Brownlee Gerry: Government Communications Security Bureau Bill — Second Reading 
Brownlee Gerry: Government Communications Security Bureau Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:606;Page:3939] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (NZ National—Ilam) 
: 
 This is a very important bill. It is not one that should be dusted over lightly by the House. Quite clearly some people do object to the Government agencies having a greater degree of authority to intercept communications or to carry out surveillance when matters that might be of harm to New Zealanders come to their consideration and there are other people who say that such organisations should not be given any greater authority than is given to any other person who claims to be a citizen of this country. Quite clearly that is inappropriate. 
New Zealanders should not imagine that because we are so far from the rest of the world we are in any way immune to the events that have in many ways overtaken the world since September 11. After all in our living history we can recall the terrorist activity that took place in Auckland harbour when the  
Rainbow Warrior 
 was sunk. Interestingly we are one of the few countries in the Western World that can say it has been attacked by the French whose Government’s view of the Iraqi situation now seems to be forming the basis of New Zealand’s current foreign policy. It is quite interesting that we should now be chasing after a country that has attacked us on our soil and be saying that France’s view of Saddam Hussein is the official New Zealand view of him and his regime. That is very disappointing to members on the Opposition side of the House but it does not stop us from supporting this bill quite fulsomely. 
My colleague Dr Mapp has outlined all the reasons that this bill should be supported and he spoke particularly about clauses 14 and 17. I make the point that clauses 15 and 16 deal with the right of interception—in other words whether an agent of the Government Communications Security Bureau needs to have a warrant or an authorisation if he or she is engaged in some sort of surveillance. It seems to me that the suggestion that an agent does need that runs almost counter to the idea of catching some people. The moment that we start looking for a court to issue a warrant we are setting up a paper trail. The people whom we are looking at or whom we want this agency to look at—the people who would come under the scrutiny of that agency—do not have high levels of integrity. I do not doubt at all that they would have mechanisms to find out that someone was on their trail. I am not at all sure that it is necessary for some of the provisions to be in this bill requiring the Government Communications Security Bureau to have a warrant in every case. 
Nor do I think it necessary that the Government Communications Security Bureau has access or authorisation from a court to intercept transmissions that occur via the computer networks that operate throughout the country. The fact is that crime—not only domestic crime but also international crime—has become much more sophisticated these days and we are not immune to that. It is important that we have as flexible an arrangement as we can for an agency that is supposed to be acting on our behalf and that does act on our behalf in all those matters. 
However I would like to raise one small matter: the working hours of the Government Communications Security Bureau. I understand that it closes down on public holidays. 
John Carter 
: Huh? 
GERRY BROWNLEE 
: Yes that is right. If we pick up the phone and ring the Security Intelligence Service or the Government Communications Security Bureau on a public holiday the staff of those organisations do not answer the phone. 
Rodney Hide 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I do not mean to interrupt the member on his feet but I guess I am. I am not sure whether he wants to be passing out that information. I ask him to consider whether that is in the best interests of New Zealand. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich) 
: I thank the member for raising that matter. It is not a point of order. 
GERRY BROWNLEE 
: I thank Mr Hide. He has stopped me mid-revelation and I will take that matter no further. But I do want to say—[ 
Interruption 
] Well it is their fault. I have only had two occasions on which to ring one of those bureaus and it was appropriate that I did so. But I got a person on the end of the phone who was clearly there to empty the rubbish bins or clean the floor because that person had absolutely no idea of what was going on. I think frankly the organisation was plainly disrespectful of a citizen who had phoned up with a concern. I would like to think that given these extra powers the organisation is about to sharpen up its operation quite considerably. There have been two occasions when I have had to call on the bureau; the other occasion was on Anzac Day. 
Why should a member of Parliament who receives a communication from someone who might be a nutter but who feels an obligation to pass on that information end up being given the run-around by a cleaner or a general office flunkey in one of those organisations? That is quite unacceptable. I have no doubt that had an incident resulted some terribly plausible reason would have been given for that particular response. I can only assume that as a Government agency that bureau is very much tied into the employment policies promoted by the Government and therefore it does not have staff working on public holidays—or at the weekends for that matter. If some of my colleagues find it strange that I have revealed that I think I have done the nation a favour. 
This bill is about empowering those people. I do not want my comments to demean them in any way; it is just that that has been their general modus operandi when it comes to dealing with me. I say respect is a two-way street. 
Dr Wayne Mapp 
: Wanting to intercept your communications. 
GERRY BROWNLEE 
: I have no doubt that they are and I welcome that because if they were doing their job that would clear out some of those African banking scams that seem to land on MPs’ computers about every 2 seconds of the day. But clearly the security organisations do not seem to be very interested in those sorts of things and neither should they. They have more important things to be dealing with. 
I think most members would be aware of occasions where these organisations have undertaken some interception work and have ended up with good intelligence that we have been able to pass on to our allies. Of course just who our allies are at the moment is an open question. This House has not had the opportunity to discuss our international relations in the current unstable environment because the Government is very very uncertain about what it is going to do. The Prime Minister it would seem is on an extended job interview for a high position with the United Nations. She does not want this Parliament to offend some of our so-called friends around the world. I state again that France the only country that has ever attacked us and perpetrated a terrorist activity on our soil is now the country that appears to be dictating our foreign policy. I know that the Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade is very uncomfortable with that but unfortunately he does not have sufficient sway inside the Government to be able to require the Prime Minister to let the Parliament have its voice on these important issues. In fact an opportunity that was given to the Government today to have a debate on Thursday was met with a blanket no from the Government. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: What about Wednesday? 
GERRY BROWNLEE 
: The Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade who is making a rare appearance in the House on one of the days when he does not get a stamp on his passport asks about Wednesday. Wednesday is members’ day the day when the Opposition puts forward bills to tidy up the mess that the Government finds itself in. The Government has most of the parliamentary time at its disposal and members have only about 6 hours every 2 weeks for their work. Yet the Government is saying that it would be appropriate for members to give up their time for such a debate because the Government is too busy passing wine bills racing bills shop trading bills and various other bits and pieces on the Order Paper. It would seem that the Government is terribly frightened of getting into a debate on an important issue like New Zealand’s foreign relations. 
The National Party is delighted to support this bill. It is necessary. We will be casting our votes accordingly at the end of the debate.