SpeechHon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National): Just a brief call in relation to my Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) around summary form. The Minister's actually provided some elucidation in response to Joseph Mooney's question one before.But I'm looking in clause 56(5) as an example of where I'm a little unsure how much more of a summary form you could get. Chief executive" in this case is talking about the determination a report that the sector agency must publish about who's accessing data what data is being accessed the purposes for which the data is being accessed how the data is being accessed and the characteristics of the data being accessed.Now with the exception of that last one I fail to see how you can have a summary form of what's effectively a summary. I mean it's a bit hard to say who was accessing the data in summary form. You either say who it is or you don't. What data is being accessed? Well they've all got sort of nomenclatures and titles on them. What purposes? Well it might be for research into X Y or Z. It's a bit hard to know how that could be further summarised; it's a bit of a sort of a legal piece of string.So does the Minister or officials actually have a template or some kind of indication about what the information that needs to be published right through the bill in summary form might look like? Are we talking about one page per—nobody wants a dictionary and a taxonomy and a mountain of information but that's not what the law asks for. The law in its wording actually strongly implies that that is a summary. So I don't know how you can summarise a summary. That's the problem I've got and that's why I put the amendment up.Hon Dr DAVID CLARK (Minister of Statistics): I'll respond first to the point raised by the Hon Michael Woodhouse and then come back to Joseph Mooney's previous question.In terms of what the summary would look like effectively there is a convention and it's already being done—this is codifying best practice. So what you—Hon Michael Woodhouse: You should have asked for it in committee then. That's our oversight.Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: The member—sorry I've forgotten what I; I've been listening to the member. I shouldn't do it while I'm talking—Hon Michael Woodhouse: You basically said there was already precedent.Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: Right. There is yes. We would expect that to be a developing practice within the department of statistics as well.I want to come back to the member Joseph Mooney's question about the Privacy Act not applying to overseas persons. I think I may have covered this earlier but again it is an important point and I think a concern raised in some of the correspondence.The member raised concerns about the Privacy Act not applying to overseas persons and now while the New Zealand Privacy Act doesn't apply to a person overseas clause 52 requires the Statistician to take extra care when deciding whether to allow access from overseas taking into account the laws that apply in the relevant jurisdiction and the relationship between Statistics New Zealand and the overseas person and any means available to the Statistician to ensure that the overseas person complies with any conditions imposed obviously by the Statistician.It's important I think again in this context to emphasise that data will not be provided to the researcher. Stats NZ continues to hold the data and it can only be accessed through a secure portal. The member noted previously as well that there might be no obligations—this is I think last night from memory—on the researcher to leak data but that would only make sense if the researcher held the data. But again it is actually held within Stats NZ—I think that's really important to emphasise that point."