Parker David: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill — Referral to Government Administration Committee In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeParker David: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill — Referral to Government Administration Committee In Committee[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12360. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour):Peter Dunne who just took his seat said that we should take solace from his amendment to section 8C set out in clause 6 of the Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill. I want to read out what the Law Society said as to the collective effect of sections 7 to 8D set out in clause 6 and then deal in particular with concerns about section 8B which was its greatest concern and which Mr Dunne’s amendments do not even address. The Law Society said that: “Proposed sections 7-8D set out new objectives and functions for the GCSB which taken as a whole effectively transform it from a foreign intelligence-gathering agency into an additional domestic spy agency.” That is its overall point.Grant Robertson: That is apparently not an extension of power.Hon DAVID PARKER: Yes that is right. According to National that does not amount to an extension of power but if you look back at the original Government Communications Security Bureau Act it is very clear that it is about foreign intelligence not about gathering information about New Zealanders. That is clear from the objective set out in section 7 of the current Act which says: “The objective of the Bureau is to contribute to the national security of New Zealand by providing—” and then it lists “(a) foreign intelligence …” and then “(b) foreign intelligence …” and then paragraph (c) is in respect of Government departments protecting their computer systems. Nowhere is it about spying on New Zealanders. Then you turn to the current bill and the Attorney-General can tell me if I have got this wrong but my reading of the bill is the same as the Law Society’s. It says for a start in new section 8(2) in clause 6 of the bill that the order in which the functions of the bureau are set out does not create any order of importance or priority. So the order in which they appear is irrelevant.Then we go to section 8B(1)(b) which is the one that worried the Law Society the most. It says that the function of the bureau is “to gather and analyse intelligence about information infrastructures;”. There is no reference to this being foreign intelligence at all. It is general. It is to gather and analyse intelligence about information infrastructures. The reference to foreign persons in the earlier part of that section does not limit the interpretation of subsection (1)(b). To work out what that means you have then got to go and look at the definition of information infrastructures. This is what theLaw Society points us all to. When you go to the definition of information infrastructure it is actually not just information infrastructure—Grant Robertson: Far from it.Hon DAVID PARKER: —far from it; it is any communication carried on it. That is the nub of this bill. If Parliament passes this bill it confers on the GCSB the ability to gather and analyse information including communications carried on technology platforms—absolutely. There is no restriction. This is not under the provisions where there has to be a warrant already given to the police—no. This is quite separate from the debate about whether it should be able to assist the police or the Security Intelligence Service.The Law Society is saying that the effect of section 8B(1)(b) is that we are for the first time in New Zealand’s history allowing the GCSB to spy upon New Zealanders and have a look at all of their communications. That is what the legislation says according to the Law Society. Mr Dunne your amendment is absolutely ineffective at curing that major increase in the jurisdiction of the GCSB. That is unless I am wrong and the Law Society is wrong and the Privacy Commissioner is wrong and the Human Rights Commission is wrong—because they all say this in respect of section 8B(1)(b). They say that that is a very wide information-gathering power which can be used in respect of the GCSB.Of course that power has to be in line with the objective of the bureau but the objective of the bureau is widened as well. So there is no protection to be found in new section 7 which replaces a more narrowly drawn section in the original legislation. We have this very extensive power so I want the Attorney-General to stand and tell me how it is that we are wrong and how it is that the GCSB is prevented from using the powers that are conferred in respect of section 8B(1)(b) upon New Zealanders.