Wall LouisaLOUISA WALL (Labour—Manurewa): Tēnā koe e Te Māngai o Te Whare. It is my pleasure to speak in this the first reading of the Electronic Interactions Reform Bill. I was not expecting to speak on the bill so I have done a little bit of research so that I could understand what this bill is actually trying to achieve. This is an omnibus bill to amend more than one Act and it may be introduced under Standing Order 263(a) because it is dealing with interrelated topics that can be regarded as implementing a single broad policy." What is that single broad policy? Well that single broad policy is part of the "ongoing information management and digital transformation work" or as I like to think of it how we use technology to deliver public services to New Zealanders. In looking at the merits of this piece of legislation I managed to find a Deloitte public sector research group report that was published in October 2015. It is titled The journey to government's digital transformation: A global view. This survey examined "digital technology's ability to fundamentally transform the way public sector organisations operate and deliver services to citizens" and included 1200 participants from Government departments of 70 countries. The key global findings were twofold. The first was that "Around 75% of respondents indicated that digital technologies are disrupting the public sector and 96% said the impact was significant" and the second was that "Nearly 70 percent [of these public sector officials] said they were behind the private sector." So they identified this huge technological divide.Why does it matter? Actually from research and modelling in Australia it matters a lot. There was a cost-benefit analysis by Deloitte Access Economics titled Digital Government Transformation: Unlocking the Benefits of Digitising Customer Transactions. What it highlighted in this particular report was that the reduction in transaction costs by traditional channels had the ability over a 10-year period to reduce costs by 20 percent. It also increased Government productivity and efficiency to the tune—and this is quite staggering—of $17.9 billion. The other saving that it anticipated was a further $8.7 billion in convenience and out-of-pocket costs to citizens. So when you think about the merits of this piece of legislation actually I think that speaks for itself.The ICT and transitional costs were estimated at $6.1 billion. So if you look at the cost-benefit analysis they are going to save $26.6 billion and it is going to cost them $6.1 billion. That is a 4.36 ratio of savings to cost. So I think really the merit of this piece of legislation lies in that research. I could not find the New Zealand - specific research but I am sure that the officials will be able to provide that advice in due course.I also looked at the departmental disclosure statement and the relevance to this piece of legislation on page 6 is to 163000 New Zealand citizens. That is how many transactions annually this will enable to be completed online. So actually I think the scope of the transactions—I do not know how many officials anticipate but if that is how many currently use those online services if you think about making the technology more accessible to the entire country which was my colleague David Shearer's point actually I think the benefit to New Zealand citizens is going to be huge.It is incumbent upon me given this is not really my area of expertise—but it is of my colleague Clare Curran who is our spokesperson for open government—to communicate some of the messages that she thought were really relevant to this piece of legislation. We obviously are supporting the legislation to select committee but there are questions around the amendments specifically to the Births Deaths Marriages and Relationships Registration Act changes. They are regarding the electronic verification which currently requires statutory declaration documentation. Why? For her and I think for other members of the House it was actually within the context of the Phillip Smith issue. As we know there was an inquiry into how Phillip Smith who was on temporary release from Spring Hill Corrections Facility in the Waikato could obtain a passport. What we want to be reassured about—and I am signalling this to the Government—is that any changes in the use of technology are not going to create an opportunity for someone else in Phillip Smith's situation to be able to obtain a passport because we have enabled them through technology to do so. I am highlighting it because I think it will be one of the issues that will come up. I am sure there are ways and means and we have the officials who will be able to answer those questions on our behalf.Other than that I do not really have much more to contribute. I think that the select committee process is always an incredibly robust one. We get submissions from people who not only understand the technology but will highlight some of the challenges in the system if we remove statutory obligations in terms of requiring for example people to verify people's identity. But I am convinced that the select committee process is robust and the membership of the Government Administration Committee has the skills and expertise to identify any challenges and to provide amendments that this House I am sure will recognise. So I commend the bill to the House. Thank you."