Penk ChrisCHRIS PENK (National—Kaipara ki Mahurangi): Thank you Madam Chair. Just to pick up on the conversations that are taking place already questions from Messrs Woodhouse and Seymour and to be fair the Minister as well engaging in the point regarding that distinction between official statistics on the one hand and research on the other. My question is ultimately in a similar space but going a bit further down the track of what it means to be collecting statistics for the purpose of research. Just looking at it from the perspective of a researcher and someone who would be undertaking academic work to discover some great truth about New Zealand as it is now or where it's heading and so forth and understanding that in an academic context it's hugely important that there are ethical considerations of the collection of data the use of data the publication of the data and knowing that in an academic context there are very strict requirements such that there must be ethics approval for research projects given prior to the undertaking of those projects. And of course in relation to the use of the data and the publication of the data whether we're talking from a privacy perspective or not to cause harm inadvertently to those who are providing the information or indeed in the way that it is used and presented. It occurs to me to wonder how researchers might be obliged to justify the use of data—and I use that term generically—in their research when that data has been collected before the undertaking of that research in the sense of the way that the data is collected. So it seems to be there's a bit of a disconnect in time as well as in relation to the purpose that it was collected and I wonder if the Minister's got any advice on how that could be resolved such that a reasonable ethical oversight can be undertaken by a researcher noting that they wouldn't have had any hand in the collection of that data in the name of official statistics in the first place.Hon Dr DAVID CLARK (Minister of Statistics): I say this a little cautiously: I think a lot of the conversation that we're having now is about the intent because the purpose is about the intent. And some of the questions that are being raised rightly actually will be dealt with in a more concrete way as the former Minister Michael Woodhouse referred to Part 3 and Part 5 and David Seymour as well and this is a test about whether those things align is essentially what I hear from members opposite. I think we're agreed that we do want the data we want the official statistics and we also want the ability to research in a safe and protected way and to ensure people's data is protected and that the right kinds of protections are around that and we come to that in the bill. So I just say that for context and I think some of the real debate and the detail is going to happen in those later parts of the bill.But I just want to also say for the record the purpose enables collection of data for official statistics and research. Data can—and I have covered this but I'm just saying it in other words—be provided voluntarily for both purposes. The mandatory collection only applies to official statistics—the mandatory collection only applies to official statistics. The bill clearly provides for data to be provided voluntarily or by agreement as well as the mandatory aspect of it.