Chauvel Charles: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Chauvel Charles: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Sitting date: 03 April 2012. Volume:679;Page:1555. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
5. 
CHARLES CHAUVEL (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Justice 
: Why has she declined to accept the Law Commission’s recommendation supported by the Privacy Commissioner to increase the Privacy Commissioner’s investigative powers including by giving her the power to issue compliance notices and to conduct information-handling audits? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Justice) 
: 
 The member is quite wrong. 
Charles Chauvel 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I took care in wording the primary question. The Minister has had time to consider it. I wonder whether she would like to— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! The member will resume his seat. The Minister said the member had made errors in his question. She said it was wrong. I cannot know whether the Minister is right or wrong. The solution is to pursue the Minister with incisive supplementary questions. 
Charles Chauvel 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Primary questions go through an authentication process through the Office of the Clerk so it is not as if a groundless proposition is being put to the Minister here. I wonder whether you might just think about whether or not this is a precedent we want to see followed in future. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! The process of the Office of the Clerk approving questions—just because the question has been validated—does not make the question right. There may be support material provided to validate a question and the Clerk’s Office accepts it but that does not mean that any supposed fact or statement contained in the question is correct. That is up to the Minister. The Minister has asserted pretty emphatically that something in this question is not right. It is worth pursuing that to find out what it is. 
Charles Chauvel 
: Without the powers that the Privacy Commissioner says she needs to do her job how can the House have any confidence that the Privacy Commissioner will be able to fully investigate high-profile or important privacy breaches such as the question of whether the Minister or anyone in her office improperly disclosed the Bronwyn Pullar email and associated information? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: There are in fact a range of responses that the Law Commission has suggested we make in terms of the Privacy Act. However I note that the member who has just resumed his seat was in a Government that was in office for 9 years and did not address them— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! I invite Charles Chauvel to repeat his question. 
Charles Chauvel 
: Thank you Mr Speaker. Without the powers that the Privacy Commissioner says she needs to do her job how can the House have any confidence that the Privacy Commissioner will be able to properly investigate high-profile privacy breaches such as the question of whether the Minister or anyone in her office improperly disclosed the Bronwyn Pullar email and associated information? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: The member is yet again wrong. The inquiry by the Privacy Commissioner is—and this is all I can really say on it—relating to privacy matters in ACC and what has happened to particular emails and other documents. It is not specifically about my office. So that is wrong. But the Privacy Commissioner already has powers under section—[ 
Interruption 
] Do they want to hear it or not Mr Speaker? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: The Privacy Commissioner already has a range of powers which she set out for the Hon Trevor Mallard and me. They are obviously broad powers and roles under section 13 of the Privacy Act; also under section 90 to freely obtain information and make inquiries; under section 91 to require information and evidence to be produced and to summon witnesses; and under section 76 to require a person to attend a compulsory conference. There is an obligation to comply with the requirements of the commissioner set out in section 92. There are also other relevant powers. In fact there is the entire Privacy Act and I suggest that member reads it. 
Jonathan Young 
: What is the Government already doing to implement the recommendations from the Law Commission’s review of the Privacy Act? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: The Government has already acted to address the immediate need for better information-sharing for public service delivery through the Privacy (Information Sharing) Bill which is expected to be passed later this year. The Privacy (Information Sharing) Bill will improve the rules around the collection storage and use of personal information while ensuring there are safeguards in place to protect an individual’s right to privacy. 
Charles Chauvel 
: Why is the Minister exacerbating the Privacy Commissioner’s inability to press fully for answers in this matter by invoking the public interest defence in this House as a ground for refusing to answer legitimate questions from members thereby further preventing relevant information from entering the public domain? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: The member is quite wrong again. This is actually an issue for the Privacy Commissioner and as an independent body which she is she needs to be free to conduct her investigations without the sorts of lies and manipulations that people have said in this place. 
Charles Chauvel 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I invite you to reflect on whether that answer was in order particularly the final phrase of it. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I heard what the Minister said. A member cannot accuse another member of lying. I am not sure the Minister actually did that. She referred to lies and things in this place. I do not like ruling more and more stuff out. It was certainly on the margins—I accept that absolutely. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. With respect if that was not offensive to this side of the House then it was a description of her own behaviour that she was talking about. That is the only way she can survive the challenge from the honourable member over here. He says it was offensive— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! I have heard the member and I think the member’s point is not unreasonable. I think the Minister should get to her feet please and withdraw and apologise. 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: Yes. I withdraw and apologise. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I thank the Minister. 
Charles Chauvel 
: Why is she further trying to prevent relevant information from entering the public domain by threatening news media and members of this House with meritless defamation proceedings and just what is it that she has to hide? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: The Minister of Justice has no ministerial authority or responsibility for that and that member should know better.