Electronic Identity Verification Bill — First Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Electronic Identity Verification Bill — First Reading 
[Sitting date: 07 February 2012. Volume:677;Page:138. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Electronic Identity Verification Bill 
First Reading 
Hon AMY ADAMS (Minister of Internal Affairs) 
: 
 I move  
That the Electronic Identity Verification Bill be now read a first time. 
 At the appropriate time I intend to move that the bill be referred to the Government Administration Committee for consideration and that that committee report finally to this House on or before 29 June 2012. This is an important bill. It is part of the Government’s framework to put tools in place that make it easier for individuals to interact with government and at a lower cost for those individuals and for the agencies concerned.  
Specifically the purpose of the Electronic Identity Verification Bill is to regulate and enhance the operation of the igovt identity verification service. Once it is fully operational individuals will be able to use that service to verify their identity via the internet for interactions where it is necessary for an agency to know who it is dealing with. Those might for example be transactions involving the paying out of money or the exchange of personal information. Currently for those types of transactions agencies usually require individuals to provide multiple documents as evidence of their identity such as passports and drivers’ licences. Individuals have to bear the cost and the time burden of applying for and supplying those documents and individuals whose identities have been wrongly used can face significant inconvenience distress and cost to rectify matters. There are costs for agencies to check copy and return those documents. In addition the use of false lost or stolen identity documents can impose considerable further costs on agencies. Another bill before this House the Identity Information Confirmation Bill will go a long way to combat the risk of fraudsters presenting false identity documents to agencies. While that bill will help with face-to-face transactions the current bill and the identity verification service within it provide a complementary role for the online environment.  
The igovt system will provide agencies with a ready-made secure process to support the provision of online services that would not otherwise be possible because of the potential fraud risks involved. It will allow individuals to avoid repeatedly having to provide physical documents to multiple agencies in order to use online services should they choose to use the service. The igovt identity verification service has been operating successfully but in a limited form since the end of December 2009. Individuals have for example been able to use the service for the online ordering of certificates and copies of records from the Births Deaths and Marriages registry which requires proof of identity. In this way the identity verification service use has to date been limited to a small community of eligible individuals for a single type of transaction. It is now time to expand the service for use by all members of the public and for the widest possible range of services so that individuals government and businesses can all realise the benefits that internet technologies offer. The Electronic Identity Verification Bill will enable this to happen.  
The bill will enable individuals to choose to verify their identity via the internet with approved agencies with appropriate controls and safeguards while also providing operational flexibility for the service to be developed over time to respond to changing technology. It is important that this significant Government service as it is expanded is duly authorised by legislation. The bill will ensure that the service can operate effectively and that appropriate safeguards are put in place and maintained. It is vital that the bill is progressed quickly. This will ensure the best use of the investments being made to develop the service and individual agencies’ online services that will rely on it.  
Clause 4 of the bill is particularly important. It sets out the principles around which the service’s operation is based. Those principles emphasise that the use of the service is optional and that individuals have control over the personal information that the service holds. Individuals will not be required to join the service. If they do choose to do so they can decide whether or not to use it for any particular transaction and agencies are expected therefore to ensure that individuals can still access their services by presenting other forms of evidence of identity should the individual wish to use that option. The bill does not impose any mandatory obligation on New Zealanders. Individuals can cancel their membership of the service at any time. The identity verification service provides authorised agencies only the minimum amount of information necessary to verify an individual’s identity through a record referred to in the bill as an electronic identity credential. The credential may be provided to an agency only with the individual’s consent. An individual may check the information before it is sent correct it or update it as necessary and monitor where the information has been sent. An individual’s identity is verified using an identifier or code that is unique to each authorised agency and this prevents the unauthorised sharing of information between agencies.  
The bill will allow anyone to use the service once his or her identity is verified to a high standard comparable to that used for the issuing of New Zealand passports. That may occur for example through checking that an individual’s identity information which includes his or her photograph is consistent with information held in other official records. The bill authorises information-matching programmes and other processes for that purpose. Children will be able to apply but those under 14 will need their parents’ or guardians’ consent. 
The bill also provides a number of other safeguards that will ensure the service operates securely and protects people’s privacy. Those protections are vital. If the public loses trust in the service it will fail. The first key protection in the bill is that it provides that agencies must be authorised through regulations to use the service. Those agencies may be in the public or the private sectors. Approved agencies must adhere to the standards for the use of the system. Secondly the bill strictly regulates access to photographs and other personal information held by the service. Thirdly the Privacy Commissioner will be able to require reports on the general operation of the service rather than just reactively dealing with complaints about privacy breaches that may be associated with the service. I am pleased that the Privacy Commissioner and her staff have been closely involved in the development of the service and this bill and that this involvement will continue. Finally the bill creates specific offences and penalties to deter abuse of the system. Courts will have the ability to ban offenders from using the service and to determine the validity of any transactions that have been undertaken using false information. Agencies will be notified if a false electronic identity credential has been used for their online services so that they may take immediate action.  
This is an important bill. It will enable individuals and agencies to realise the benefits of being able to easily verify individuals’ identity information via the internet for a wide range of services. There will be appropriate safeguards in place to ensure the service continues to be secure protects people’s privacy and is easy to use. I commend the bill to the House. 
Hon RUTH DYSON (Labour—Port Hills) 
: 
 Can I begin my contribution on the Electronic Identity Verification Bill by congratulating you Mr Assistant Speaker Robertson on your re-election to the esteemed position of an officer in this House. I say that I look forward to your reminders and support of us adhering to the Standing Orders which you know more diligently I believe than any other officer of the House whom I have known about and also to the engaging way that you respond to members during often quite difficult times. Your persona is appreciated I think by all members in the House.  
I also want to commend the Hon Amy Adams for what I would imagine is her first piece of legislation even though I also want to acknowledge her predecessor Nathan Guy because he actually did a lot of the work—not all of it. I think it is an important occasion when a Minister has her first bill introduced in the House. I can assure you that the select committee to which you alluded and to which you want to refer it the Government Administration Committee will give it rigorous attention and will ensure that it comes back to the House with every single detail considered and every concern not only looked at but also addressed and that the entire House will have confidence in the robustness of the legislation.  
