Goff Phil: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeGoff Phil: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 05 November 2013. Volume:694;Page:14338. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon PHIL GOFF (Labour—Mt Roskill): Labour is opposed to the Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill. It is shoddy it is rushed it is inadequate to do what it sets out to do—that is to provide protection against terrorists or international criminals; the officials told us that—and it is absolutely inadequate in terms of providing protection to ordinary New Zealanders going about their lawful business and in terms of the ability of the State to intercept their communications without adequate scrutiny and without adequate safeguards.What this bill does is two things. First of all it increases the power and the ability of the State to intercept private conversations between people over the telecommunications network and it also expands the State’s powers to actually direct the telecommunications companies to do certain things or not to do certain things. But what really worries me about this is that this bill is the bill that is required to implement the changes made a couple of months ago in this Chamber through the legislation arising out of the Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill. That legislation which Jacqui Dean seems to have overlooked made a fundamental change in the power of the Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB). That bureau was not previously lawfully able to spy on New Zealanders. As a result of that legislation it now can do that. You know it is funny—we had the GCSB legislation in this House because the Government was found to have abused its powers. It unlawfully spied on Kim Dotcom and when it set up an inquiry into that unlawful spying Rebecca Kitteridge found that it had done it on 88 other occasions. So you find that the bureau has been abusing its power and what is the Government’s answer to that abuse of power? It is to make the abuse of power lawful. It is not to stop the abuse of power and that is absolute nonsense.We live in an age when the State can exercise remarkable power over its citizens and we are seeing that every day through the revelations of Edward Snowden who was the United States whistleblower. What has he exposed about the National Security Agency in the United States? He has exposed that it is intercepting and looking at not tens not hundreds not thousands but millions of pieces of communication. It is communication not by terrorists not by international criminal gangs not by those who are trying to break into the cyber security of other systems but by ordinary Americans and by ordinary people around the world. It is even spying on its friends. It is spying on the Chancellor of Germany an ally of the United States.Then we had the grovelling performance of the Minister of Defence who goes over and meets the Secretary of Defense in the United States and says “We trust you not to spy on us.” and he gives the secretary a rugby jersey. Was that not sweet?Hon Dr Nick Smith: What would the member have said?Hon PHIL GOFF: I would have asked the obvious question. There is an agreement under “Five Eyes” that said that you do not spy on your allies. We want to know what they are doing. I want to tell you this Mr Smith: Mr Coleman said we had no secrets. Well apparently we do because the Government will not tell us what it is negotiating with the Trans-Pacific Partnership but it does not mind if the Americans are eavesdropping to find out what our negotiating position is. Apparently there are no secrets but actually Mr Smith we have New Zealand companies competing with their American competitors. I do not know whether you Mr Smith feel comfortable about the fact that they might be spying on what New Zealand companies that are in competition with the Americans are doing in this country but I am not comfortable with that. Dr Coleman should absolutely apologise for that fawning grovelling interview that he did with Secretary of Defense Hagel.We can see that there is a real ability to abuse the powers in this bill and that it happens both in New Zealand and around the world. We can see that there areinadequate protections because our Government Communications Security Bureau has unique powers to intrude on your privacy or the privacy of any New Zealander in this country. If we are going to give security agencies those sorts of intrusive powers then it is incumbent on this House to ensure that there are proper oversights so that we can be sure that those powers are not being abused.When we had the Government watchdogs and New Zealand watchdogs against the abuse of State power come before the Law and Order Committee what did they tell us? They said that this bill should not proceed. They said that there are not adequate safeguards and that what the Government is bringing before this House is not satisfactory. Take the New Zealand Law Society for example. It says that there needs to be “systemic checks that should be put in place to ensure the GCSB powers that are to be extended by the amendments are exercised appropriately.” What does the Law Society say? It says that those checks have not been put in place. It says that this bill is intrusive and that it “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”. It says that this bill is inconsistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act and is inconsistent with privacy interests recognised under law in New Zealand. That is the Law Society. And what does the Attorney-General say? “What would the New Zealand Law Society know about the law and the Bill of Rights?” It is its job. That is arrogance Mr Smith and you know it.Then we have the Human Rights Commission. Mr Smith the Human Rights Commission is appointed by this Government and what did it say? I want to quote it to you Mr Smith. “The Commission considers that what is proposed by the GCSB Bill and the TICS Bill is too wide-reaching. It does not provide adequate oversight and makes inadequate provision for ensuring appropriate transparency and accountability of those who administer the legislation. It does not provide for a legal regime containing sufficient safeguards against abuse of power and to facilitate a proportional approach.” The primary recommendation of the Government’s own Human Rights Commission is “that a full and independent inquiry into New Zealand’s intelligence services be undertaken”—this party’s position. What was the response of that Government to its own Human Rights Commission saying that this legislation should not be before this House? The arrogant and overbearing response of that Government was to threaten the funding of its own Human Rights Commission. Did it listen to the watchdog that it had set up that warned about this legislation? No it threatened that watchdog and said “We’ll withdraw your funding if you’re critical of the Government.” Frankly that is an absolute disgrace and the Government should apologise for what it has done after it withdraws this legislation.Then we have the Privacy Commissioner. The Privacy Commissioner is a woman who understands how our system works. She was for more than a decade the Secretary of the Cabinet. She knows the secrets of Government. She is a practical and wise person. She says this legislation should not proceed in this form and that this was not the right model of oversight to guarantee that we had protections against abuse.So I ask the next National speaker who gets up to speak on this bill to say why each of those watchdogs is wrong in what they are saying to say why adequate oversight has not been built into this legislation and to say why the Government is ignoring the overwhelming evidence of how these intelligence agencies quickly abuse their power and in fact how our own Government Communications Security Bureau has abused its power. This legislation is not adequate. It is not in the right form. We were told it would not stop the serious terrorist groups because they know how to avoid those communication companies that are subject to interception. It will not work on them butit will allow this Government to spy improperly on New Zealanders going about their lawful business.New Zealanders are right to be concerned about this Government. They are right to be concerned about its arrogance. They are right to be concerned about how out of touch it has got in 5 short years. We oppose this legislation and we will Dr Smith change this legislation and change the Government Communications Security Bureau legislation that is so badly drafted and so lacks safeguards.