Little AndrewThird ReadingHon ANDREW LITTLE (Minister of Defence): I move That the Inspector-General of Defence Bill be now read a third time.I want to thank the House for their consideration of the bill particularly in the committee stages. I think there's been a good examination I think the points of principle that the members have been concerned about have been well canvassed. I reiterate the point that the importance of this bill is that it strengthens and assures civilian oversight of our military forces—that's very important in liberal democracies like ours.Our defence force has an extraordinarily important role to play not only domestically in being the source of defence and security for New Zealand but as our forces frequently are—the role they play overseas in theatres and areas overseas and the work that they do whether it's peacekeeping whether it's humanitarian assistance and disaster recovery or whether it is indeed combat. And we need our defence force personnel to know that alongside their professionalism the training they get the leadership they get from their officers in the rare occasions when there are failures and failings—and particularly where there are material consequences including loss of life—that there are avenues for them or their families or members of the public or indeed the Minister of the day to have an inquiry and to be assured about what has happened in relation to those events. That's what this bill does.The office that it sets up is pretty orthodox actually in countries like ours. We are not the first to have an Inspector-General of Defence. Other like-minded countries have already established such an office—Australia is one the UK is another. And most countries with well-established and well-developed defence forces have a range of oversight offices or organisations to provide that assurance that we expect that we all need and this will do this.I know that some members have expressed disappointment about some of the amendments that I've introduced effectively reinstating some aspects of the original bill. I have done that to protect our national security and foreign relations interests. Of course everybody has a natural curiosity about the things that go wrong and the information that may support that. The reality is that if there is one operation of Government—apart from foreign affairs itself—that engages heavily in information and data that comes from our overseas partners it is defence. A lot of that information is classified or it is subject to confidentiality and we have an obligation to those partners to respect and observe that confidentiality whatever the context—and that would include the discharge of the powers of the Inspector-General of Defence under this bill once enacted.So that's important but those powers themselves are subject to a set of conditions. So there's not a carte blanche right of the Minister of the day to certify that any information that he or she chooses should not be disclosed. A certification of non-disclosure of information has to meet a certain type and a certain description and is laid out in the bill. Likewise the conduct of inquiries—whether in public or private again those confidentiality requirements our obligations to partners have to be preserved.The final point I'd make which is the other change which is the application of the Official Information Act. The Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee quite rightly on the basis of submissions made did not accept the kind of almost blanket removal of coverage from the Official Information Act and that is now no longer the case. But there is some exception for that. The committee got advice from Sir Ken Keith who basically said the sorts of things that ought to be excluded from the Official Information Act under this bill are already excluded by the application of a range of other pieces of legislation. What I think is important and indeed the style of this House has for some years now been that where we can we codify those sorts of arrangements. So all I have done is to ensure—in the amendments I have put in in relation to the Official Information Act—that the exemptions that would be applicable to the Office of the Inspector-General of Defence are those that would apply through the application of other legislation anyway. And in that respect nothing is lost.Otherwise I think as a consequence of the work of the select committee of the debate in this House and the attention that members in this House have given we have now a good piece of legislation to establish the Office of the Inspector-General of Defence. It will be good for our defence force personnel it will be good for confidence in our New Zealand Defence Force and it will be good for the confidence of future Ministers and MPs who will rely on this office to provide assurance that up to now has not been able to be given—except through the very expensive time-consuming and somewhat tortuous process of a royal commission of inquiry. On that basis I commend the bill to the House.