Labour certainly agrees with the point of this legislation and supports its progress. No doubt there will be some issues that arise in the select committee—I do not recall any legislation that has not had that happen—but in terms of the principle I think it is a really good bill. Basically as the Minister outlined it stops people needing to provide often quite frustrating amounts of identification to a variety of different agencies. We all know that to carry numerous amounts of paperwork around with you is a pain in the neck. Actually it is quite dangerous as well. I do not think people should be encouraged to carry their passport with them all the time. Certainly overseas it is a habit that people are strongly advised against doing. You do not walk around the streets of some city with your passport in your pocket but in New Zealand that is what we require of many people—to bring in your passport or get it photocopied and then you have to go through the added tasks of getting a justice of the peace a lawyer or a member of Parliament to witness that that document is a genuine copy of the original. So you have another round of paper filling to do.  
This bill seeks to get rid of that requirement by having a little box that is controlled by the Department of Internal Affairs under the management of New Zealand Post which I am very pleased to hear about and if an individual chooses to put information in that little box they can then—again their choice—have that information shared with the agencies that they have authorised in order to provide the level of identification that is needed. I think it is a great idea. I do hope that it leads us on to further thinking and courage about how better the internet can be used to provide access to information access to services and access to voting and whatever because so often that robust verification of identification has been the barrier.  
I do not know whether it is common in other countries but I think in New Zealand we still have a lot of anxiety about where things go when you put information on the internet. I know a large number of people who still will not buy things online because they are so nervous about putting their credit card numbers into a computer because then they vanish off the screen and they do not know where they go. Someone else might get them and the next minute they will get a huge credit card bill. Actually it happens when you just leave your credit card on the counter by mistake as well. 
Hon Amy Adams 
: That’s just your children. 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: That is right or you leave your wallet somewhere where your children might get access to it. I do think there is an anxiety about where information can go. I particularly noted the point that Minister Adams made during her introductory speech that if the public loses faith in this process then the whole service will fail and I do think that is a very important point. We have to be very careful if this bill is referred to our select committee that we listen to the concerns the public have and make sure that we can provide them with the level of confidence they require because this is not a service that should fail. We need the confidence of the public and therefore we need the robustness of the service.  
We do have the absolute clarity within the legislation—I actually think it is a very well-drafted bill—that consistently throughout the process it is the individual’s choice about what information is stored and which agencies that information can then be shared with. So that is for me a primary point to make known to the public. This is not information that can be gleaned from other documents or other sources and compiled on your behalf; it is only when you have authorised it yourself that you will be able to have that then shared with agencies and then it is only agencies that again you have authorised. You cannot have any unauthorised exchange of information.  
I heard some debate over the dinner hour about this legislation where people thought that it actually allowed for data sharing between agencies which would be of benefit to the particular agencies. For example some Work and Income information may be of use to the Housing New Zealand Corporation the Inland Revenue Department or some debt-collecting agencies. There is information that if it was shared could be of use. And I know from the discussion we had over the dinner hour that some people thought that this would allow that and that is something that I will be seeking absolute clarification of during the select committee process. My reading of the bill says that that is not possible. If that was a sort of side advantage then I think we would have to be very upfront with the public. But the Minister is agreeing with my point; it is not enabled by this legislation and I am very pleased to see her nodding about that point.  
The other advantage in this legislation to me currently—and again it might be just part of the progress of the way we do things in New Zealand—is that this does not replace other ways of providing identification. So if you just do not trust the internet or if you do not want to do it for whatever reason you can still get your passport photocopied and validated and send the photocopy with the signature saying it is the correct copy off to whichever agency you have to provide that verification of identification to. So this is a progressive choice; it is not eliminating the current ways that we do things. I think that is a very good point as well.  
I was delighted to hear the Minister’s enthusiasm for the involvement of the Privacy Commissioner in this work. I do think it is very important that the Privacy Commissioner keeps on top of these issues. The ability to require the chief executive of the Department of Internal Affairs to report on any aspect of this service to the Privacy Commissioner should again give New Zealanders confidence that the information will not be misused.  
I also noted that New Zealand Post was an exclusive agency for the operation of this service which is—well I think it is fine actually but it does seem to go against the grain somewhat and I wondered whether the Minister had any particular reason. Perhaps the deputy chair of the select committee to which this bill is being referred might be able to glean some words from her about whether having New Zealand Post in that position as the exclusive agency was a considered decision whether it just happened to be that New Zealand Post was the most appropriate or up and able to do it or whether it was because New Zealand Post has been working this system this service since the operational trial began in December 2009.  
I certainly hope that we will be able to get some assurance that New Zealand Post will not be next on the block to be sold off as well because if it was that would cause the public huge concern and would I know be of worry to the Minister because then the public would lose faith if a private agency had all this information stored and perhaps was able to potentially make money out of it. We want to avoid those sorts of things and the best way to do that of course is for the Government to not sell State assets.  
The final point I want to make is that this has been operating since the end of 2009. I agree with the bill and with the comments in the explanatory note and also in the regulatory impact statement which looked at the alternatives: do we need to have a legislative framework are there alternative regulatory processes or could we just have it operating as it has been under trial with a non-regulatory option? I want to commend the regulatory impact statement; I think it is very considered and robust and it is the sort of quality this House needs. I agree with the verdict of the regulatory impact statement that we do need a robust regulatory framework. I look forward to the debate in the select committee and certainly offer Labour’s support for this bill to the next stage. 
CHRIS AUCHINVOLE (National) 
:  
May I begin as the previous speaker did by congratulating you Mr Assistant Speaker Robertson on the position that you hold as returned Assistant Speaker to the House. I am sure many other members will enjoy the careful and considered way you fulfil your responsibilities so congratulations on that.  
