Bayly AndrewANDREW BAYLY (National—Port Waikato): Thank you Mr Speaker. It's a pleasure to be talking on the Data and Statistics Bill third reading and I'm very conscious about time because we've got a very important maiden speech due very shortly.I just want to start out by—the issue is that the Minister stated right at the outset when he introduced this bill today by saying that he understood that on the stock markets most of the value of companies comes down to data. I find that statement rather troubling because here we are: we've got a Minister of commerce who also is responsible for this bill. The reason he gave as to the value placed on data is actually not correct. He is correct in the sense that data is important but the reason why so much value is ascribed to businesses is actually because of intellectual property. I find it troubling that the Minister can't differentiate that issue when introducing a bill of this importance.Anyway this bill is—as my good colleague the Hon Michael Woodhouse noted we're going to support it. But we have had caveats with this bill. I think the important thing is we want to make sure there's a better collection publication and analysis of data that is actually obtained and to produce good quality statistics for use in New Zealand not only by the Government but by other people.It's important that we get this because when National was in power the importance of social investment was such a crucial issue in terms of our decision making making sure that our interventions—our initiatives that we were putting in place—were actually directed at the right outcomes at the right groups to achieve those outcomes. Without data and good quality data you cannot achieve that and that's why this bill is so important.Of course we've seen some issues with that over time and unfortunately a lack of focus on social investment by the current Government which I think is a real shame—an absolute shame. Because otherwise you do not have a context you do not have a framework in terms of the Cabinet or the Minister being able to determine where should we be putting our money where should we be putting our effort? But of course we don't hear that from our Government because this Government just wants to spend lots of money and talk about what it's doing without any outcomes.Anyway getting back to the bill. The Minister of Statistics will continue to have responsibility for specifying the data and statistical priorities and that is important. Of course it is the role of the Statistician to actually put in place the procedures and methodologies for collecting that data. We have no issue with that and of course what this bill does is seek to put in place a new framework.One of the important things—and I don't think anyone really picked up previously—is that there is a multi-year data and statistical programme designed which has been embedded into this bill. So there is a framework and there's a period so people know what's going to go forward in terms of the work that Stats New Zealand does which is a good thing because it's going to prioritise data collection and the production of official statistics.Part 3 was the bit that was pretty interesting. First of all there's the mandatory requirement and it firms up the relationship or the requirement on Government agencies to provide information to the Statistician and that is correct. That is appropriate; we want to make sure that the Stats New Zealand CEO has the ability through his department to be able to go and get the right sort of information and we think that is good. That obligation to provide data for official statistics will apply whenever a mandatory data request is made unless other legislation expressly prevents provision of this data.Now the bit that was contentious is the bit of this Statistician being authorised or being able to authorise other agencies to collect data on behalf of Stats New Zealand and to produce official statistics. Of course quite rightly so we had a number of people highlight this issue. It is a fundamentally important issue to make sure that if we are delegating—and that was the first question: whether in fact the Statistician should be allowed to do that. Some would argue they've had that power for some period of time but it is important that the constraints around that—the appropriateness of that—is properly captured in the bill.My good colleague Michael Woodhouse introduced a Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) that ensured that anyone who has delegated power must comply with Part 5 of the bill. That's a very important thing.Look I think I'm going to give way because I want to make sure that Mr Sam Uffindell gets his opportunity but the last thing was the research. We want to make sure that anyone—SPEAKER: Five minutes.ANDREW BAYLY: Oh I've got more time. Thank you Mr Speaker. It's very appropriate. So the use of data for research was again a significant issue that was traversed quite widely in the committee of the whole House stage because of course what is the purpose of data? It is for the collection of data principally for Government decision-making. But the role and the use of data for research and who uses that data was a primary concern to many people—and we've had many submissions on it but it also occupied a lot of the time during the committee of the whole House.We want to make sure that it is appropriate—again my good colleague put up some very good SOPs on that matter. It was important; I think we traversed the issue quite comprehensively during that process.The last thing is the census and of course the Hon Michael Woodhouse was right. The last census was an absolute shocker—a shocker. To have the Minister not being clear whether in fact we're going to have another census on the due date in 2023 or—and he's kept his options open—whether in fact he might delay it until 2024. Wow. That is unbelievable.We should have a census every five years. That is something that everyone in New Zealand knows occurs. It shouldn't be something that comes out of the blue. This should be a Minister who should be saying This is what we're going to do make sure it happens and don't muck it up. Don't muck it up." Of course that's not what we've heard from the Minister—not what we've heard from the Minister. It is wrong; we need a Minister that is very clear about the priorities. We need a Government that's clear about the priorities and that's not what we're seeing from this Minister nor this Government. Get it right."