Martin Tracey: Electronic Data Safety Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMartin Tracey: Electronic Data Safety Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 18 March 2015. Volume:704;Page:2393. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]TRACEY MARTIN (Deputy Leader—NZ First): Kia ora Mr Assistant Speaker. New Zealand First had a very strong discussion in caucus about this particular bill. Originally it was the cost of the inquiry that concerned us and whether we felt it was necessary because we already knew that there were some reviews going on. So there were some reviews in the systems and the National Party members continued to repeat that that was adequate. What is unfortunate is that after those reviews more breaches happened so New Zealand First has decided that it will be supporting this bill. We would like to see it go to a select committee.There has been a very interesting series of contributions by National Party members to date. The contribution from Melissa Lee and the contribution from the member Kanwaljit Singh Bakshiwho has just resumed his seat both made it sound like we have moved into a digital world so therefore it is too bad you are just going to have to accept being hacked. That is really interesting because Melissa Lee said—and she repeated it again and again if you look at her contribution—that if somebody wants to attack you they are going to attack you they are going to steal your information. This bill is not actually necessarily all about people being attacked.Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi: This is for the royal commission.TRACEY MARTIN: Mr Bakshi just said the same thing. Apparently he has forgotten because he is repeating himself now. This bill is not necessarily about being hacked. This bill did not come out of somebody hacking information; this bill came out of Government departments dropping it—dropping it—and accidentally sending it to other people. This bill is not about each individual Government department.The members on the other side like to use the phrase and they have used it in this House today—here we go; I had better get it right—“a whole-of-Government approach”. They like to use the phrase “a whole-of-Government approach” and that is exactly what Ms Curran is suggesting in this bill. That is exactly what the purpose is. If you have a look at the last sentence of the explanatory note of the bill it says: “The Commission will also examine the agencies’ capacity to respond to breaches in the future and how best to prevent further future unauthorised access to private information.” but it is across Government departments. It is about the point of weakness. That is what we see that actually needs to be addressed here. That is what is different from Deloitte and KPMG. It is not about a single department; it is about this point of transference between departments.Since these reviews were done this Government has actually put through several pieces of legislation in the last 3 years—2012 2013 and 2014. One of them has actually been a mass collection of data of every school-leaver in this country—every school-leaver in this country. I am referring to the Social Security Amendment Bill. Every 16 17 and 18-year-old New Zealander now has under their National Student Number all their academic data sent to the Ministry of Social Development. The Ministry of Social Development then outsources this data about these young people’s academic outcomes to contracted people in certain areas around New Zealand and a risk analysis is done on every single one of those young people. How likely are they to become a beneficiary? What are their parental circumstances? Are they the child of a parent who is on a benefit? This data is all done. It has all been brought into play through the Social Security Amendment Bill and that data is now held like it has never been held before by this Government.All that Ms Curran and this bill are suggesting is that it is actually worth $4.5 million to the New Zealand public to do a commission of inquiry to have a look at the weak points of transference around this data and others because we have seen data leak out from this Government and its departments. Surely if ever there was a saying “A stitch in time saves nine” is one of them. If we keep having to employ KPMG and if we keep having to employ Deloitte to go and look at breaches when they happen for each individual department how much will that add up to? Instead of investing $4.5 million let us get the systems right across Parliament because the cloud is a reality. We know that it is here. Let us look at it in its reality and make sure the New Zealand public believes that it is safe. We urge the Government to just vote the bill through to the select committee.