I am particularly pleased to follow the Hon Ruth Dyson on this particular bill the Electronic Identity Verification Bill particularly as she spoke so positively and in such a considered way about this bill. It is not new to this particular committee the Government Administration Committee it is new to me because I am a new member of the committee. I think it bodes well for the passage of this bill through the select committee to hear such a positive approach being taken by both sides of the House.  
I am very pleased to be taking a call on the Electronic Identity Verification Bill which is the latest step in National’s programme of better public services. This is an excellent step forward for online Government services and for all the reasons so far canvassed by Minister Adams and by the Hon Ruth Dyson it augurs well for the future.  
The world of technology moves very quickly and occasionally Governments are accused of not keeping up with that changing world. That criticism cannot credibly be levelled at this Government. We are rolling out high-speed broadband to schools homes and businesses across the country and we have improved our cyber security. Under the new Minister the Hon Amy Adams our communications and information technology infrastructure will continue to grow as New Zealand begins to benefit from the transformative effect of what we have achieved thus far in this area. It is appropriate that as we are transforming New Zealand with some of the highest broadband speeds in the world we also establish online Government services that match the best in the world.  
This bill establishes the Electronic Identity Verification Service. The service will be responsible for issuing individuals with an electronic identity for use across multiple Government agencies with an online presence. It does away with the need to verify one’s identity repeatedly often with original hard-copy documents or copies of those documents when dealing with multiple Government departments. As a practising justice of the peace in a rural area I can sympathise with the comments made by the Hon Ruth Dyson about the difficulty people have in obtaining verification of copies of passports and other things—it puts them to some considerable degree of trouble to get these things done in a rural situation.  
The bill’s objectives are achieved by authorising the Electronic Identity Verification Service to create electronic identity credentials. These credentials will contain limited core identity information about an individual. The core information can include the full name the gender the date of birth and the place of birth of the individual. The electronic identity credential will ensure that a Government agency with an online presence can identify individuals with a great degree of accuracy which is necessary when dealing with sensitive Government services. This is particularly the case for example when dealing with those services related to identity such as the issuing of passports.  
By centralising the verification of online service users’ identities we will not only provide a high degree of efficiency for both the users themselves and the Government agencies they deal with but also provide a consistent level of security across agencies. This whole-of-Government approach to identify verification is in line with National’s goal of providing better public services.  
The Hon Ruth Dyson did ask that I take the opportunity to canvass with the Minister why we are using New Zealand Post in particular. Basically it is a matter of providing a contract which New Zealand Post has contested for and has secured. It gives one measure of control so that we do not lose measurements of efficiency by having random providers and also it is a national organisation and most people have access to a post office service within a reasonable distance from where they live. Basically those were the contributing reasons for that choice.  
I would like now to focus on the principles set out in this bill in clause 4. These are the principles that must be taken into account by every participating agency. I concur with previous speakers when I say that it is very comforting to see the degree of preparation that has gone into the drafting of this bill because it has not avoided what we could call public perception issues which are going to be a feature of this sort of thing.  
Again I find myself agreeing with previous speakers who say that there will be public apprehension particularly perhaps amongst people who are a little older and not au fait with modern technology. I think that most of us if really pressed would find it hard to give an absolute assurance of the net being a very secure sort of organisation. Indeed most of our institutions would caution care when using it. But basically it is the controlling principles that will decide on the protocols that control this service and these are the principles that must be taken into account by every participating agency. These principles provide a strong defence in my mind against any kind of misuse of this new important tool.  
When considering an online service that involves the Government collecting personal information about individuals for use across multiple Government agencies one’s first concern must be for the security and appropriate use of that information. Information is power. Once somebody has it it cannot simply be taken away. So this bill has been structured from the point of view that in receiving that information there are safeguards over its use. I am pleased to see that any concern on that score is well and truly put to bed by the strong safeguards in this bill.  
I will quote from clause 4 “Principles” if I may: “(d) an individual’s consent to the supply of his or her personal information to a participating agency must be obtained before the Service can supply the information to the agency and even if the consent is obtained the Service may supply only the minimum amount of personal information that is necessary for the agency to act as part of a given transaction or series of transactions:”.  
The safeguards in these principles are comprehensive. They clarify that at no time will an individual be forced to use this service. Nobody can be forced or coerced to apply for an electronic identity credential and nobody can be forced to use it. Importantly—and I think this is important—no Government agency can make this the only way in which to access its services.  
The system is a good one. It will provide a high level of convenience to the users of Government services. However there will of course be individuals who prefer not to make use of it for all sorts of reasons. The principles of this bill make it absolutely clear that that decision is at their discretion and will not prevent them from accessing Government services.  
In addition individuals are entitled to check the information on them held by the Electronic Identity Verification Service and to view the usage of their electronic identity credentials. This is the level of service you can expect from most privately run online services and it is good to see that this bill will ensure that people can expect that level of service from their Government-run services.  
When dealing with online information security of information is of the utmost importance. Safeguards in this bill are comprehensive and they seem to me to be an appropriate level of security for the information that will be held. I am sure this is an area that will be thoroughly scrutinised when it comes before the Government Administration Committee and I too look forward to working on it there.  
The Electronic Identity Verification Bill brings our online Government services into the 21st century. It does so in a way that comprehensively safeguards the security and the privacy of those who use those services and for those reasons I fully commend this bill to the House. 
DARIEN FENTON (Labour) 
: 
 It is a pleasure to take a call in the first reading of the Electronic Identity Verification Bill but before I begin my contribution may I also take the opportunity to congratulate you Mr Assistant Speaker Robertson on your election as an officer of this Parliament. I look forward to you continuing your role as a fair and effective officer of this House. We have all had great experiences with you in the role and it is very nice to know that you are continuing in that. I would also like to congratulate the new Minister Amy Adams and I congratulate her on introducing her very first bill as a Minister in this Parliament. As my colleague Ruth Dyson said it is a pretty special moment. I also acknowledge the work that has gone before but well done Minister.  
