Bindra MaheshMAHESH BINDRA (NZ First): I rise on behalf of New Zealand First to speak to the Enhancing Identity Verification and Border Processes Legislation Bill. At this stage I would like to acknowledge the work done thus far by the members of the Law and Order Committee the staff who are allocated to us to assist us and the advisers who advised us very efficiently on legislation that to me appears to be not foolproof but very close to becoming very efficient legislation.This bill was prompted by the findings of an inquiry into Phillip John Smith's escape on 6 November 2014 while on a 74-hour temporary release from Spring Hill prison. The inquiry actually found out that there were various issues with regard to the processes that were followed to assess that prisoner's suitability for a 74-hour temporary release. This escape was followed by a number of knee-jerk reactions and one of those was in respect of prisoners who went out to work in industries on the Release to Work programme which has got nothing to do with the temporary release that Phillip John Smith was entitled to. It had nothing to do with Phillip John Smith. However those prisoners who were otherwise entitled to leave to prison to go out and work—and a continual outing like that would have helped them in getting rehabilitated into mainstream society—were adversely affected by this escape and they were not very happy when the prisoner was ultimately recaptured and brought back to New Zealand.This single incident caused us huge unprecedented embarrassment internationally and it opened our border control agencies and our law enforcement machinery to ridicule and criticism nationally and internationally. I quote a sentence from the inquiry report: Mr Smith passed unimpeded through immigration and security checks at Auckland International Airport." The so-called SmartGates at Auckland Airport were proven not be all that smart. Smith passed through all those SmartGates and manual controls unimpeded and unstopped. This escape was entirely preventable but the relevant agencies were smug in the knowledge that nothing could go wrong. This is the sort of complacency that the prisoner actually used and manipulated.The report is very comprehensive and detailed. It bares the glaring holes in the manner law enforcement agencies and border control agencies work with each other. We had submitted a Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) when the Drug and Alcohol Testing of Community-based Offenders Bailees and Other Persons Legislation Bill was being debated in this House. The intent of that SOP was to make it mandatory for the Department of Corrections and the police to communicate with each other while formulating regulations for their specific purposes. But unfortunately that SOP was voted down by the National members because the then Minister of Corrections was convinced that the departments did actually communicate with each other and that there was no need to make it mandatory for those departments to communicate with each other more effectively.We asked the question then and we ask it again: where was the communication and the information-sharing regime when Phillip John Smith escaped all the way to Brazil? After the escape Corrections conducted its own review into the debacle. The chief custodial officer made some pretty alarming observations and I quote him: "There was conflicting information pertaining to the risks prisoner Smith posed". This is Corrections auditing Corrections.Let us look at what the inquiry committee's recommendations are and there are quite a few. Almost all of these recommendations point out that the lack of communication amongst the agencies needs to be fixed. First and foremost this bill to some extent aims at achieving that. This bill aims to ensure a better flow of information sharing amongst various law enforcement and border control agencies and that need has arisen out of a bizarre escape—that is of that convicted murderer and sex offender Phillip John Smith. Although a bit of a knee-jerk reaction this bill hopefully will prevent similar escapes in future.During the select committee process a number of submissions were made and concerns were raised. The Privacy Commissioner had a few concerns to raise and he had a few recommendations to make. While I am not going to go through the recommendations in detail I can say that the committee considered all aspects of those submissions to arrive at what I consider to be quality legislation. What makes this legislation stronger is the fact that personal information including biometric information will be collected and shared by agencies for the purposes of preventing detecting investigating and prosecuting offences. It will also enable better management of offenders including those special care recipients special patients and restricted patients. This bill will help strengthen our border controls to ensure that these categories of individuals are not allowed to leave New Zealand without authorisation. After the passing of this bill we believe that there will be better sharing of information amongst the law enforcement agencies and our border control agencies. Agencies will gain the ability to store and share information of offenders on bail and on temporary release and of course of those incarcerated.During the course of this bill being deliberated on at the select committee there were some doubts and apprehensions raised and the intent was to ensure that the bill did not in any way shape or form affect the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act or citizens' right to privacy. One of the questions that I sought clarification about was the length of the period that the information which includes biometric information will be stored and shared by the agencies. The response to that query of mine was that the agencies will hold the information for the period of an offender's sentence. That I think is a fair approach towards it.The other issue was the security of that information. We have seen personal information being shared inadvertently by a Government agency causing serious embarrassment to both the victims and that Government agency. We cannot have a repeat of that situation and that is why we think that we must get this right every time.We have contributed in the select committee by way of our own submissions and we have supported this bill at its first reading. New Zealand First will continue to support this bill. Thank you."