Martin Tracey: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMartin Tracey: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 16 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:13950. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]TRACEY MARTIN (NZ First): Kia ora Mr Chair. On behalf of New Zealand First I stand to oppose this Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill. Originally at first reading New Zealand First reserved its judgment predominantly to make sure that we heard the arguments at the Law and Order Committee and so we supported the bill through its first reading. Since then it has become incredibly obvious that this is predominantly a bill that says: “Trust us. Trust us New Zealand. Give us all these powers. We won’t necessarily use them but trust us.” I think we have seen even just today that there are some standards that this Government has that need to be questioned so “trust us” is not good enough unfortunately for New Zealand First.We recognise that the bill basically is in two parts. One is around interception and the other is around network security. The network security aspects of the bill are largely technical in nature and deal with how the telecommunications sector and companies operating inside that sector will operate in relation to interception warrants. These technical aspects relate to the operation of networks—and we have just heard how wide that description is currently—and the examination and collection of information and data both through and from various network devices.These areas are areas that are particularly subject to rapid technological change. The nature of individual and commercial use of networks and of network devices is also changing at an incredibly rapid pace and it is through this usage by the very nature of its usefulness that makes companies as well as Government agencies vulnerable to exploitation. Essential services both public and private may be subject to eavesdropping and cyber-attacks with the potential for intellectual property to beusurped and the possibility that essential services to individuals and companies may be compromised.New Zealanders deserve and expect to be protected from such potential threats and as such it is necessary to have legislation governing the interception of electronic communications and it is necessary to update them as required as the cyber-environment evolves. But New Zealanders also deserve and expect that their Government will appropriately balance these protections of security with protections around their rights their freedoms and their civil liberties. Having recently just come back from a democracy that is only 2½ years old and over a 20-year period prior to that lost all its citizens’ abilities to keep their freedoms and their rights I say that we need to not take this flippantly. New Zealanders do need to continue to maintain vigilance around legislation such as this where a Government just says “trust us”.We are in a good place. We are a good people and a good democracy—150 years of unbroken democracy in this country; we do it well. But we still must be aware of what I refer to as “the invisible man theory” and that is when there is not enough oversight. When there is nobody watching the watchers when there is nobody checking on the warrants and those who have the powers are at arm’s length and removed from the powers that be then there is the possibility that things will not go well in the future and herein lies New Zealand First’s problem which is why we will oppose the bill.We will support Clare Curran’s Supplementary Order Paper 370 because we see there particularly the new insertion into clause 2 around an independent review of New Zealand security agencies. We hope that this in itself would make sure that the New Zealand public and therefore the New Zealand First Party could have confidence that their overview is appropriately there—that the independent overview is there. A change of Government given the same powers may not be the lovely nice people who currently sit on the Government benches. They may be people who use these powers in another way that is not to the benefit of the people. It is necessary therefore for the New Zealand people to constantly have the ability to be confident that there is an oversight and that their Government is looking out for their welfare.It is also of interest to us that four of the largest internet providers of content and email Google Yahoo! Microsoft and Facebook gave advice to the Law and Order Committee that this legislation would create legal conflicts with other countries and that the law is out of alignment with approaches taken by the UK Canada the United States and Australia—the “Five Eyes” arrangement that we are part of. The Minister for Communications and Information Technology rejected those comments. The Minister—