Labour as my colleague has said supports this bill’s referral to the Government Administration Committee. I know that the process in the select committee will be really robust. I think that there will be a lot of interesting submissions and hopefully we will be able to return a bill that everybody can continue to support in this House.  
I was a member of the Government Administration Committee in my first term in Parliament and this is not the first time that committee has dealt with issues of identity. I was on the committee when we did the changes to accessing online information about births deaths and marriages. I remember how controversial that was—on all sides of the argument actually—and how distrustful people were about anybody collecting information particularly Government departments. So I think the committee has a big job ahead of it. There is no doubt about it—issues of identity are extremely sensitive. It is understandable because it is part of our uniqueness. It is part of who we are as human beings and it is extremely personal to every single one of us. The history of our families and our whanau and our personal information is something that we all hold on to and hold dear.  
It used to be the case that it was paper based and I really do not want to part with any of that paper-based information that I still hold from my forebears such as birth death and marriage certificates. Of course our drivers’ licences are still paper based as are our passports although I will acknowledge the work of the former Labour Government and the Hon Rick Barker as the Minister of Internal Affairs and the progress we have made with our passports. In fact I just got my new one. It is very good; it is very nice. I like the black cover and the fern. It is very beautiful and also it is somehow reassuring to know it has that electronic tag in it so that it cannot be duplicated. Somebody cannot obtain my passport and duplicate it.  
Technological developments are altering access to personal information quite radically. It has become a valuable commodity—unfortunately often to be bought and sold combined sorted profiled mined and sometimes abused meaning that the opportunities for the misuse of that information have multiplied. There have been many stories about identity fraud and the State’s role in this is that it has special responsibility for the personal information that it holds. Actually it holds personal information about almost every New Zealand citizen in one form or another. And so what this bill will do is enable a wider sharing of that information through the Electronic Identity Verification Service where individuals will have the option of verifying their identity online and in real time to participating agencies including in the future the private sector.  
Now it seems like it is an inevitable change as technology overtakes us and many people will welcome the ability for an online service. It is optional and I acknowledge that and it should stay that way but sadly I do not think it will. If we think about the development of call centres for example and if we think about the services that are provided through public services for example we now have to spend quite a lot of time on the end of the phone going through a whole lot of different numbers pressing buttons and so on and sometimes speaking to people in different countries. It is now a requirement. I read something the other day that said that the ordinary person now spends something like 14 hours a year on the end of the phone going through the various— 
Chris Hipkins 
: That’s on hold? 
DARIEN FENTON 
: That is on hold— 
Chris Hipkins 
: That’s just the IRD. 
DARIEN FENTON 
: That is just the IRD. But consider that. We are time poor as it is and here we are now obliged to follow those processes because it does save money it is more efficient and so on and there are people on the end of the phone maybe in India maybe in other countries maybe in the Philippines. But you know that is the way our lives have changed. So although we can say it is optional at the moment my fear is that it will not stay that way. It is just the inevitability of the change that we are seeing in technology.  
I do want to give a caution. I am glad there are protections in this bill for the moment but let us keep in mind the people who actually have no idea about how to go about doing something online. It is not necessarily because they are older; sometimes that is the reason. Some people do not even have access to a computer and some people do not even have access to a phone. So we have got to remember this as we go into these things and remember that not only are many of our families time poor but they are also technology poor. They are communications poor so we have to bear that in mind. For those people putting something in the envelope and walking down to the Post Office because they probably do not have a car because they cannot afford one is the only option that they have. It is the cost of living issue and I just really as I said caution that we keep in mind that not everybody is able to move with the times with the fast pace of technology as this bill indicates we will be doing.  
It is really important in this bill that there is provision for ensuing that there are protections against fraudulent applications and criminal activity. I think it will be easier if it is online. I think there are far more security checks in that than in being able to copy someone’s birth certificate as people used to be able to do and probably still can and then reinvent themselves as another person. I probably should not talk about that too much. I mean— 
Hon Member 
: Where is David Garrett? 
DARIEN FENTON 
: That is right. We have had an unfortunate example of that in this Parliament and we know what distress that caused. It really did cause enormous distress to that family. It was a very sad story actually on all counts.  
But whether we like it or not the internet as a service delivery channel is continuing to grow in importance. Statistics New Zealand reported that in the 12 months to the end of December 2009 around 2.68 million New Zealanders used the internet and that number continues to increase. Now I will own up and say I have got much more comfortable about online access to some of these things. It took me a while to trust internet banking and I am still a bit iffy about it. I still do not really believe that it is secure; however it is convenient. Often convenience in the end overtakes one’s requirement to be cautious.  
I am glad about many things in this bill. I think of the “Principles” which the previous member referred to and also in Part 2 the administrative provisions. Part 3 I think will receive a great deal of attention because it is around the intersection with the Official Information Act and the Privacy Act 1993. That is a while ago you know but it has become a really important part of the New Zealand culture and expectations around privacy of our information and privacy around the way we are treated and how our information is used. I think all of those things will receive a great deal of attention and scrutiny in the select committee.  
The challenge in this legislation is to preserve the benefits of online transfers including easy access for those who require it in the public interest while minimising the risk to individuals preserving the option—so that it is not compulsory—in the long term and making sure that the contest between access and convenience ensures an obligation on the State to protect personal information. I suspect that this bill will have to visit all of those debates when it gets to the select committee. I look forward to hearing about it but we are happy to support it to the select committee. Thank you. 
GARETH HUGHES (Green) 
: 
 Kia ora Mr Assistant Speaker Robertson. Nga mihi nui ki a koutou. Kia ora. It is a pleasure to rise to take a call on the Electronic Identity Verification Bill. I would also like to share the best wishes of this House so congratulations to you Mr Assistant Speaker Robertson; congratulations to Amy Adams the new Minister for Communications and Information Technology; and congratulations to all members in the House who were elected at the last Parliament. 
