Cosgrove Clayton: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCosgrove Clayton: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 18 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13461. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]8.Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Labour) to theMinister responsible for the Earthquake Commission: Does he stand by his statement yesterday in relation to the Earthquake Commission’s latest privacy breach “I guess when they’re dealing with that level of correspondence things can happen”?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Minister responsible for the Earthquake Commission): In the context of the nearly 3 million pieces of correspondence sent out by the Earthquake Commission yes.Hon Clayton Cosgrove: Given that the Earthquake Commission has just breached 260 customers’ privacy following a series of breaches where 98000 claims details and 2000 cancelled cheques were released should the people of New Zealand now accept that privacy breaches are a business-as-usual practice from the commission?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: What I can report to the member is that the Earthquake Commission identified a possible 263 customers who may have received incorrect information. Of 177 customers who have been corrected 11 have confirmed they have received the wrong information. That is not acceptable and I do want a better performance but in the context of 3 million pieces of correspondence being sent out by the commission I do not think this is an outrageous breach. I do think though that there was an outrageous breach earlier this week when my colleague and Associate Minister received a note inviting her to the Labour front-bench meeting with the Hon David Cunliffe.Grant Robertson: She didn’t even show up.Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: No she did not show up but I have got bad news for the member asking the question because he is not on the next list.Hon Clayton Cosgrove: I am glad he looks on these breaches with such seriousness. [Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! On the Government side of the House.Hon Clayton Cosgrove: Can the Minister confirm that the Earthquake Commission advised him on 31 March—[Interruption] Can you not hear? The Minister cannot hear.Mr SPEAKER: Order! Would the member start his question again please.Hon Clayton Cosgrove: Thank you. Can he confirm that the Earthquake Commission advised him on 31 March 2013 that the commission had identified that “170000 Excel spreadsheets”—that is approximately 141 spreadsheets per employee—“are still live some of which are located on third-party computers”; if so how can he possibly have confidence that the Earthquake Commission has the ability to protect claimants’ private and personal information?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: The issue of protecting people’s privacy through the Earthquake Commission has been a challenging one from the outset. The reality is that in the early days after the earthquake that member and many of his other cronies on the other side of the House were claiming that we were not moving—Hon Clayton Cosgrove: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I simply asked the Minister to confirm whether he had had a set of advice from his Earthquake Commission. That is what the question was—Mr SPEAKER: Order! That was not the question. It was far more elaborate than that. I am going to ask the Minister to complete his answer.Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: As I said from the outset protecting people’s privacy has been an important aspect of this work. What I will say is that in the early days after the earthquake there were many people including members of the Opposition who were saying: “Get things done faster. Move more quickly. Why is it taking so long?”. The Earthquake Commission went to aniPad-based assessment system which meant that some of the 1500 engineers who were in the field did end up holding information that perhaps they should not have had. I have asked the Earthquake Commission to ensure that the privacy of people is protected. I have to say that if any system that has dealt with 3 million pieces of correspondence is looked at there will probably be privacy breaches of this type—the number being 11 so far. As I have said earlier this week—Grant Robertson: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. That is completely irrelevant—Mr SPEAKER: Order! And the member does not—[Interruption] Order! The member does not need to interrupt. I was standing to my feet to agree with the member.Hon Clayton Cosgrove: I seek leave to table an Official Information Act request received on 3 September identifying that the Minister has received the advice I outlined in my question about the 170000 spreadsheets and the risks associated with them.Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table that particular document. Is there any objection? No.Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.Hon Clayton Cosgrove: Does the Minister recall giving a commitment to Cantabrians exactly 1 year ago today to conduct a review of the Earthquake Commission which included in its focus the “institutional structure and design of the Earthquake Commission including its roles”; if so why has virtually nothing been done to progress this review apart from it receiving a few submissions given that that review could have helped to identify solutions to protect claimants’ private and personal information?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: I did and the member is wrong to assert that nothing has happened. That review is ongoing. His problem is that none of the review documents has managed to leak to him.Hon Clayton Cosgrove: Given that the terms of reference for the review stipulated that it was to be completed “by mid-2013”—that is completion—why has so little progress been made; if there has been progress can he outline for the House exactly what that is in order to assist people and assist the commission with solutions to protect people’s privacy?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: Well for a start that is a review of the Earthquake Commission’s overall operation its policy and its cover. It is most focused on future cover. So we have of course had reviews into the privacy issues as the member knows and we have had 11 breaches recently against 3 million. Given that we had one this week against 34—Mr SPEAKER: Order! That part is not necessary to the answer.