Browning Steffan: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBrowning Steffan: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9700. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]STEFFAN BROWNING (Green): Kia ora. I rise to speak to the Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill. It could also be called the “TELCOs (Spying on Kiwis) Bill” or the “TELCOs (Let’s Get Hacked) Bill”. We have to ask: why now? What is the gap in legislation that we need this bill to cover? Wequestioned that in April when this bill was being mooted and at the time of the announcement that the Government was to change its plans to modernise the Telecommunications (Interception Capability) Act 2004. We opposed that Act for good reason and since then there has been plenty to show up why we should have and why we did. Rather than amend that law it should be reviewed. The Green Party opposed that law because of the great power it gave agencies to spy on New Zealanders’ online activity. Of course when we learn about the 88 people who have been illegally spied on we may see that that has been an abuse of this. Maybe that is the patch-up that this new bill is about—about covering up another one of the gaps where the Government has clearly been operating illegally.It is very concerning that the changes to this interception capability are being developed at the same time as the Government changes the law around the Government Communications Security Bureau—and not just New Zealand agencies; it is around the agencies of those other nations such as the US which is the main one behind it the UK Australia and Canada. It gives those agencies associated with that the ability to spy on New Zealanders as well. Or is the reason for this change that agencies have yet again been caught outside the law and also that in building “interceptability” let us call it into the network it has actually created weaknesses? We think that they have created weaknesses that could be exploited and they now need to be patched up.But tell us the truth. What is going on here? What is the real reason? What are the real reasons for this bill coming at the moment apart from just overall having a total surveillance State in New Zealand? A commission of inquiry is needed into both the Government Communications Security Bureau and the telecommunications laws the laws that allow that surveillance and their operation. We need a review. We need a full commission of inquiry rather than these piecemeal pieces that the Government is putting in.What does this bill open us up to? Well one thing is that the increased capacity in security systems will basically allow National’s chosen spy mates its chosen agencies like the Government Communications Security Bureau and its US mates to get into as I said that deeper hacking. Shortly after Parliament passed the Telecommunications (Interception Capability) Act 2004 there were concerns raised as a result of what we called the Greek Watergate. In 2004 and 2005 hackers gained access to Vodafone Greece’s mobile system and to the built-in law enforcement interception capability back then and they tapped months of calls of more than 100 mobile phones. These days hackers do it much much more. The reason they could do that was that they were using the interception capability put in by the spy agencies. Greek officials believed that a foreign intelligence agency was responsible and the news media including the BBC and theWall Street Journal at that time raised the United States intelligence agencies—the Government’s mates—as the leading suspects.What we are doing here is putting in laws to make it legal for those agencies to spy on us. We do not need to rely on them hacking in any more because we are setting up laws for them to do it—not us; the National Party and its buddies. There was another thing that happened in 2004—to United States wireless company T-Mobile—that resulted in hackers obtaining candid photos at that time from Paris Hilton’s Sidekick smartphone account. What did they get? They got 16.3 million customers through that access point. Provided for by whom? By the law enforcement agencies. For over a year that hacker had access to all their social security numbers dates of birth voicemail PINs and passwords to their email accounts.So what is this bill? What is this National? Is this because you have stuffed up? Are you going to make us even more vulnerable when we go into this? Whose tune are we dancing to National? Who is in town this week? There is lobbying by the FederalBureau of Investigation which is in town again this week. The Government Communications Security Bureau is totally tied in with that. We know that from the past.Scott Simpson: Ha ha!STEFFAN BROWNING: You guys might laugh at the idea that other foreign agencies are part of all of this. You just talk to your boss John Key about that and you will see—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): Order!STEFFAN BROWNING: Sorry Mr Assistant Speaker. This is a disgusting abuse of legislative power.There is another aspect in this bill of course. Is this a bill to actually screw down the telecommunications companies to pay even more money in meeting the Government’s requirements? In the early 2000s Telecom was charging Government agencies nearly half a million dollars a year for assisting in search warrants and Vodafone had set an annual fee of $800000 to $1 million. The risk wrote the SIS was that in future the police would not be able to afford all the bugging that it wanted to do. Is this the reason for this bill: so that other providers will provide the Government the information that it wants free of charge? It certainly seems that this might be the case.Dean Pemberton who had previously set up and run lawful interception equipment at TelstraClear told a lot of network specialists a while back that the agencies expected that sort of assistance from it. He said that they expected TelstraClear to install devices that could intercept data and forward it to the agencies on a minute-by-minute basis. That is what this bill is about. If the companies did not—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): Order! Members it is a longstanding convention that people should not conduct conversations in the House unless it is absolutely necessary to do so and then only so as they do not disturb proceedings. I just ask for some courtesy for the member trying to address the House. There is too much background noise.STEFFAN BROWNING: Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker. As he pointed out the agencies were meant to intercept and forward that data—New Zealanders’ data—on a minute-by-minute basis. He said that if the companies did not have this gear in place they risked a half-million-dollar fine and should get a lawyer. And he said: “If you try to be wise with them you’ll end up in the High Court within hours. Don’t be a fool.” Well of course the Government is not going to make them be a fool I suppose. It is going to enforce it through this new legislation and force them to spy on their neighbours to spy on their fellow nationals on behalf of the spy agencies.Another concern we have with this is that it is about data retention or the amount of time the spy agencies demand the telecommunications companies hang on to our private communications our telephone calls our texts our emails and everything that is going through the systems that these two bill together—there is an ugly twin as I have said with the Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill—will be able to do. The Greens will be opposing this. Thank you.