Sio Su'a William: Customs and Excise (Joint Border Management Information Sharing and Other Matters) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Sio Su'a William: Customs and Excise (Joint Border Management Information Sharing and Other Matters) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:666;Page:14039] 
SU’A WILLIAM SIO (Labour—Mangere) 
: 
 The Customs Service is New Zealand’s front line to the world and it plays a significant role in facilitating international trade and tourism. Labour acknowledges that our border management environment involves a number of agencies that facilitate and control the flow of people and goods across our borders. We recognise that the Customs Service makes a significant contribution to border management and assists other agencies in meeting a range of objectives at the border. We agree that the challenge for the service is to maintain security of the border from risks and threats without compromising trade and travel facilitation standards. Labour notes that enhanced information technology and the joint border management information system may assist the service to process the transactions from increasing volumes of trade and travel. Labour believes that in order to effectively respond to increasing demands Customs Service interventions need to be focused on people goods or crafts that are likely to present risks to New Zealand’s interests. We believe that those risks need to be identified as early as possible in the process. Labour supports the work of the Customs Service and its officers on the New Zealand border and will therefore support the Customs and Excise (Joint Border Management Information Sharing and Other Matters) Amendment Bill’s referral to a select committee. 
However although Labour supports this bill’s referral to a select committee we do have concerns about privacy issues and issues of human rights and freedoms which I will pose by way of asking the following questions. In regard to the joint border management information sharing we ask what the guiding principles are of this system of information sharing. What specific information is collected used disseminated or maintained in the system? What are the specific sources of information in the system? Will the public and stakeholders accept why the information is being collected used disseminated or maintained? How will information be checked for accuracy? Who will check it for accuracy? How will the public have inaccurate or erroneous information corrected? 
I give an example of a gentleman who lives in my electorate whose mother died not too long ago. He dropped everything bought an airline ticket—one way with cash—and rushed to be with his family in Pakistan. After the funeral rites were all done he bought a ticket—again with cash—and returned to Mangere. Upon his arrival he was detained at the airport and questioned for several hours. That was not the first time that it had happened to this gentleman and he is not the only person to whom it has happened. 
So there are questions about the validity of information that is collected and about how an individual corrects erroneous and inaccurate information. What are the specific legal authorities arrangements and/or agreements that would define the collection of information between the border agencies involved? Given the amount and type of data collected what will be the privacy risks and how will these risks be mitigated? What types of tools will be used to analyse data and what type of data may be produced? Will the system collect commercially-sensitive data; if so how will commercially-sensitive data be used? What information is retained in the system and for how long? What are the risks associated with the length of time that data is retained for and how will those risks be mitigated? 
Which border agencies is the information shared with other than the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry? What information is shared and for what purpose? How will the information be transmitted or disclosed and what are the privacy risks associated with each transmission or disclosure method? With which external organisations—and I say external to New Zealand border control agencies—is the information shared? What information is shared and for what purpose? What security measures will safeguard the transmission of information? 
Do individual persons have the opportunity or right to decline to provide information? Are the individuals from whom data is collected given notice before the collection of information? Do individuals have the right to consent to particular uses of the information; if so how does the individual exercise that right? 
What procedures will allow individuals to gain access to their information? What procedures will allow individuals to correct inaccurate or erroneous information? How will individuals be notified of the procedures for correcting their information? If no form of redress is provided what alternatives are available to individuals? 
What procedures will be in place to determine which users may access the system and where will those procedures be documented? Will contractors have access to the system? How will we ensure that contractors use the system lawfully and legally? 
What privacy training will be provided to users either generally or specifically relevant to the system and how often? What auditing measures and technical safeguards will be in place to prevent the misuse of data? 
What technology is being used for this system? Will the technology used in the joint border management system be future-proofed for new technological developments and future developments? Is it the Government’s intention to extend the joint border management information sharing from internal New Zealand border agencies to other nations within our surrounding region? 
Labour believes that we need to ensure both that the Customs Service is able to take advantage of relevant technological developments to ensure the efficiency and effectiveness of customs’ operations and to have the appropriate technology and intelligence capability to monitor them. It is Labour’s view that there are enough significant privacy considerations to warrant the Privacy Commissioner to participate in a statutory review of the provisions of the bill in 5 years’ time. We agree with those provisions but we ask whether 5 years is too long. 
I also say that sophisticated data-sharing software is a powerful tool and it does not come cheap. We understand that the $75.9 million allocated in the 2010-11 Budget will pay for only the first part of a two-stage project. Industry sources estimate that the total cost could top $200 million. The Minister has conceded that the Government expects to cover at least some of the development cost which has commenced with an expanded import transaction fee. From 1 July this year the Customs Service began applying an import transaction fee of $24.75—which is GST inclusive—to a range of personal imports that attract GST and import duty. Generally the import transaction fee will apply to goods valued over $400 but at times packages valued at less than $400 will attract the fee. The fee will apply to all import items such as jewellery clothing and electrical appliances. The Customs Service says that import transaction fees are applied to cover the time and costs associated with processing imports and are used to fund border risk-management activities. Consumers who purchase goods from overseas over the Internet will be more likely to be caught by the fee. 
Then there is the powerful data-matching tool itself which is designed to hone in on suspicious passengers and freight at ports and airports. The system will be able to check for relationships between people who have previously been too obscure to have concerns raised about them. It will track all import and export transactions—personal movements across the border criminal records and family and romantic relationships. This is the reason why we have raised the fact that significant privacy considerations ought to be considered. I would be keen to hear from the Privacy Commissioner about the risk associated with that system and about the way we mitigate any and all risks identified. 
I would also be keen to hear from the general public who have had good and bad experiences at our borders about any concerns they may have. In addition I think it will be important to hear from the agencies that may be directly affected by this bill including those organisations whose interests may be affected by this legislation. 
Although Labour supports this bill to go to its select committee consideration and although some amendments are so-called minor amendments we ask those questions because the real concerns my colleagues and I share are the issues about privacy. Those issues are the reason I have posed those questions. They are significant questions that hopefully the select committee process will be able to tease out and receive evidence upon from the general public out there. Thank you very much.