Cunliffe David: Estimates Debate — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCunliffe David: Estimates Debate — In Committee[Sitting date: 01 July 2014. Volume:700;Page:19044. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Leader of the Opposition):New Zealanders have a lot of unanswered questions about our intelligence and security community. Over the last couple of years New Zealanders have been very disturbed at the lack of assurance from the current Government about the protection of their privacy online and in cyberspace. They have had grave reservations about the Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB) legislation that was passed by this Government through this Parliament and the Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Act which provides for the intercepts that support it. At the start of this debate I want to revive and reaffirm Labour’s commitment to two things: firstly on our taking office a thoroughgoing and urgent review of our entire security establishment; and secondly an absolute comprehensive and unshakeable commitment to the principle that no New Zealand citizen will be subject to blanket surveillance or any surveillance by a New Zealand security service without a judge’s warrant—no ifs no buts no maybes. That review will absolutely assure New Zealanders that there are no gaps workarounds or other exceptions in the legislation that would ever allow such unwarranted surveillance to occur.There has been a great deal of discussion about New Zealand’s security arrangements with other countries. This is a sensitive area. The Labour Party recognises that we live in a complex and dangerous world. We recognise that there is a legitimate and appropriate place for well-governed security services but we do not accept that as a member of an international agreement that governs these services we should or could give a blank cheque to our partners to use New Zealand - sourced intelligence in any way they see fit. It is absolutely appropriate that this Government is transparent with New Zealanders about the governance arrangements and policies within limits and within the need for operational sensitivity that govern the use of New Zealand - sourced intelligence.New Zealanders are rightly concerned that our security establishment is not up to snuff. Today the Government has released and it is on the State Services Commission website the Performance Improvement Framework: Review of the agencies in the core New Zealand Intelligence Community. For an unclassified document it is a remarkably interesting one. On the business strategy and operating model the reviewers say that the establishment needs to first clarify priorities and the scope of the role of the security agencies. In other words they are in a muddle. They do not know what their priorities are and they are ineffective.Grant Robertson: Who’s the Minister for that?Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE: And who is the Minister? The Prime Minister.Second it must ensure that the intelligence community works effectively together the conclusion being that currently it does not. Third it is to establish customer-driven priorities and practices. They make the point that if nobody uses their reports they are not worth producing and note that there is a huge gap between the level of interaction between community partners such as New Zealand companies and the agencies in New Zealand and their analogous agencies in the UK or Australia. It says that basic business systems are “weak and require attention. Financial and managerial control systems have not been maintained”. For goodness’ sake! These are supposed to be some of the most sophisticated agencies in the New Zealand Government and they can barely run their own budgets—they can barely run their own budgets. They are to establish a common workforce plan and ensure continued legal compliance.Well there the rubber meets the road because the GCSB could not even in its last annual report get to within about 50 percent accuracy of the number of intercepts it has actually done. It was out by a factor of two—unbelievable. The Auditor-General was called in to explain why our spies could not count to 50. It is embarrassing and the Minister in charge of the NZ Security Intelligence Service should be able to take a call right now and explain to the Committee why some of the most sophisticated agencies in the country cannot count past two hands and two feet. It is not good enough Mr Chairman and it is not good enough Minister.They are to improve the public mandate—well there is an understatement. The agencies concerned do not have one because the Government’s policies are not clear robust and transparent.Vote agreed to.