te Heuheu Georgina: Public Records Bill — First Reading 
te Heuheu Georgina: Public Records Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:620;Page:15777] 
Hon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU (National) 
: 
 I am pleased to stand to speak to the Public Records Bill. National will support the bill going to the Government Administration Committee. However we certainly want to have a good look at it when it is before that committee. There are one or two issues we will have some questions about during that stage and we will probably seek advice on them as well. 
National agrees with the underlying principle driving the bill. The purpose as the Minister said is to create a record-keeping framework for Government records and we support that. Over recent years it has become so much more important that we as New Zealanders make sure that a proper record of our history is in our archives and that we properly recognise those things that are distinct and unique to us in our identity as New Zealanders. Legislative provisions that date back to 1947 given advances in technology alone make it necessary for us now to have a look at this very important area of activity. 
I want to raise a couple of points relating to some of National’s concerns. The Minister referred to the Treaty of Waitangi clause and I acknowledge that this seems to be a new approach to issues around the treaty. I remember that when the Government was passing its health legislation in 2001—I am not quite sure about the date—a general treaty clause was proposed. I asked at the time why we should not rather than having a generic treaty clause—which ultimately always seemed to lead to litigation or which on another view of it may mean nothing at all—judge what it is we want to protect then specifically spell that out. It seems to me that clause 7 does that. It states: “In order to recognise and respect the Crown’s responsibility to take appropriate account of the Treaty of Waitangi …” then sets out what is sought to be protected. 
For instance paragraph (a) of clause 7 states that clause 11 requires the Chief Archivist to ensure that processes are in place for consulting Maori. I am not saying that we necessarily agree with that because the issue of consultation in a range of legislation seems to have gone a bit overboard; none the less it sets out what is considered important in respect of treaty obligations in this case. Paragraph (b) states that clause 14 requires that at least two members of the Archives Council have a knowledge of tikanga Maori and paragraph (d) states that clause 26 recognises that an iwi-based or hapu-based repository may be approved as a repository where public archives may be deposited for safe keeping. That is interesting and I look forward to receiving some advice from the officials in the select committee as to how that is to work and about what it actually means. It is important to recognise that many hapu and iwi have frameworks or processes whereby they keep things they consider to be of value not just to themselves but to us as New Zealanders. So it is likely that that is an appropriate provision as well. 
As I say National is particularly interested in clause 7. For myself I am interested to see that it takes a different approach to the treaty and spells out what it is that the Government thinks ought to be protected as against having some nebulous treaty clause which over the years has come to mean not a hang of a lot in some cases. 
The other area is the interface between official information and public records. Under the Official Information Act it is not an offence to destroy official information yet the definitions of official information and public records seem to overlap. So there seems to be a gap there. If that is not the case then we will find out soon enough. I listened to the Minister’s speech but I do not expect that an issue such as that would necessarily be traversed in a first reading speech. I just flag with her that we possibly have an issue there as well. 
There is one other area I would like to raise because one of my colleagues had a group come to him with an issue that touches on the Privacy Act. Archives are a record that belongs to us all after a certain time and the bill constantly mentions access. There are people whose lifelong work or whose job or profession is in archival research. In fact a lot of what we will do in the future and the decisions we make today for the future are based on that as well. A concern has been raised that in this bill an attempt may be made to try to restrict access to the point where privacy issues unnecessarily impinge upon legitimate archival research. That is an area of real concern. We would not want to see that happen and we will be scrutinising the bill’s provisions to ensure it does not. Otherwise we certainly support the thrust of the bill. It is in the interest of all New Zealanders to make sure we have a good process for keeping records. Ostensibly this bill appears to do that.