Dowie Sarah: Official Information (Parliamentary Under-Secretaries) Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDowie Sarah: Official Information (Parliamentary Under-Secretaries) Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 14 October 2015. Volume:709;Page:7248. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]SARAH DOWIE (National—Invercargill): I rise in opposition to the Official Information (Parliamentary Under-Secretaries) Amendment Bill in this first reading. Look I acknowledge what the sponsoring member Adrian Rurawhe said with respect to the concept of transparency but when we are talking about this bill—official information with respect to parliamentary under-secretaries—I think that he is blurring the lines between parliamentary work and executive work. I think that that is a slippery slope and obviously this bill is one that the Government opposes.To put this assertion into context with respect to this bill I do need to acknowledge the importance of the Official Information Act. It is significant in respect of its intent its purpose and the functions that it sets out in its principles as to accountability. But that is also a balance between transparency and privacy.Given that I have got great respect for the principles of the Official Information Act I have chosen a few key words from it that sum it up really nicely and those are about availability of and access to information; effective participation; administration of laws and policies; accountability of Ministers—as the sponsoring member has mentioned—and officials; promotion of good Government which is something we believe in on this side of the House; a balance between public interest to that information; and privacy. I believe that we have got that balance right at the moment.I believe in this Act because once upon a time in a previous career I was a Government official and it was my responsibility to administer official information requests also. I will talk a little bit more about that shortly.The Official Information Act the parent Act that this bill seeks to amend goes to the heart of the principles of natural justice about giving the public of New Zealand the right to access information so that they can build a case with regard to their circumstances in line with a particular policy or practice and so that they can fully understand the reasons for a determination on a policy and assess whether that was a proper decision whether it was made without bias and whether it was made fairly.But in the same breath officials need to have the right to have free and frank conversations so as to debate outcomes and that goes toward better decision making and sometimes those conversations do need to be protected. Then there is something that in my previous role I experienced—vexatious litigants—but that is probably a story for another day.But certainly as an official in respect of the parent Act that this bill seeks to change I felt a quiet pressure and a healthy intensity to make myself as an official accountable the department that I worked for accountable and ultimately the Minister and Executive Council accountable. Parliamentary under-secretaries are not part of the Executive Council. The Executive Council is made up of Ministers inside and outside Cabinet with the Governor-General presiding over it.Parliamentary under-secretaries do not have a warrant. They are responsible to the designated Minister and they do the Minister’s bidding. That is set out by the relevant Minister so the line of accountability rests with that Minister. The line of accountability and I will say that again rests with that Minister and all information relating to that role can be accessed through the Minister’s office—that is one that has the appropriate resourcing and systems in place to meet statutory criteria of processing that request assessing it and communicating it appropriately within the time frames required.It would be a slippery slope if we were to make parliamentary under-secretaries subject to the Official Information Act as set out in the bill. It is blurring the lines again as I said before between the Executive Council and parliamentary functions. What would be the ramifications of that? What would be next if parliamentary under-secretaries were included? Would members of Parliament be next and all the parliamentary side of work that goes with that?The communications of members of Parliament unless they are directly with a Minister’s office are not subject to the Official Information Act and that is for a good reason. We all have constituents who come to us every day who find themselves in situations whether it is through deliberate actions or unwitting actions that put them in a precarious position with respect to the law. If that is all subject to the Official Information Act then how can we do our job effectively if our constituents are fearful to disclose all of the information to their case? It is like a lawyer-client privilege. It is there for a reason. To ascertain true facts there needs to be full disclosure.There are all types of examples that come under that but in respect of this bill it is about parliamentary under-secretaries. As I said before the information of parliamentary under-secretaries can be obtained from the Minister because of the line of accountability. The relevant Minister tells the parliamentary under-secretary exactly what they can and cannot do. There is no separate warrant. The information pertaining to the role can be directly sourced from the Minister’s office.I need to talk about accountability and that comes to the role of the Office of the Ombudsmen. The sponsor of the bill and I sit on the Government Administration Committee and we have had a chance to review the Office of the Ombudsmen. It is the overseer of course that goes toward that accountability under the Official Information Act. I believe that it is well administered. Not only is that the place where the public go if they are aggrieved about the outcome of their request for official information but if it is not processed within the time frame this is where those constituents go.The Ombudsmen look at that assess that and make a ruling. They are independent and they are impartial and so their job is a significant one. It is a check and balance for the Executive Council and all that goes with that work.Just to wrap up—again this bill seeks to amend the parent Act the Official Information Act by including parliamentary under-secretaries and it is simply not necessary. The Official Information Act at this stage is fit for purpose. Recently we had technical amendments through a statutes amendment bill that modernised the Official Information Act allowing for requests to be made verbally and requests to be delivered electronically. It was an opportunity to update that Act and have a look at its functioning. The Act is within a suite of vehicles that hold the Government to account.Funnily enough this is an approach that is one that is consistent with the Helen Clark and Labour - led Government in 2002 when she appointed two parliamentary under-secretaries. And so I say what is good for the goose is good for the gander and there is no need for this bill.