Tolley Anne: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill — Referral to Government Administration Committee In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTolley Anne: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill — Referral to Government Administration Committee In Committee[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12362. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister of Police):I stand in the Chamber to support the passage of the Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill. I have to start I think by reading out and giving some context to some previous debates. I would just like to quote from the Hon David Cunliffe who rose to speak to the original legislation on 27 March 2003. He said: “I do think that the Intelligence and Security Committee deserves some commendation for this bill because it has sought to balance the need to update and modernise our communications security infrastructure legislation with the need to protect third parties from accidental eavesdropping or interception. The bill does provide a legislative basis for non-warranted non-authorised interceptions under specific certain circumstances that are set out in the bill.”Tim Macindoe: So who said that?Hon ANNE TOLLEY: That was said by the Hon David Cunliffe in the third reading of the Government Communications Security Bureau Bill in 2003. It was a very sensible contribution which unfortunately has not been repeated in this Chamber tonight. It was also interesting to hear the previous-but-one leader of the Labour Party the Rt Hon Helen Clark who in the weekend backed the Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB) bill and said: “I think the real issue is is there is a gap in the law which theKitteridge Inquiry apparently found that there was and if so how do you deal with that and do you take the opportunity at the same time to write in more controls to protect the privacy of the individual?”.I submit that tonight we are looking at a bill that actually does exactly what the former leader of the Labour Party is suggesting. In fact it addresses what New Zealand First is complaining about and even to a certain extent what the Greens are complaining about. The previous legislation that was passed under a Labour Government in 2003 had significant problems with the drafting. That created an opportunity for the GCSB toact particularly on behalf of other agencies erroneously. It was clear in the legislation that there were contradictions. The GCSB over the last 10 years has used interception powers on 88 individuals on the understanding that it was acting lawfully under the law that that Labour Government passed.What has now emerged is of course that there was a contradiction in the law and even Helen Clark the Prime Minister at the time the original legislation was passed actually admitted that that needed to be fixed. So that is what this piece of legislation in front of us tonight is attempting to do. It is a pity that we have a continual play of politics around this very serious bill. The last time that this issue was in front of the House Labour proposed the legislation New Zealand First supported it and the Greens clearly opposed it because they oppose the need for the GCSB but the Opposition was thanked for supporting the bill and recognising the importance of the security of this country.I just want to talk a little bit about some of the comments that have been made. One comment made during the politicking by Labour members opposite was that public confidence in the GCSB bill is at an all-time low. Well I would dispute that but I would also maintain that the misrepresentations by the politicking coming from that side of the Chamber have contributed to the public’s confusion about what we are trying to do here tonight. They have some responsibility for casting aside any responsibility for security for this nation in order to play politics because they are falling in the polls. I think that their leader will come to regret the stance that they have taken.I have to applaud both United Future and the Greens; the Greens in particular because they despise this law. They despise all our spying laws and they make no apologies for that. That is their philosophical position and you have to respect that. But what they have done is they have come to the Chamber and made some serious sensible suggestions not all of them we would agree with but they have at least attempted to contribute to make the bill better in their eyes.What we get from the Labour Party is that all it is interested in is having an inquiry. It is not interested in fixing the things that are wrong with the previous Act. It is not interested in closing those loopholes. It is not interested in addressing any of the issues—the legitimate issues—that have been raised about some of the legalities of some of the actions in the current Act. All it is interested in doing is playing politics and all it has proposed is an inquiry.I would like to focus on section 8 in clause 6. In the existing Act we have a very minor explanation of exactly what theGCSB’s responsibilities were. What this bill attempts to do is to set it out very clearly and to make it absolutely clear that it has three distinct functions and what those functions are. I would like to just finally concentrate on section 8C which is about the cooperation with other entities—which actually got us to the position that we are in now where the GCSB believed that the legislation gave it the legality to act as agents on behalf of. You could drive a tractor through the previous Act. Anybody and everybody could come to the GCSB and ask it to act as their agents. What this bill does now is limit those agencies to three specifically—Andrew Little: It does not.Hon ANNE TOLLEY: It does. It is quite clear. Section 8C(1)(a) mentions the New Zealand Police section 8C(1)(b) mentions the New Zealand Defence Force and section 8C(1)(c) mentions the New Zealand Security Intelligence Service. And Supplementary Order Paper 308 which Mr Dunne is putting in means that nobody else no other department no other agency can approach the GCSB and ask it to act as agents without this Parliament deciding that that is appropriate. I think that is a very sensible change and the Government will be supporting that.But I just want to make one thing clear to the New Zealanders who are listening to this debate because they are really confused. Nothing in this bill gives the GCSB the ability to spy willy-nilly on New Zealanders. If the GCSB acts as an agent for other agencies it has to have the legitimate ability to do it. So if the police go to them and ask them—Andrew Little: No they don’t.Hon ANNE TOLLEY: They do. They do Mr Little. They have to have a warrant before they can apply to the GCSB to act as their agents and then they are protected by another addition to this bill—the Independent Police Conduct Authority. So we have strengthened the requirements we have strengthened the accountability and that is what makes this a very good bill for the interests of New Zealand security.