Hipkins ChrisPROTECTED DISCLOSURES (PROTECTION OF WHISTLEBLOWERS) BILLThird ReadingHon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister for the Public Service): I move That the Protected Disclosures (Protection of Whistleblowers) Bill be now read a third time.Once again I want to thank the select committee for their deliberations on the bill and thank all of those who took the time to make submissions. This is the first of what will probably be two bills.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jenny Salesa): Point of order Minister. One moment please. Does the Minister want to present a legislative statement?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: No Madam Speaker; the legislative statement was presented on the earlier readings.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jenny Salesa): Thank you. The Minister may continue.Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Once again I'd like to acknowledge the contribution of the members of the select committee and perhaps review the fact that this is the first of what I'm sure will be probably two bills—another one further down the track to deal with some of the issues that were unable to be captured by this one.When we started to look at the Protected Disclosures Act 2000 it was of course a significant piece of legislation at the time but it became very clear that the Act was not operating as it was intended. People didn't understand it and they were not using it. People were afraid to make protected disclosures because it had become such a difficult to understand process that it did not give them the confidence that it was designed to give them that they would be protected in the event that they disclosed wrongdoing.This bill does a couple of things. First of all it simplifies the existing legislation so that it's easier to understand and it makes some changes to them. The first thing the bill does is clarify the key elements of the existing protected disclosures regime that will continue in the new legislation. I'll run through those quickly. A protected disclosure has three key ingredients: a discloser who believes that they have identified serious wrongdoing in their organisation and discloses it not in bad faith within their organisation or to an appropriate authority. Disclosers are people who are in a position to see serious wrongdoing in an organisation because they work there or have previously worked there and they need protection in disclosing that serious wrongdoing to someone who can do something about it because the organisation or the perpetrator of the wrongdoing is in a position in order to be able to retaliate.The protections that the legislation provides are the confidentiality around who has made the disclosure immunity from disciplinary action in making the disclosure and protections from retaliation under the Employment Relations Act and the Human Rights Act. The receiver of a disclosure needs to play their part by maintaining confidentiality investigating or referring the disclosure and informing the discloser what they have done about it. The main changes that the bill makes are the removal of all of the gates and hurdles that have previously prevented or discouraged disclosers from getting their concern in front of an appropriate external authority requiring public sector organisations to specify in their internal procedures how they're going to support disclosers adding to the definition of serious wrongdoing" the misuse of public funds or authority by non - public sector organisations and the serious risk to the health and safety of any individual improving protection of disclosers by enabling them to complain to the Privacy Commissioner if the requirement to protect their confidentiality has been breached and removing the restrictions on the protection of those who disclose supporting information. That's effectively what the bill does. To turn the House's attention though to some of the issues that people raised that the bill doesn't necessarily fully address this bill is predominantly focused on changes in so far as the protected disclosures regime relates to the public sector—in the broadest possible definition of the phrase "public sector". It does not look at the private sector; more work is required there and if there are going to be further changes then potentially a subsequent piece of legislation can bring those changes before the House. I was very mindful in making decisions on this legislation that the potential to add significant potentially additional compliance costs for small businesses for example could be significant if we didn't work our way through that carefully to fully understand the implications of that. This bill does not lean on those topics; it looks at the broader public sector rather than looking at the private sector although as I've indicated in my introductory remarks it does afford some protection for disclosures where the use of public money is involved by other organisations private sector companies or non-governmental organisations.The Government and indeed I think—from the comments that we've heard around the House—the House as a whole is committed to protecting New Zealanders who speak up about serious wrongdoing; I think that that's really important. New Zealand is internationally recognised as one of the least corrupt countries in the world; that's something that we should all be proud of but it is nothing to be complacent about. In order to maintain that status we have to constantly be looking for areas where we can continue to improve. The disclosure of wrongdoing and protecting those who blow the whistle is one of the ways that we can safeguard our standing as a country.Hon Mark Mitchell: "Chippie" can I meet with the commissioner? That would be a good start.Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Well that's a parliamentary matter; it's not a matter for me as a Minister.Ensuring that people can make protected disclosures with confidence is one of the ways that we can safeguard our reputation as one of those countries that suffers from the least corruption in the world. I commend the bill to the House."