Ardern JacindaJACINDA ARDERN (Labour): I just want to reinforce the comments that were made by my colleague Kelvin Davis around this bill and Labour's support for it. I do just want to acknowledge that obviously the system surrounding offender and prisoner management does need amendment and updating. It is of course more than unfortunate that the proof and demonstration that we had of the need to update our legislation was quite a serious breach of the law. The ability of a prisoner to escape not only from prison but from New Zealand—you cannot really get much more serious than that. But what I think we need to remember though is that although we now know that there are a number of things that did not prevent a prisoner from making an escape like that—although there were a number of things that were not in place to do that—actually there were some really basic failings that occurred that meant we should never have seen some of those mechanisms tested.So what do I mean by that? Well sure we know that for instance there are no comprehensive systems in place where the Department of Internal Affairs is routinely supplied with information about New Zealand citizens who are not allowed to leave the country. We also know that the Customs Service was not routinely loading information about those not allowed to leave the country into its border alert system. So those are two obvious things we need to make sure are happening now.But actually before Phillip John Smith even arrived at the airport there were a number of things that should have happened that never happened. For instance he was being released to a nominated sponsor. He had been part of a release training run that we use in our corrections system. He was due to be released to a sponsor but no one informed the nominated sponsor of his pending release so therefore there was no expectation by that sponsor that he would arrive and no call to the corrections system when that individual did not arrive. So yes we have some failings at our border but actually some of those failings—those fundamental failings—occurred right at the beginning and were failings within the corrections system of the most basic nature. Of course the Department of Corrections—I acknowledge—responded quite quickly to that and acknowledged those failings.One of the concerns that I think we need to have though is about things like Release to Work which is by and large a really well-run well-utilised way of slowly working towards reintegration. While a prisoner is still behind the prison wall but getting close to the point at which they will be released and they are assessed as being ready for work and being in a situation where the Department of Corrections feels able to monitor them outside the wall for work then such prisoners are able to go out and do that and come back into the prison grounds in the evening. Release to Work by and large works really well but my understanding is that as a consequence of some of these issues that were raised by Phillip John Smith we had a complete complete shutdown of Release to Work. That is a real shame because actually when monitored well when we do a proper risk analysis of the individuals to whom it applies it works. It is a good tool. So we do not want to see a complete knee-jerk reaction and I would implore the Minister to work with the Department of Corrections to make sure we get some of those useful tools back into play.I want to come to what the bill fundamentally does for the Customs and Excise Act Birth Deaths Marriages and Relationship Registration Act and the Privacy Act across the board around the way that biometric information is used at the border. As I say Labour supports this bill but we do want to check some of parameters of it once it gets before a select committee. The best example of some of the things that we want to have a bit of a discussion around is the way that biometric information will be used for instance by the Customs Service. When we are referring to biometric information the Immigration Service obviously uses biometric information already. It includes basically the ability to scan the iris and it includes photographs and fingerprints—not necessarily all of them but that is the cohort that we describe as biometric information. In New Zealand when you apply for a passport you do not automatically provide all of that information. Obviously you provide a photograph but some of that additional information is really—kind of—checked on a voluntary basis on the return into New Zealand. So as a New Zealander when I exit New Zealand the only information that is used for me is a photo. But if we use—as I understand it if you opt to use the e-gates then you are providing greater information at the border.One of the things that this bill will allow is say for example in Subpart 2 Amendments to Customs and Excise Act 1996". If you get down to the amendments that this bill will make it allows biometric information which as I have mentioned is one or more of the following kinds of information: a photograph impressions of the person's fingerprints or a scan of the person's irises. Then in clause 15 we go on to new section 32D where it talks about how that information can then be legally used. It states: "The Customs may for the purposes of monitoring the movement of craft and persons passenger and crew processing and border security collect and use the following information about craft and persons arriving in or departing from New Zealand: (a) details of craft movements …"—that is less useful—"(b) personal information including the person's name date of birth gender biometric information passport number nationality and travel movements." It then goes on to new section 32E and states: "(1) A Customs officer may during the processing of a person's arrival in or departure from New Zealand request that person to verify his or her identity by providing biometric information …".It then has a series of provisions around what happens if you fail to do that. Those are quite broad sweeping provisions. At the moment we are basically allowing the Customs Service to at its discretion access or request biometric information for anyone who arrives or departs. I want to point out again that that is actually not commonly what is practised other than a photo. The Customs Service is currently not able to do that with everyone who comes and goes.It may be the will of the House that we consider it to be absolutely fine to broaden that power because actually the status quo provides some powers for entry but not for departure and this is obviously where our concern exists—around people who are seeking to depart from New Zealand and not just arrive. It may well be that we want those broad sweeping powers to be available to border control but that is a discussion we need to have because in the regulatory impact statement it has acknowledged that the Customs Service has actually said that its preferred option is not to check every single person at departure but to allow the discretion. Well actually in allowing the discretion is that enough to make sure that we pick up everyone who might have a false passport or be using an alternative identity? There are arguments on both sides. We really need to test that we have got the balance right in the powers that we are handing over at the border to border security and to the Customs Service.One other point that I want to make is that with these kinds of bills it is always incumbent on us as the Opposition to make sure that we do look at every implication. As I have said we support the bill. The intent of it is absolutely necessary. But as a House it is really important that we also make sure that we look at the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act (BORA) implications. Sometimes we do pass in this House things that do encroach on an individual's privacy. It is always our job to check that that is done in a proportionate way and that we have analysed it we know the implications and that we are comfortable with a breach if indeed a breach has occurred.I try to make a habit of checking a section 7—a New Zealand Bill of Rights Act assessment—against legislation like this. I have not been able to find the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act analysis for this bill. We checked online today; it does not seem to be available. I personally think that is unacceptable for a bill that does undertake some of the functions that this one does. So I make a plea to the Government that if indeed a BORA analysis has been undertaken—which I can only assume it has; unfortunately the departmental disclosure statement made it very clear that it was not available at the time that that was drafted—I would implore the Government to make that available to the Opposition. We cannot do our job without information like that. Otherwise I look forward to the scrutiny that I know the select committee will be able to provide to this bill to ensure that we get the balance absolutely right."