I also want to thank the officials. It has been surprising that Labour has not taken credit for this in the debate I have heard but it did do a lot of work in the years it was in Government in getting this process with igovt the process towards getting this legislation started. So I would like to acknowledge Labour members’ work and also the officials who have worked with them over a number of years for this bill.  
It is an important and emerging issue we are discussing in this Parliament in 2012. We are quite right: we are talking about our lives we are talking about our memory and we are talking about our data. One has only to look at Facebook to see that that company did not get rich just by selling ads or subscriptions; it got rich because it managed data. It managed to package compile and share data in such a way that it is one of the wealthiest companies in the world. I think its share offer will be immensely huge.  
The Greens share with the other parties their support for this legislation’s referral to the select committee. What I would like to talk about is the importance of it around easing the relationship with Government departments. I note in the regulatory impact statement there is a quote that there are over $300 million in tangible economic benefits to the nation. That is good. I would love to ask one of the officials what they estimate the time savings could be for people using this system around the country. I am prepared to wager any member in this Chamber that the time-savings from this bill for a minuscule sum of money will be much more considerable than the $19 billion the Government is currently borrowing to spend on motorways literally saving only minutes of Kiwis’ time across the country.  
So we see the potential. We see the benefits. That is why we are supporting the bill to the select committee. But like the other parties we do think there are valid concerns and we will be asking some questions at the select committee. So this bill effectively sets up an online passport. I think it makes sense. I think it is common sense. You have a mishmash of different log-in requirements for different Government departments. Like Darien Fenton I cannot remember half of my passwords. I have to keep getting them to email them to me because there are just so many when you are engaging with Government departments let alone all the other services that people use online for work or for pleasure. So we see the common sense.  
 I have been very interested to follow over the years the progress of igovt which is currently the contractual-only service preceding this legislation—the trial that is effectively making this legislation relevant and I would say desirable. But I would also note that there are only 400-odd people on igovt at the moment—the Minister might be able to correct me—and I would love to see more people using this service.  
I have also got some concerns because I have to write to the Minister of Internal Affairs just to go to the National Library. I asked him more than a year ago whether I could have a briefing from officials because I am interested in this and I would like to engage constructively but to no avail—Minister Guy would not let me have a briefing.  
So to look at the detail it is important that we as legislators get our heads around this issue. Technology is shaping lives in ways we cannot even imagine probably in the next 5 to 10 years and certainly longer. More and more of us are engaging with our Government online; more and more of us engage with the Government only online. As Chris Auchinvole said the Government is embracing technology. I think they have done some good things but I also think it is maybe a bit of an exaggeration to portray ourselves as world leaders in the technological field. We have got Skynet the copyright infringing and file-sharing law and we are engaging with the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement negotiations recently signed in Tokyo and the punitive rules in the Trans-Pacific Partnership.  
Look you know I do not think we are embracing technology as we could be. I do not think we are world leaders in this but this is one area where we certainly could be. Take the Inland Revenue Department—it was only last year that this Parliament passed a law the Education Act No. 4 that let student loan borrowers go online to check their balance. In 2011 this Parliament was not passing such legislation. Take the legislation just before this bill the Road User Charges Bill. At a time when we could be using digital electronic technology we are instead going down the absolute opposite path and getting average weight-based models of calculating road-user charges.  
The stuff we are talking about in this Parliament is topical. We have just seen in America and all around the world that literally 7000 websites I think it was—4.5 million people—signed Google’s petition in 1 day. We saw the two Houses the House of Representatives and the Senate in the US fully step backwards from the punitive copyright legislation there—the Stop Online Piracy Act and the Protect IP Act. We have seen the Megaupload arrests where we have had 70 police officers flying in on helicopters to catch someone in relation to alleged copyright infringing. And to the right side of the ledger we are seeing the Government invest a considerable sum in ultra-fast broadband which the Green Party supports the intent of.  
I think what we have seen in terms of the Skynet legislation debates in New Zealand and the stop online piracy and protect IP debates in America is that it is no longer OK—as a popular blog post also points out—for us as legislators to not know any more. It is not a badge of honour to pretend we do not use computers and we do not know how to engage—it is not OK any more. We have to get on top of our game I think these are salutary lessons and I look forward to engaging with the other members the officials the submitters and the select committee.  
So we will be supporting this legislation to the select committee. We think it is common sense. We think there are some definite inefficiencies—we could be engaging with other departments—but also there are some tremendously exciting opportunities that flow out from this legislation. Take the last election: we saw the lowest-ever level of youth non-enrolment in our country’s history. I heard anecdotally of people around the country who would have enrolled and would have liked to vote but had to send in the blasted form via a fax machine from overseas. We heard of people who would have loved to do it online in between checking Facebook or Twitter and to enrol online. There is no framework or legislative allowance for that.  
I would like to see this law look at how we take this unique identifier to understand the potentialities not only for our economy and society but also for our democracy. So what we see with that change which I think would be desirable in our future is a challenging of the central tenet which we have talked about in the clause 4 debate in this Parliament which is that we should not worry about privacy concerns. Everything is taken care of in clause 4 “Principles”. At the moment the main protection is the fact that it is only opt-in for people to have their data saved but if we are going to unleash the powers of this legislation obviously we are going to have to look at a mandatory-type system in the future and what the privacy implications are there.  
So we see that people cannot opt out in every circumstance when it comes to this bill. People cannot opt out when it comes to statistical analysis. As Ruth Dyson aptly put it there is a digital divide. We still need to make sure people have options. We cannot replace every type of communication or validation with the Government. It has been good to see that the Privacy Commissioner has been involved in the drafting of this legislation. I think we might want to investigate in the select committee actually going slightly further than what this bill outlines which is that currently the Privacy Commissioner can go to the chief executive of the Department of Internal Affairs and ask for a report. I wonder whether we should write into the legislation or through an Order in Council a regular reporting requirement given that this is the front line of both the privacy and the new technological developments in New Zealand.  
