Clark David: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — Third ReadingText is subject to correctionClark David: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 05 November 2013. Volume:694;Page:14340. Text is subject to correction.]Dr DAVID CLARK (Labour—Dunedin North): Well that member Mike Sabin would do well to take a leaf out of his own book—explaining that yelling does not make things true! I found the irony of that delicious—just delicious. I fear that that member has not read the bill because the connection to the previous legislation that was passed the Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB) legislation is not in dispute here in this House. The Law Society acknowledging that this type of legislation is responsible for striking a balance between privacy and security made a very full adequate and interesting response on the GCSB bill and on the Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill—the related pieces of legislation. If I can read from their submission on this bill the Law Society says in paragraph 2: “The Law Society notes that this bill is intimately connected with the GovernmentCommunications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill”—for that member’s benefit—“and the justification (or otherwise) of its intrusive objectives. The Law Society has expressed its concerns’’—and let me read one or two of those concerns from the GCSB submission by the Law Society. “The Bill changes the Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB) from being a foreign intelligence agency to a mixed foreign and domestic intelligence agency. The bill empowers the GCSB to spy on New Zealand citizens and residents and to provide intelligence product to other government agencies in respect of those persons in a way not previously contemplated and that is inconsistent with the rights to freedom of expression and freedom from unreasonable search and seizure under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 (NZBORA) and with privacy interests recognised by New Zealand law.”The Law Society goes on to express its concerns about the urgency process the undue haste of this Government to get this legislation through without the checks and balances that New Zealand society—indeed most Western countries—expect of their Governments. This is a terrible process. It is a terrible piece of law and that is coming from a body that is moderate whose criticism aims to be fair and independent. That is coming from the Law Society which pithily and clearly explains why the GCSB bill and its accompanying Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill are appalling for New Zealand.The telecommunications bill imposes on the telecommunications network operators obligations to assist the Government on network security matters where they may raise a risk to New Zealand’s national security or economic well-being. That is what it says in the bill and those aspects of the bill have not been defined. That is another reason why this legislation is sloppy. It is not defined what is in the national interest nor what is in terms of New Zealand’s economic well-being within the scope of spying activities and what falls outside them. This sloppy legislation does not define that. There is no oversight mechanism that sufficiently captures whether we should be doing these things or not. And then it goes on to give to Ministers—the Minister of Police the Minister responsible for the SIS the Minister responsible for the GCSB—Draconian powers to use these provisions and we know these people do not themselves always get things perfect.Certainly the history to this legislation the background the context was the Minister responsible for the GCSB coming under sharp criticism for spying on Kim Dotcom. That was against the murk of the appointment of Ian Fletcher when the Prime Minister could not remember the fellow and then he kind of could remember the fellow and then oh well it turned out he was the brother of one of his friends. Then oh he may have actually called him to tell him to apply for the position. He had a major brain fade—what is becoming known as “a touch of the Banksies” I think in this House—on these issues. John Key then went on to be questioned on the Kitteridge report. He went on to be questioned on those illegal cases of spying; the Dotcom case was not the only one. And the GCSB bill and the telecommunications bill that followed which we are debating today went on to try to make legal those kinds of illegal spying on New Zealand citizens. That is outrageous—without any kind of checks and balances that would provide New Zealanders with the confidence that the spy agencies are acting in their interest and not in overseas’ interests.This Government is distracted by spying on people in their homes. It should be focused on bigger issues. It should be focused on employment; on jobs; on policies like NZ Power which will make power affordable for New Zealand homes; on KiwiBuild which will build houses for New Zealanders; on Kiwi insurance to make sure that people can get insurance for their houses; and on the other reforms that Labour is proposing to—