Davis KelvinKELVIN DAVIS (Labour—Te Tai Tokerau): My apologies if this point has already been covered but I am referring specifically to clause 13(1)—this is about the intelligence collection and analysis—which reads: It is a function of an intelligence and security agency to—(a) collect and analyse intelligence in accordance with the [New Zealand] Government's priorities;". My question is how those priorities are determined. Are they set priorities? Have they been determined somehow? Or are they determined regularly and reviewed regularly? Because it says "in accordance with the [New Zealand] Government's priorities;" my assumption is that the Government—i.e. Cabinet—would determine what those priorities would be.Another question is whether the Leader of the Opposition under clause 23 I think it is gets consulted about these priorities and whether the Leader of the Opposition actually has any input into them. Because they are the Government's priorities the question is whether it would need to collect and analyse intelligence in order to determine its priorities in the first place before it then went on to collect and analyse intelligence in accordance with the priorities. So do they need to actually get data and intelligence to determine the priorities before they get data and intelligence to set those priorities as per clause 13(1)(a)? The questions are how those priorities are determined what data and analysis needs to be gained and collected so that you can actually make a determination of what the Government's priorities are and then when you know what those priorities are whether the Government then has to collect and analyse intelligence in accordance with those priorities. For me it is just again a little bit confusing.I also have a question around clause 17 "Co-operation with other entities to respond to imminent threat". It would be interesting to know what the definition there of "threat" is. I will just read clause 17(1): "It is a function of the intelligence and security agencies to co-operate with and provide advice and assistance to a person class of persons or public authority (whether in New Zealand or overseas) that is responding to an imminent threat to the life or safety of"—and then this is paragraph (b)—"any New Zealand citizen who is overseas;". The question there is a threat by whom and to hark back to another of my pet issues whether this includes New Zealand citizens overseas who are at threat of being detained without having committed a crime such as in Australia.In fact I am dealing with a situation now with a 23-year-old podiatry student from Melbourne who has been detained without committing a crime. She has not been informed of why she has been detained. Is this an example of a sort of threat to a New Zealand citizen? Of course we know that some of the threats and dangers to people in detention centres are threats of self-harm threats of assaults and issues around mental health issues. How far will we go to protect New Zealand citizens overseas? Is a threat of detention without committing a crime one of the threats? Are we talking about threats to New Zealand citizens by overseas jurisdictions—Governments—or are we talking about threats of being assassinated or something like that by some terrorist organisation? I seek clarification of those two issues: setting priorities and the threats to New Zealand citizens overseas. Thank you."