The regulatory impact statement talks of the risk of function creep which I think is a definite risk. When we look at the Privacy Commissioner’s website principle 12 of the privacy principles says categorically—and it is going to be interesting to ask her how she is going to deal with it—that the Government is not allowed to give people one personal number to use in all their dealings with Government agencies. There is a whole bunch of questions around privacy around the sharing of information between Government departments and around what I believe is a flagrant overuse of Orders in Council by this Government to pass regulations.  
These are all questions the Green Party looks forward to raising with officials and submitters and the other parties in the select committee process. We urge Kiwis to get out there make a submission and find out more about it. I think there is a whole host of subsidiary issues which I think would be valid to raise on the select committee. There are questions around the need for a time line for those Orders in Council to be broadened by the Government and there are some questions around what the scope of those fees is going to be for the full costing.  
I think we have got to ask the officials flat out whether they are confident we can avoid cyber-security or hacking threats given having one unique repository for information does make us vulnerable. We have seen Governments fall victim to that recently. As a historian in the interests of future archivists what are we going to leave as a legacy given that so many of us found out about our families around the world because those paper forms those parish books still exist and we can still access them? So I think there is a whole bunch of important questions. This is the front line of the privacy and the technological debate in this country and the Green Party looks forward to constructively engaging with all the parties in Parliament. Kia ora.  
KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI (National) 
: 
 I stand in support of the first reading of the Electronic Identity Verification Bill. Over the course of each year individuals are likely to have to visit or deal with several agencies to undertake various transactions that require their identities to be verified.  
The Electronic Identity Verification Bill will regulate and enhance the operation of the igovt identity verification service. Once fully operational individuals will be able to use the service to verify their identity via the internet for interaction where it is necessary for the agency to know who it is dealing with. The ID is in electronic form and is made up of four pieces of information about the person that can be used by logging into a service and giving consent for use of your ID. Instead of providing a document that contains a lot of other information such as a passport it reduces the amount of detail about yourself.  
Since the early 2000s it has been recognised that there would be inefficiency and inconsistency if each Government agency developed its own identity verification system. The Electronic Identity Verification Service was developed as a shared service to provide members of the public with the option of providing their identity to the different Government agencies. Complying with the evidence of identity requirements of these transactions adds cost travel and transaction time and inconvenience for customers and processing costs for the agencies. Detecting and acting upon fraudulent applications and criminal activities committed through the use of false lost or stolen identity documents can impose cost and additional requirements on agencies and individuals who identify information as being wrongly used.  
The scope of the Electronic Identity Verification Bill will set clear parameters and provide adequate penalties to deter and punish abuse of the system and ensure compliance with the Privacy Act 1993 especially in relation to the disclosure of personal information. An individual has the choice to decide whether to apply for an electronic identity. This is in fact a record kept in electronic form that contains unique detail personal to that very user. The following details should be given to provide a person’s unique code and validate personal information such as full name sex date of birth and place of birth. This electronic identity is personal to each individual and cannot be transferred. Significant benefits have been estimated. Individuals who choose to use this service will have potential reduction in compliance costs travel time transaction time and risks associated with identity crime. I fully support this bill and look forward to the select committee process. Thank you very much.  
BARBARA STEWART (NZ First) 
: 
 Firstly Mr Assistant Speaker Tisch congratulations on your appointment to your role. We know that the Speaker’s role is in a very capable pair of hands and we look forward to working with you over this parliamentary term. We would also like to congratulate the Minister of Internal Affairs on her first bill. We know it is a big moment and we hope it is the start of many more of these moments.  
On behalf of New Zealand First I rise to support the Electronic Identity Verification Bill to select committee. We are looking forward to the chance to discuss the bill further and to hear the public debate on this particular issue. We know that the internet is a huge concern for many many members of the public and the fact that the information can be hacked into and can be accessed by unauthorised persons is a really big fear I think for everybody. Of course more and more people are actually working online. But again it is an option; it is not compulsory which we are pleased to see in this bill.  
We note that the public has to have confidence in any service of this nature so we are going to look forward to canvassing it further. Security to us is of the utmost importance. We are pleased to see that there has been a trial already because it is only by working through a trial that anyone can find the loopholes and correct those loopholes.  
Another thing we are happy to see is that a physical card with a number is not going to be issued to everyone. We are all notorious for losing cards and once the card is lost everybody wonders who is actually accessing that information. That to us is a very important factor in this particular bill. On that note I will say that New Zealand First will support this bill to select committee. 
JONATHAN YOUNG (National—New Plymouth) 
: 
 I am very pleased and happy to stand in support of the Electronic Identity Verification Bill. As we know online transactions and communication are transforming service delivery for Governments and businesses around the globe and this is a very logical pragmatic step in terms of streamlining those processes by which information can be transferred and shared. In order to do that and protect the privacy of people it is incredibly important that people’s identities are accurately verified in a very high-confidence manner. 
Very interestingly several years ago the  
Press 
 reported that 100000 victims in New Zealand suffered electronic identity theft and it is good to see that this measure is going to propose an identity verification process that is going to have extremely high confidence so that New Zealanders can feel confident that their identity will be protected. We know that through this process there will be incredible savings not only for the Government but also for individuals; I think the Green member mentioned close to $300 million worth. The regulatory impact statement prepared by the Department of Internal Affairs states that it could even be over $500 million. When you think about the savings that will save New Zealand taxpayers that is a considerable amount. When you think about the efficiency and time savings for people who have to verify their identification with Government agencies that is also going to be a tremendous saving in terms of their time and compliance costs. It will also reduce the risks around identity fraud which we know is increasingly becoming something that we need to counter and work on so that New Zealanders are protected. 
As I come to a conclusion in just a few minutes I want to congratulate the Minister on the presentation of her first bill as Minister of Internal Affairs. Congratulations to her; I know that she is going to do a fantastic job in her role and we are going to see many strong bills come through. I also just mention the previous Minister and his work as well. 
