the 1940s. The Viet Nam War was when the cluster munitions were used in absolutely great quantities, and new and more effective designs—looking at it from a bomber’s view—were developed. Laos is a really interesting country to look at to see the long-term effects of these bombs. Laos was probably bombed as part of the so-called Ho Chi Minh Trail—the Assistant Speaker Rick Barker and I well remember protesting about that bombing in our youth. Some 80 million bomblets were dropped on Laos to try to stop the flow of supplies reaching South Viet Nam from North Viet Nam.

Today, some 40 years later, some of those unexploded bombs are still going off and killing people in Laos. That is the great danger of these munitions. They do not cause just mayhem and havoc when they are first used; they have an insidious legacy. For example, 40 years later in Laos, the bomblets are still going off periodically as children go to look at a shiny object that a monsoon has revealed in the muddy rice fields or that has been washed up on the river bank. Of those young people and people who do not know what these bombs represent—and I imagine many Laotians do—there will always be some who will be attracted to this. These bombs are still going off, still killing people, still blowing up limbs, and crippling and blinding people.

The Gulf War, the war in Kosovo, the Russian use of these weapons in Chechnya, the conflict between Eritrea and Ethiopia, the war in Afghanistan, Lebanon—in all of those conflicts, cluster bombs and cluster munitions have been used, with a lasting legacy of death, destruction, and chaos.

The international community is to be absolutely commended for showing initiative in this area. New Zealand is to be commended. We are a country with a proud nuclear-free heritage. We have held our heads high internationally. We have played a responsible role in many international conflicts, and in the great issues of peace, disarmament, and being nuclear-free. These are all things that New Zealand can be proud of. We are a small country of just over 4 million people. We are in many ways the most remote land from the world’s great land masses of Eurasia, North America and South America, and Africa. But, because of the tradition this country has held for over 100 years in terms of having a population and a society that really cares about issues that affect all of mankind—all of humanity—this legislation, and the leading role that our country has played in its development, is something that all Kiwis can be very proud of.

If we could only reach a consensus on a carbon trading system, we could show leadership on climate change, as well. I will just finish my speech today by making an appeal to all parties in this House. This issue is an important one in terms of its impact on people. Nothing could be more important for all of humanity on our planet than global climate change. Let us see whether we can reach a consensus on that, as well.

MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National) : I am delighted to rise in very strong support of the Cluster Munitions (Prohibition) Bill, which, when signed, will add this country’s name to the list of those that have ratified the Convention on Cluster Munitions. Hopefully, if the bill has a speedy passage through the House, we will be one of the 30 nations that will bring the convention into force. New Zealand was one of the 94 nations that signed up to the convention in early 2008.

As many others have mentioned, the bill, when passed, will provide for sanctions on those who develop, use, distribute, or possess cluster munitions, and also for reporting requirements in record-keeping obligations. I do not want to get into a history spat with my colleague Chris Carter, but my information tells me that cluster munitions actually pre-date World War II. They have been around for a long time, but the Soviet Union in the 1930s deployed what were then known as “Molotov breadbaskets”, which scattered incendiary bomblets around Finland. The cylinder of the main bomb was really large—it was probably over 2 metres long—and it contained more than 100 incendiary bombs. The main bomb itself did not have an incendiary device, but it had a very large tailfin, which, when dropped through the air, caused the bomb to spin, thus spraying the smaller incendiary devices right around the Finnish continent.

In 1939 the Soviet Foreign Minister, Mr Molotov, claimed that the Soviet Union was not dropping bombs but merely airlifting food to starving Finns—hence the nickname “Molotov breadbaskets”. The Finns, being a resourceful bunch, developed improvised incendiary devices used to counter Soviet tanks that were invading their land, and called it after a drink to go with the food—hence the famous term “Molotov cocktail” was born.

Dr Cam Calder: Thank you, sir. Thank you—very erudite.

MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: The member is most welcome. The Leader of the Opposition, Dr Mapp, and others have talked about configurations where munitions devices have been used. Certainly, Lebanon in 2006 was a nadir in that respect. But the sad fact is that there have been a large number of conflicts where cluster munitions have been used. The list is a long and sad one, going back to Viet Nam and Korea, the first and second Chechen wars, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Georgia, and Sri Lanka—the list goes on.

Between World War II and the end of the 20th century, the technology of cluster munitions has become extremely advanced in terms of the volume of the devices and the width of the field across which the devices can be spread. The capacity to cause death and injury is increasing. Sadly, although necessity is widely credited as being the mother of invention, so too is war. The world, sadly, has become pretty damn good at its ability to kill and maim.

One of the other things that has happened over the last 20 years is the influence of television on war. As a younger man watching the first Gulf War in 1991, I well remember how visible and visual the conflict became. I recall General Colin Powell saying at a press conference in respect of certain intelligence information that CNN had acquired the information as quickly as he did.

Then in subsequent wars we followed munitions as they flew through the air and landed on buildings and so on. The result of that is that we in peaceful nations that are not normally exposed to the horror that war generally, and these munitions particularly, can inflict on people were exposed successively to news footage and documentaries following people like Princess Diana, other celebrities, and also aid workers doing great work, bringing the horror of what these munitions can do into our living rooms.

The passage of this legislation will not in and of itself eliminate the scourge of cluster munitions, but when a group of civilised, peace-loving nations with one voice says that even when belligerent nations come into conflict there are rules around that conflict and that those rules preclude such indiscriminative weapons, then the world might just be a bit safer. Fewer innocent civilians, particularly our young innocents, will end up disfigured, dismembered, or dead from these devices.

I applaud and congratulate those on both sides of the House who have worked on behalf of New Zealanders to achieve the progress we have made so far. But I particularly applaud those groups, individuals, and non-governmental organisations who have worked so tirelessly for many years to draw the world’s attention to the evil that cluster munitions bring. I also applaud those brave men and women of our military, and others around the world, who risk their lives to disarm these weapons. The number of these munitions is simply incalculable, and they will be around for many, many years after the effect of the convention is brought into play, if ceasing the use of these munitions is even possible. I congratulate those who are involved in the bill. I thank them for bringing it to the House. I support the bill.

• Bill read a first time.

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