Finlayson ChristopherHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (National): I feel it's appropriate to begin by acknowledging Wahine day. Most people in the House won't probably believe this but I was alive in 1968. I couldn't go to St Benedict's School that day because of the weather but I did go round to Seatoun Heights and—I think I was probably the only person in the House who actually did this—looked down on that beautiful ship after she had foundered in front of Steeple Rock and looked with horror on the news that night as we learnt that 53 people had died. It was a dreadful day in the history of New Zealand which is why it was appropriate that the Minister of Transport moved a motion in the House earlier today.I agree with most of what the Minister of Justice has said. Obviously I don't agree with the partisan sniping about delay but I agree that this is very important legislation and it is ripe for review. I go to 1993 when the first Privacy Act was passed—1993 was an interesting year. Jim Bolger was Prime Minister of our great country. Mike Moore was Leader of the Opposition. Helen Clark knifed him a couple of months later. And of course bearing in mind that some things change and other things never change guess who was a failed Minister at that time? None other than Mr Peters. He had been booted out of Mr Bolger's Cabinet for incompetence toward the end of 1991 and was languishing on the backbenches. As I say some things change and some things never change. But the 1993 Privacy Act was a very—Hon Tracey Martin: Is there anything to do with the bill at all? Got any information about it at all? Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON: I hear Eliza Doolittle" over there coming to the aid of Mr Peters and nothing surprises me. But the 1993 Act was passed and it really was very important legislation because it introduced for the first time certain key privacy principles. It established the Office of the Privacy Commissioner and I acknowledge at once the current commissioner John Edwards who I think is doing a very good job. In my dealings with him when I was Minister in charge of the intelligence services—Hon Andrew Little: He comes from New Plymouth—of course he does.Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON: —which portfolio the Minister of Justice is now holding with great distinction—I found Mr Edwards excellent to deal with when it came to a review of the intelligence legislation.But the Act as the Minister said has been operating for 25 years and in that time we have seen the enormous exponential growth in the internet—the rise of the digital economy—and that has simply transformed Government and as the Minister said the use of private information.That is why 25 years on it is entirely right and proper that this House should be reviewing this legislation and doing so very carefully indeed. That is why the previous Government asked the Law Commission to review the privacy legislation. In 2011 the Law Commission published its excellent report and suggested that what needed to happen was modernisation of the legislation and replacement by legislation that reflects the fact that we live in a completely different age from the age we were living in when Mr Peters was the failed Minister and the legislation was first passed in 1993.Hon Tracey Martin: Oh you just hate the fact that he's the Deputy Prime Minister don't you?Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON: Oh there she's at it again. She is such a loyal little Chihuahua. New technologies have rapidly advanced the type the quality and the quantity of personal information available to Governments and businesses and so I think this bill is—Hon Tracey Martin: We'll miss you—we'll miss you!Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON: Oh what is she saying? I don't know what she's had for dinner but she's certainly weirder than usual tonight.This bill is going to go some way to modernising our privacy legislation and will reflect these technological changes. What I like about this bill is that by and large it implements most of the Law Commission's recommendations along with some additional recommendations from the Privacy Commissioner's reports. So I agree with the Minister that the best thing we can do is get this away to the select committee and it's going to require a very careful analysis.For example I'm very interested in the information privacy principles. I think it's very important that we take a good look at those and also that we look at the complaints system because this is a hugely significant area and growing faster than most of us think. In fact I can recall some years ago reading a report—I think it was produced by Shell—which said that one of the issues that societies around the world are going to have to consider over the next 15 to 20 years is actually the death of privacy and how we cope with that. So this is not some kind of incidental piece of legislation; it's extremely important and that is why it deserves very very careful review.I want to commend the previous Minister of Justice Amy Adams who supported these reforms with her customary energy and diligence. A lot of work was done by the previous Government between 2014 and 2017 getting this legislation prepared and it's a tribute to Ms Adams that the current Minister of Justice has basically introduced her work. So in a sense it's really yet another piece of National Party legislation which has been introduced.Hon Andrew Little: That you did nothing about.Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON: And I hear the—Hon Andrew Little: Six years—six years!Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON: Well takes a lot of time to get these things right and as L.V. Martin used to say it's the putting right that counts. Privacy reform was a huge priority of the previous Government and it was a very large and comprehensive piece of work—Hon Chris Hipkins: So why didn't you finish it?Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON: —which was undertaken by the Government and I have to say in answer to Mr Hipkins' unpleasant and inappropriate comments that as a result of the hard work that was done we're now in a position where Mr Little can introduce this legislation.Now I think there are some substantial parts of work that need to be reviewed. I'd like to know for example how the reforms as to how the approved information-sharing agreement mechanisms work and whether or not we can improve on those—but I think the essence of this legislation is to update the 1993 legislation recognising the new age that we are in and making sure that the legislation balances very strong and effective privacy provisions or protections for individuals with sensible use of data and data sharing by agencies. That was an issue that has come up time and time again: can agencies of the Crown share information; and if so on what sorts of terms? Again that's an issue that has come up in my time as Minister in charge of the intelligence agencies. I'm sure Mr Little would understand that. So yes I agree with Mr Little. It's entirely appropriate for the legislation to go to the select committee. I hope that there will be good submissions on it and substantial submissions on it.The select committee under the excellent chairmanship of Mr Huo is looking at the trusts bill at the moment. I have to say one of the disappointments of the work that we're doing is that there aren't enough submissions from the law firms. I know the Law Society and some firms have made submissions but I would have thought on the issue of trusts there would have been more submissions from the legal profession. I think this is a God-given opportunity now for a broad range of submitters—not just law firms but companies and other groups—to make submissions on the Privacy Bill.As the Minister said it's a very good piece of work but the submissions process will hopefully improve it and so the sooner it gets away to the select committee the better. We support this legislation and I commend it to the House."