Barker Rick: Births Deaths Marriages and Relationships Registration Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Barker Rick: Births Deaths Marriages and Relationships Registration Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:647;Page:15994] 
Hon RICK BARKER (Minister of Internal Affairs) 
: 
 First let me take a minor point. Brian Connell made reference to the Hon Clayton Cosgrove’s contribution to the Committee earlier tonight. Clayton Cosgrove was not denying the right of the National Party to put up a position at all. He was welcoming it. He was simply pointing out that the National Party was blaming Labour for the power crisis in Auckland which had occurred under a National Government. He was simply highlighting the stupidity of a National member’s contribution; that was all he was trying to do. The member should just accept that this is a place for robust debate without being personal about it. 
I come now to the member’s question about what the problem is. Well the problem is quite a simple one. Firstly this bill is about protecting individuals’ identities—protecting individuals from identity theft. If one wants access to somebody’s personal details one finds that the records system in New Zealand is completely and utterly open. Anybody can walk in off the street and get anybody’s personal details. People do not have to identify themselves and they can do what they will with the information. We have seen example after example of identity theft. 
The most interesting thing about that issue is that some time ago I got a letter from the member who is shouting out now Sandra Goudie. She was raising a complaint from constituents who were outraged that someone had gone to the Births Deaths and Marriages register got details of their family’s personal records and had them in his or her possession and the family had known nothing about it. Sandra Goudie wanted to know how that could happen so that she could explain it to those constituents who were outraged that their personal information had been obtained. Well the same member is opposing the changes in this legislation. 
Sandra Goudie 
: That’s rubbish. 
Hon RICK BARKER 
: Well I will pull the correspondence out and table it for the member later. It shows that she is completely confused on this issue. 
So the first thing that this bill is about is protecting identities. The second thing is that up till this date the record has been a paper record but in the future it will be a digital record. When it is a digital record it can be accessed remotely and therefore we will have little or no control over who has access to the record. People could have access to all the historical and current data and from that they could create an identity—a false identity—and use it for a range of purposes. Someone I know said to me that using the basic details from Births Deaths and Marriages records they could within days accumulate tens of thousands of dollars worth of debt against an individual’s name. The State requires people to give us this information; the State therefore has a corresponding obligation to ensure that it does its best to protect that information. That is one tension. 
On the other side of it there is a legitimate case to be made that people should have access to this information in order to know that a person does exist. People should be able to identify that I Richard John Barker exist and am still alive. I accept that that is a legitimate purpose. I should not be able to hide that information; it is true. People should also be able to identify whether people are New Zealand citizens. I accept that as well. The record should be able to be searched but we should know the purpose for which people are searching it and who is searching it so that if there is a problem or an issue in the future we trace backwards to find out who created the mischief. 
The other point I want to make is about historical research. Under the current system if historians want to access the record they have to name the individuals about whom they want information. There is no ability currently to search the record for all births in a particular area. One has to know the names of the people who were born in that area and to identify them. This new legislation will give researchers the opportunity to trawl through this information by area by region by time and so on. They will have a much more powerful research tool than they currently have. This bill will advance the ability of historians to research our records and I think that is a very good thing. But we have to do it in a way that does not take away the right of individual people to have their records protected. We also have to make sure that when we have this information we use it sensibly. So I say that there are great benefits in this legislation for genealogists and there are great benefits in it for historians but we also have to make sure that we protect individuals. 
I accept that the mood of the House was to accept the legislation as introduced. It was sent to a select committee. At that point some members and parties had some doubts about it so there were some discussions about it and they were robust discussions which is as it should be. This is a democracy; we should have these discussions. I forwarded to the select committee a proposal that would meet the concerns—which I thought were legitimate—of historians and genealogists who want access to the record; that would meet the concerns of those people who want their identities to be protected; and that would ensure that there was a screen but a not particularly tough screen and one that we could vary over time by regulation. I wanted the select committee to consider that proposal but it was rejected. The select committee did not want to consult on it. 
Shane Ardern 
: The time had expired Minister. 
Hon RICK BARKER 
: Well the select committee could have come back and asked for more time. Notwithstanding that that proposal will be put before the Committee in the form of a Supplementary Order Paper. 
Phil Heatley 
: It will be? Oh good. When will that be? 
Hon RICK BARKER 
: It is on the Table tonight and we will debate it. 
I am confident that a majority of the House now favours this legislation. I thank all those people who have worked through this issue. It is important to find the balance between openness and allowing access to the record and protection of individuals’ identity from fraud. It is a serious issue to be discussed and not one to be made light of. This bill is also much-needed in that it updates the way in which we manage the record to take into account the fact that we are moving from a paper record to a digital record that can be accessed remotely. We needed to do that. The legislation also updates a number of other features. 
I thank the committee and officials who worked on it. I thank the other parties who cooperated in negotiating to find an amicable agreement about it. I think the hallmark of MMP is that we can introduce legislation we can have robust discussions about it and we can find new consensus about it. I think that is a good thing. I think this bill makes a good point about the importance and value of MMP. I thank all those concerned who have made contributions on this bill so far and I welcome the discussion on this bill as it goes through the Committee stage.