Hipkins Chris: Privacy (Cross-border Information) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Hipkins Chris: Privacy (Cross-border Information) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:653;Page:2350] 
CHRIS HIPKINS (Labour—Rimutaka) 
: 
 I would like to take a brief call on the Privacy (Cross-border Information) Amendment Bill. I will begin where Louise Upston left off by congratulating Simon Power the hard-working and diligent Minister in charge of the bill. I will take only a brief call because I know that the Minister is eager to get on to the next bill on the Order Paper which is also in his name as is the bill after that. Tony Ryall is allowed a brief turn on the Order Paper then the next three bills are in the Minister’s name. As a matter of fact if we count all of the bills on the Order Paper we find that 15 out of the 35 bills are in the name of Simon Power. It could be that the reason we are discussing so many of Simon Power’s bills is that a significant number of the other bills are in Richard Worth’s name and he has been told he is not allowed to participate in the debate at the moment. 
I note that this bill like all of the other bills I can see on the Order Paper was introduced by the previous Labour Government. Although Simon Power is a conscientious and hard-working Minister in charge of this bill he does appear to be somewhat advantaged by the fact that a significant number of bills in his portfolios were introduced by the last Labour Government. 
Hon Simon Power 
: Somewhat advantaged! 
CHRIS HIPKINS 
: That is right. 
This debate today is fairly topical because privacy is integral to avoiding issues around identity theft. As we have heard in the House today identity theft can apply to anybody. Politicians and members of this House are not immune to issues of identity theft. Changes in technology have made identity theft so much more possible and we saw that just this afternoon when the Government aided and abetted a right-wing blogger’s attempt to be passed off as a member of this House in order to discredit that member. I am sure that is something we would like to avoid and that we would not encourage in any way. 
The issues around privacy have been heated. I for one do not profess to be an expert on privacy issues in any way shape or form but I like the idea that any information stored about me is kept securely and will not be passed on to somebody who is not entitled to have it. I understand that private information that comes into New Zealand as a result of our trading relationships with people from overseas should also have that same protection. I like the thought that if the private information stored about me is incorrect I will have the ability to access that information and to correct it. When international trading partners and their customers are involved those rights should be extended to them also. 
I agree with Louise Upston that the environment we live in now is very very different from what it was in 1993 when the Privacy Act was passed. We do not have file cards and things like that so much any more. The information is all stored electronically and that introduces a whole range of new challenges. 
As this bill progresses through the House I will be interested in the enforceability of this law and in how it will be enforced. Again I do not profess to be an expert on privacy issues but if we look at the provisions in the bill and the powers given to the Privacy Commissioner it is difficult for us to see how some of those things will be enforced. For example if the Privacy Commissioner prohibits the transfer of a certain amount of personal information the ruling would be difficult to enforce given how easy it is in the current technological climate for information to be exchanged very quickly. 
The aim of the bill is to reduce the likelihood of New Zealand being used as an intermediary for the avoidance of other States’ privacy laws. The bill removes the current restrictions on who may make an information privacy request by enabling public sector agencies to charge for making personal information available to overseas foreign nationals by providing for the referral of cross-border complaints to the appropriate privacy enforcement authority and by establishing a mechanism for controlling the transfer of information outside of New Zealand where the information has been routed through New Zealand to circumvent the privacy laws of the country where the information originated. 
Getting our privacy laws right is important for both individuals and for businesses. Major advances in technology have changed the way in which personal data is collected stored and used. The challenge for businesses is to ensure that the benefits obtained through the use of new technology do not compromise individuals’ expectations about the security and use of their personal information. Businesses must be able to assure their customers that their privacy will be respected. Currently the Privacy Act does not allow foreign nationals resident overseas to make information privacy requests. 
Further nothing in the Act prevents data received from overseas from being transferred outside New Zealand to jurisdictions without adequate privacy protection. This means that New Zealand is unable to provide the level of assurance requested by overseas trade partners that we can fully protect their privacy and their customers’ privacy in an era of increasing globalisation and e-commerce. Our inability to give this assurance is a potential impediment to trade. 
This bill complements the privacy law review currently being undertaken by the Law Commission. It is a good bill. It was introduced by the previous Labour Government and I commend it to the House.