Bayly AndrewANDREW BAYLY (National—Port Waikato): Thank you Mr Speaker. It's a pleasure to be talking on the Data and Statistics Bill second reading. I wasn't on the Governance and Administration Committee although I did hold this shadow portfolio last year and had the pleasure of meeting Mark Sowden and his team who at that stage was as relatively new CEO of Statistics New Zealand. I thought the direction he was taking the organisation after the previous disaster was very helpful and hopefully will lead to a better outcome. And of course this bill as we've heard helps move statistic collection and production of data into the 21st century if I may say in terms of how we go about collecting data and how it can be used. There are a few issues with the bill and I think the Hon Michael Woodhouse has certainly covered off his Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) 156 which raises the question of why on earth should Statistics New Zealand be allowed to contemplate either holding the election in 2023 or 2024 especially when a decision will be made literally in July which is not that far away. So it raises sort of the most fundamental questions—and I know Minister Clark talked about the potential impact of COVID and all that sort of stuff. Normally you would not give unfettered power to people or organisations. I think Mr Michael Woodhouse's Supplementary Order Paper is actually good because it actually lists some specific criteria that might be used in determining whether or not to delay Statistics New Zealand's census and of course he talks about a national state of emergency an unreasonable level of risk to the public health and safety—so that could be a COVID reason—an unreasonable level of risk to the health and safety of staff employed by Stats New Zealand or civil unrest. Those are four clear areas where if they were to occur that would be a legitimate reason to delay it. But just to say Well we're just going to make our decision and we could delay it technically theoretically for any other reason for any reason." then that is a very unusual power to grant any organisation.The bill obviously picks up Te Tiriti o Waitangi requirements and particularly a way of engaging with Māori which is perfectly understandable. But of course I think we should also recognise that the number of different ethnic groups in New Zealand is very very considerable and there is also an absolute need that our other minority communities are also adequately looked after adequately catered for adequately addressed in terms of their language and the way that they want to be engaged with which is quite likely to be different from what Māori might want or even Pacific Island communities. So I think the importance of the way that statistics are collected is important but also there's a need for recognition that there are multiple ethnic groups and they are also just as important in New Zealand.The issue around the secrecy of the data and how this data is collected and stored is obviously a very very important aspect. This bill replaces the 1975 Statistics Act statutory declaration of secrecy with a more modern as they say fit for purpose certificate of confidentiality. But it does still continue the two statutory obligations mentioned about just making sure that if data is collected it is protected and individuals and organisations are not unnecessarily identified—although of course in the bill it specifically enables certain entities or individuals to be named as the Minister's covered off in his opening address. That is a very very important element of data and how it's used because it does give rise to a wider issue which is how this data might be used.Of course the collection of data is set out in clause 22 and one of the aspects I find slightly interesting just having a quick look through the bill is for what purpose might data be used either by Stats New Zealand or by another entity. In clause 22 it says that "Data may be collected by the Statistician under this Act—… (c) if the Statistician considers the data is necessary or desirable to enable the Statistician to produce official statistics or desirable for research under Part 5" and then it lists those provisions.I think this gives rise to how data might be used and I'll give you a case in point. David Parker's on a witch hunt for high-paying New Zealanders and wanting to understand what they're doing with their tax structures and he has commenced an investigation through the Inland Revenue Department (IRD) to find out the personal tax position of many wealthier New Zealanders. The question I have is whether data that may be collected by the Statistician could be used by another Government entity such as the IRD. And I give that as an example because during the committee of the whole House stage I think it's very very important that we do ascertain whether in fact we do not allow people to use information particularly where it's a Government-sponsored investigation it's a ministerial investigation conducted by the IRD—to use another entity to provide that information. Certainly I think that's something we need to get certainly from the Minister: that it will not cannot and should not occur under those arrangements.I think that's all I want to say on the bill at the moment. I'm looking forward to other contributions on it. But obviously it is a welcome update to the Act and hopefully we're going to lead to much more timely relevant statistics. I think the issue around the type of research undertaken and the type of information provided by Stats New Zealand is also critical to making sure that we are getting the right sort of stats the stuff in the data and the information that people really want to use. So on that note I'm looking forward to hearing what other people have to say."