I think we can have great confidence that this is going to be a great step for New Zealand. At the end of 2009 of the 2.7 million people in New Zealand who used the internet 46 percent of them sought information about Government agencies 35 percent had downloaded or completed a Government form online and 20 percent had made payments to the Government online as well. So this is a very timely piece of legislation and it is something that will enhance productivity in our Government departments but also will enhance productivity amongst New Zealanders as well. I am very happy to commend this bill. Thank you.  
KRIS FAAFOI (Labour—Mana) 
: 
 Thank you for the opportunity to speak on this Electronic Identity Verification Bill. Can I begin in the fashion that many others have tonight and congratulate you Mr Assistant Speaker on again being chosen for your office of Parliament and I also congratulate the Hon Amy Adams the new Minister concerned with this Electronic Identity Verification Bill a bill that Labour supports being referred to a select committee.  
This really is a bill that shows the sign of the times at the moment. The regulatory impact statement that comes with this bill shows that 2 years ago in 2009 of those internet users in New Zealand 46 percent had sought information about Government agencies online 35 percent had downloaded or completed a Government form online and 20 percent had made payments to the Government online. That was a couple of years ago so I am sure that those numbers will have advanced somewhat in that time and it just shows that a number of New Zealanders are now looking online to do their business with the Government. To make it as hassle-free and streamlined as possible not just for those who are the end-users but also for the Government departments involved we think is a very good thing. It is going to be very useful both for Kiwis and Government departments in the age of doing business online.  
Many of us have dealt with constituents who have found it frustrating at times when dealing with Government agencies having to provide the same amount of information or varying amounts of information to certify or verify that they are who they are. I think the previous speaker Jonathan Young was talking just a few minutes ago about the hundreds of thousands of cases of identity fraud involving people dealing online. I think it may have been in relation to Government departments but if not certainly that is still a lot of people who have encountered identity fraud of some description when they have been using the internet.  
I think the real benefits of this will be with real Kiwis the end-users who will now no longer have to as I said before provide various forms of identification to the I think it is 28 Government departments that are using the igovt database at the moment. I know from my own personal experience of being overseas and having to send information back to New Zealand to Government departments that it was frustrating to have to deal with different Government departments and their different systems of operating so if we can have definitely one system through which people can deal with a plurality of Government departments that will be good.  
Of course it will save a fair amount of queuing for people out there who deal with Government departments and it will make sure that those Government agencies that are already using the igovt service can push this out further to make sure we can find efficiencies. That is what we really do want: efficiencies both for the public and for the Government departments especially in these very difficult times. There will be things that we will be watching very closely though. Of course around security there must be absolute confidence among the public that this service or database will be secure. I notice that there are some serious parts of this bill around punishment for any offences that may be caused. I think it is a sentence of no less than 10 years and a $250000 fine for anyone who is caught misusing the information so we think that is a good move in this bill.  
Ruth Dyson also made the point earlier that we want to make sure that Kiwis still do have the avenue to have some face-to-face contact if they either do not have the confidence to use the internet the confidence in the system or the use of the internet readily available for them. So we do want to make sure that this is not moving towards the internet or online being the only option for people to interact with their Government departments. We still want to make sure that there is a friendly face behind the counter for when people are interacting with agencies such as Work and Income the Housing New Zealand Corporation and other agencies that are involved in the system.  
Ruth Dyson also pointed out that New Zealand Post will be the lead agency for collecting information and for taking photos I understand for this legislation. We know that one move by New Zealand Post at the moment is to downsize its outlets and to reduce the number of outlets. So we hope that there is going to be the appropriate amount of resourcing in our New Zealand Post stores to make sure that these stores which I think are pretty much already run off their feet have the ability to service the people who are coming into those stores to make sure that they can get that work done. And a point also made by Ruth Dyson is that some security around the future of New Zealand Post especially at the time the current Government is looking at asset sales would be beneficial for all New Zealanders. But in terms of making sure they are streamlining services we do welcome the moves that are being made to help our Government departments making sure that we have efficiencies within them and making sure those people who are supposed to be serving the public have more time to be able to meet their duties to the public when they are coming to them.  
Again public confidence in the system is going to be paramount and we do note that there are safeguards within this legislation for wrongful sharing of information especially at a time when you know internet safety and internet piracy are in the headlines. We want to make sure that the security around the system is 100 percent.  
Also noted has been the involvement of the Privacy Commissioner. That is also a welcome move in this legislation to make sure that they can request the chief executive of the Department of Internal Affairs for a report if there are any concerns around privacy and the security of the information that is being held on the database. We are talking about very sensitive information—family information—that is being held on these databases and for it to get into the hands of the wrong agencies or to be misused by a staff member in an agency would be a tragedy. We do support this legislation through to select committee consideration. It has been a piece of work that has been a long time coming but we do welcome it and we will support its referral to a select committee.  
NIKKI KAYE (National—Auckland Central) 
: 
 I am very pleased to support this Electronic Identity Verification Bill. Can I start by acknowledging the new Minister of Internal Affairs Amy Adams. She is a superb individual who is going to do a very good job—is doing a very good job—and it is good to see her speaking on this bill. I also want to pay tribute to the Government Administration Committee. As a former deputy chair of that committee I have often thought that perhaps the House does not realise some of the important work that that committee does; this is an example of the important work that the Government Administration Committee does.  
The first thing I would like to say is that this is part of a wider modernising agenda. As a youngish member of this Parliament—I acknowledge Chris Hipkins over there who is another youngish member of this Parliament—I acknowledge this Government’s agenda in terms of modernising our Parliament but also our Government services. Many young people talk to me about the fact that a lot of their interaction with politicians and Government services is online whether it is through our significant investment in terms of our broadband package or whether it is through a bill like this which is saying to New Zealanders and to many young New Zealanders that we are going to make it easier for them to interact with the Government and politicians. I think that is a very important point and a very important purpose of this bill.  
