Wall LouisaLOUISA WALL (Labour—Manurewa): Tēnā koe Madam Chairperson Tolley. It's a pleasure to speak on the Customs and Excise Bill in the committee stage as a member of the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee. I want to commend the debate and the themed debate that we will be having and what it does provide is a real scrutiny of the select committee's work. Actually in this particular area—in the information disclosure area—I want to commend the select committee. They made numerous amendments particularly to clause 288—which I will speak to—clauses 293 and 294 and I've got some special comments for clause 297. So if we start at clause 288 this provides customs and the Ministry of Justice to share information to enable recovery of fines. The amendment that I specifically want to focus on is actually an increase in the threshold in the definition of what a serious default" means. Under the previous legislation it was people who owed at least $1000 who could be stopped. Obviously that was our opportunity to recover the debt that these people had to society and I know the Minister has talked about that in her opening address. But what we did do I believe is futureproof that particular clause in allowing by Order in Council that amount to elevate up to $5000 over a period of time. Now I think that is a really good attempt at making sure that this piece of legislation is fit for purpose going into the future but I would appreciate from the Minister some clarification about that figure. How it did you come to that? Was that something that the officials with the select committee were able to set? Regarding clauses 293 294 and 297 again I think the select committee did a fantastic job in focusing on the issue of privacy. I found a little quote just before about where privacy came from and I've found a paper from the European Digital Rights commission on the evolution of the concept of privacy. Actually privacy—as they've noted—started essentially in 1776 when John Adams who was the second President of the USA made a comment about the British who at that time seemed to think that they had a right to search houses without justification. So the whole concept of unjustified violation of privacy is in a state of evolution and what I've enjoyed reading in the select committee report has been the thinking around those particular amendments to those particular clauses. As a principle what those clauses have said is that—and I just want to focus on some principles of privacy that our Privacy Commissioner has published on their website. Private information—the whole issue of privacy—is actually about how we collect private information and how we use private or personal information. There are 12 principles. We should think about the purpose of the private information or personal information we are collecting the source of that personal information the collection of that information from the subjects themselves—that is do people know and are they aware that the information that they are contributing even if it is ticking a box is actually being collected? So it then becomes about the manner of the collection the storage and security of personal information who has access to that personal information is it readily retrievable is there an opportunity to correct personal information—so if you find that your personal information has been stored and you find out that there's a problem with it you are entitled to confirm that that information is correct but also to change it if it isn't. So there is an issue about the accuracy of the private information and the people who collect it should also check it and verify that that private or personal information is in fact correct. It should not be kept longer than is necessary and obviously there are limits on the use of private information. It must not be used for any other purpose than that for which it is collected. In fact it's within these clauses that we see the extension of the use of that personal information from one ministry—that is from the Customs Service—to other ministries such as the Ministry of Justice the Ministry of Social Development the police and a variety of other agencies. The intersection of the use of that information then becomes about issues such as police vetting and security issues and do they also relate to issues about some of the substances or commodities that people are wanting to bring into the country? So there obviously are limits and should be limits on the disclosure of that personal information. Also we should make sure that there are never unique identifiers in the system so that people's personal information isn't coded in other ways so that we actually know who they are and all their details. The reason that I highlight that particular framework around privacy is because everything that the committee added to clauses 293 294 and 297 has been about protecting that personal information and the integrity of its use. So requiring Ministers for example to have information-sharing agreements elevates it to a level that is beyond a chief executive to chief executive relationship. It then says that the safeguards attached to the sharing of that information must be complied with. So for example in new clause 293(3) there are now some criteria that Ministers will have to sign off before those agreements can actually be entered into such as "(i) direct access to the information is reasonable and practical … (ii) there are adequate safeguards [including audit requirements] to protect the privacy of individuals … (iii) the agreement will include appropriate procedures for direct access to and use disclosure and retention of the information;". So it'd be really good to hear from the Minister specifically about clause 297(5B) where we are requiring a review of any privacy agreements and the Privacy Commissioner has an opportunity to "have an active oversight of information disclosure arrangements." This is specifically arrangements with overseas authorities and the reason I want the Minister to comment about it is because having a review clause like that actually goes back to my point about the paper that I highlighted about the evolution of—sorry where is it; I've lost my reference—this whole issue of privacy. It's such a changing world and privacy is a concept that will change based on data and information and technology. One of the issues that has been highlighted recently for example is the whole Edward Snowden revelations and the National Security Agency in the United States and their ability to collect data from multiple sources. So in this technology space things are happening at such a pace that I know the Privacy Commissioner—given it is their primary function—will be able to provide that oversight which means that we can update this particular clause if needed or those particular arrangements. Information and the access to information and who and how information is collected is actually dynamic. It is part of the dynamic society that we live in today because it's a global society. It's one where we can purchase things online and someone may be able to monitor our IP connections and what we like and don't like. I mean that certainly happens with our Countdown cards. They know what specials to send you. I just again—in concluding—do want to highlight the work of the select committee and I actually congratulate them because these amendments we should be proud of as a Parliament. Kia ora."