Clark David: Border Processing (Trade Single Window and Duties) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeClark David: Border Processing (Trade Single Window and Duties) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 11 March 2014. Volume:697;Page:16527. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Dr DAVID CLARK (Labour—Dunedin North):Thank you for this opportunity to speak. Labour supports the Border Processing (Trade Single Window and Duties) Bill. We should say there are plenty of reasons that we would want to support it. The general principle of supporting the Customs Service and other border agencies on the front line is something that is hard to disagree with.I want to pick up some of the points Mr Williamson raised and also Mr Goff before him. I too have had people express concerns to me about the customs system and its adaptability. I guess the test will come in the next days because this work is supposed to become available in early April. According to the regulatory impact statement here the 15-year-old system for customs and biosecurity has a process that is under way in terms of repairing things. If I can read it for the Minister in the chair the Minister of Customs “The [Joint Border Management System] has been approved to address these issues and will be delivered in two tranches.” as agreed in November 2009. Tranche one “is planned to be available by 1 April 2013”—ah this is a year ago as I read it more closely—“after pilot-testing.” So these things are supposed to already be in place. There has obviously been a bit of slippage since this regulatory impact statement was issued. So an update on time lines from the Minister would be appreciated because we are told that this legislation is enacting it but we are told in the regulatory impact statement that it was to have been implemented already. There are in there some references if the Minister refers back to some of the challenges that are being faced by those border agencies and the cost of upgrading the system. So I would welcome any further comment from the Minister on that.We know that there is under this Government this track record of IT systems that have not worked. We have seen the ACC privacy breaches. The Minister himself referred to Novopay. In the Inland Revenue Department—the agency with which I am most familiar—we have had $50 million spent in the last year on international consultants to get to an in principle agreement that there is a problem. It is the same problem that this Government was informed about when it took office 5 years ago. The department has known for years that it has been a problem. Why it needed to spend $50 million on international consultants to tell it that there was a problem and that it needed to spend some more money on consultants to develop some business cases to show how the problem should be addressed is beyond those of us on this side of the Chamber.IT systems are bugging this Government. This Government does have a track record with these kinds of privacy breaches. They are in the Inland Revenue Department as well. There have been stories each year about the number of privacy breaches. In fact the number of privacy breaches in the Inland Revenue Department has gone up nearly 400 percent in the last year. So to say there is not a concern here about technology beggars belief when Mr Goff has sources. I have also had the same concerns raised with me Mr Goff. I am more inclined to accept your view of events on these things than a member opposite representing a Government that has an appalling track record with the implementation of IT systems. So perhaps Mr Williamson can update us on the time line and the addressing of these issues because that will be of concern to New Zealanders who are worried about our borders.The cuts in biosecurity monitoring clearance and so on are putting our borders at risk. Other speakers have referred to some of the things that have happened as a consequence. Sophisticated computer software will enable border agencies to identify relationships between people and goods by linking travel and trade data and so on. We approve of the principle of it; it really is the implementation that is the thing in question and the time frames around that. But I guess the proof will be in the pudding.