A couple of other points that I would like to make about this bill is that we know that the real heart of this bill is about balancing the protection of people’s personal privacy with making it easier for them to interact with Government services. I had the fortunate experience of working in the Department for Constitutional Affairs in the area of data protection when I was in the United Kingdom and one of the things that I realised over there—and I do not think a lot of New Zealanders realise it—is how world leading we were when we brought in the Official Information Act. I really hope and believe that with the current Minister Amy Adams this is part of a wider agenda to ensure that our Government is keeping up with the pace of technology and ensuring that data and personal information of the individual are protected while also ensuring as much as possible that we can make Government services more easily accessible to New Zealanders.  
I want to touch on one particular clause: clause 4. I think that is a very important clause because it cuts to the heart of the principle of the National Party in terms of freedom. This is an optional service; this is not something that will be forced on New Zealanders. It is there for those New Zealanders who want to engage more online to have confidence in their interactions to be able to save their time and to not have to do a lot of these different interactions with different Government agencies. It really does emphasise that important principle of the National Party which is freedom because this is an optional service.  
The second point that I would like to make is around the savings. I heard from the member Kris Faafoi. As a constituency MP he knows how many people come to your office and say that they spend time going around various offices and various Government agencies having to verify themselves several different times. Not only is this bill about making it easier for individual New Zealand citizens to not have to spend that time and that money doing that but also it is about saving Government departments money and at a difficult time financially. I was very pleased to read in the regulatory impact statement a statement that very clearly said that over a 10-year period—and I think this is quite phenomenal—this could save New Zealanders between $385 million and $527 million. I think that is something that we should celebrate as we progress this to the select committee: not only could this save individuals time but also it could significantly save Government departments time.  
This bill is not only about Government savings; it is about modernising our Government services into the 21st century. It is about making it more accessible for all New Zealanders but particularly the next generation of New Zealanders. But also it is that balance of ensuring that the individual has the power to correct their own information. There is nothing more violating than either having your information abused or there being incorrect information about you. I think that is one of the other wonderful things about this piece of legislation: it enables the individual to have that power over access to their own information. So I am very pleased to support this bill to the select committee under the esteemed leadership of the new Minister Amy Adams. Thank you. 
CHRIS HIPKINS (Labour—Rimutaka) 
: 
 I intend to take only a fairly brief call on the— 
Hon Tau Henare 
: Thanks mate. 
CHRIS HIPKINS 
: —Electronic Identity Verification Bill. Not that brief Mr Henare not that brief. That sort of woke him up I guess. 
Kris Faafoi 
: You just made it longer. 
CHRIS HIPKINS 
: Yes and the more he interjects the longer it gets. He never learns—never learns—from history.  
The Labour Party will certainly be supporting this bill to select committee because we think there are some very worthwhile elements in it. Increasingly citizens of this country interact with Government departments online. It is inevitable that that trend is going to continue and get larger and we want to make that as easy as possible for people. It is a fairly constant gripe from people that Government departments often require the reproduction of huge volumes of information—in many cases simply from other Government departments—and this potentially I think starts us down a track that says that the Government itself needs to think a little bit more carefully about how it shares information between agencies so that people do not have to constantly go to one agency to get some information held by one agency in order to give it to another Government agency which is one of the constant bugbears of constituents who come into any constituency member’s office.  
Now we need to be very careful in the way we do that. This is a very I think conservative first step which is simply around the verification of identity. But if it works if it is proven to be successful and if sufficient safeguards are in place there is actually potential for this to expand further. Now I know that there will be a certain number of George Orwellian figures out there who will be very concerned that this is the Government coming to take over their lives and that we are going to be storing all this huge array of information on every individual citizen. The Government holds a whole lot of that information anyway; it is just that the Government is not very efficient at communicating with itself about what information it actually holds.  
But to return to my original point safeguards are going to be really important in how we use this information and how we deal with it. The Public Service I think needs to be moving to a much more citizen-focused seamless approach to service delivery. I think it really frustrates individual citizens when in dealing with different Government agencies they are constantly being given the run-around and they are constantly having to reproduce the same information over and over again. It very much creates the impression that within Government agencies the left hand does not know what the right hand is doing and that is something that any modernised and more efficient Public Service is going to have to deal with.  
It certainly makes sense to introduce this legislation so that we do not have a whole lot of different Government agencies going out and establishing their own identity verification services because that would obviously be very costly. I was particularly interested though to look at when this bill is going to be coming into force because I know that the Minister in charge of this bill Amy Adams was a very diligent member of the Regulations Review Committee in the last Parliament. As part of the responsibilities of the Regulations Review Committee one of the things they look at is when a bill is going to come into force. One of the things the Regulations Review Committee frowns upon quite seriously is bills where the commencement date for them is unclear or where it is subject to ministerial prerogative—where Ministers can simply decide when a law comes into effect. So it is kind of ironic that having been such an ardent supporter of the Regulations Review Committee’s work in this area the very first bill that Amy Adams brings to this House in her new ministerial role contains exactly such a clause which allows this new law to come into effect at such time as an Order in Council is made rather than at a specified date. So basically it removes the power to determine when a law comes into effect from the Parliament and gives it to the executive to a Minister. That is something that the Regulations Review Committee frowns upon quite seriously— 
Charles Chauvel 
: Very seriously. 
CHRIS HIPKINS 
: —very seriously. The chair of the Regulations Review Committee I can tell is very concerned about it. I am sure that is something that the select committee will need to examine in great detail when it goes to the select committee. I am sure that the Regulations Review Committee as it always does will have a view on that particular matter. 
Charles Chauvel 
: And we’ll express it. 
CHRIS HIPKINS 
: And it will be expressed I am sure. So overall I think the bill is a fairly welcome step. We need to proceed with some caution. I am sure the select committee will be very diligent in going through the bill considering the privacy implications of the bill and ensuring that in fact this bill does not take us down the wrong track. I think overall on that basis the Labour Party certainly is happy to support the first reading and referral to a select committee. 
Bill read a first time.  
Bill referred to the Government Administration Committee. 
Hon AMY ADAMS (Minister of Internal Affairs) 
: 
 I move  
That the Electronic Identity Verification Bill be reported back to the House by 29 June 2012. 
Motion agreed to.