Collins Judith: Privacy (Information Sharing) Bill — First Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Collins Judith: Privacy (Information Sharing) Bill — First Reading 
[Sitting date: 08 February 2012. Volume:677;Page:228. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Justice) 
: 
 I move  
That the Privacy (Information Sharing) Bill be now read a first time. 
 At the appropriate time I intend to move that the Privacy (Information Sharing) Bill be referred to the Justice and Electoral Committee for consideration and that the committee report to the House on or before 15 June 2012.  
The Government is rethinking the way public services are delivered. We need to make public services better and smarter by finding new ways of doing things and service delivery is moving towards better cooperation between Government agencies and community local government and private sector providers. People can find public services bewildering and frequently express frustration with a system that can fail to address problems early and protect the most vulnerable people. All too often children in this country pay the price of that failure. This has to change.  
Too often after a tragedy we hear that different agencies had different information which if it had been shared and acted on would have saved a child’s life. Information is vital for delivering quality public services. Resources cannot be best used if we do not know anything about the people who will receive them or the problems faced. Information sharing can help agencies to see a more complete picture. Better information-sharing will mean that front-line staff can work together so that the most vulnerable people in society do not slip through the cracks and they receive the assistance they need when they most need it.  
There are already several ways for agencies to share information. The information privacy principles and their exceptions allow information to be shared in a broad range of circumstances. Information can also be shared under specific pieces of legislation or codes of practice developed by the Privacy Commissioner. Still the Privacy Act is not as clear as it could be about when personal information can be shared and this creates barriers for agencies trying to identify and assist the neediest people. I know that members have asked whether or not the Privacy Commissioner is supportive of what we are trying to do here and she has been supportive.  
In some cases front-line staff may be uncertain about whether the law allows them to information share. This can lead to an organisational culture or rules that discourage information sharing unless clearly allowed. All this means that information provided to one agency—as simple as an updated home address—will not necessarily be provided to another agency that needs it and this has to change. New Zealanders need quality public services. Better information-sharing will contribute to and support better smarter public services.  
In 2007 the Law Commission began a comprehensive review of privacy law in New Zealand. The commission released its final report in August and the Government will respond in due course. I am very grateful to the commission for its hard work and this bill largely reflects its recommendations. The bill does deal with specific matters recommended and the reasons really are around the life and safety of vulnerable people. This bill will improve the way personal information is collected stored and used to help people. It will ensure that there are safeguards in place to protect individuals’ rights to privacy.  
The bill does two things. First it will remove the need for a threat to public health or safety or to the life or health of an individual to be imminent. The information privacy principles will be amended to allow agencies to share information at an earlier stage in cases where there is a serious threat to public health or safety or to the life or health of an individual. That difference between a serious threat and an imminent threat can be crucial particularly when we are dealing with vulnerable people. This change is needed because in some cases a person may face a serious threat to their health safety or life but the threat is not going to eventuate immediately. It makes no sense for an agency to keep information about a serious threat secret simply because that threat is not imminent. This change will allow medical professionals social workers police civil defence and many other key service providers to share information to help protect the lives and well-being of vulnerable people.  
Secondly the bill sets out a process for drawing up information-sharing agreements to be approved by Orders in Council. The Orders in Council will enable information to be shared in information-sharing agreements outside of the information privacy principles for specified public purposes. Private sector agencies can become parties to information-sharing agreements and share information in the course of delivering public services. This will ensure the existing barriers to information flow and the delivery of public services can be easily removed and unclear information rules can be swiftly clarified. Agencies will be able to decide what information they need and enter into information-sharing agreements to get it.  
The bill is careful to strike a balance between the need for information to smoothly flow through the public services and the need to protect individual privacy. When drawing up information-sharing agreements agencies must consult the Privacy Commissioner. The commissioner may report to the relevant Minister before agreements are approved and the Minister must take that report into account before any agreement is approved by Order in Council. Orders in Council are regulations so the Regulations Review Committee will have an important role in ensuring that information-sharing agreements do not exceed the authority provided by Parliament. Also if the commissioner considers that something is not working in the agreement he or she will have the power to publish a report. The report must be presented to the House of Representatives and the Government will be obliged to respond. If a person feels an agency has breached an information-sharing agreement that person can complain to the Privacy Commissioner which may result in an investigation under the Privacy Act’s existing complaints process. The bill introduces a principled yet pragmatic case by case approach that will ensure that information does flow and that privacy is adequately protected. I commend the bill to the House.