Doocey Matt: Electronic Data Safety Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDoocey Matt: Electronic Data Safety Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 18 March 2015. Volume:704;Page:2397. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]MATT DOOCEY (National—Waimakariri): I am rising to speak on the Electronic Data Safety Bill. Can I first say that I think electronic data protection is important it is vital and it is paramount in the 21st century. Although I am not on the Commerce Committee I am on the Social Services Committee so patient data and records and their stories and the protection of that data is paramount as well. It is an area that I am extremely interested in. I was very interested to read about the key driver to this bill in the general policy statement the hacking of 7000 documents from the Ministry of Social Development computer network through Work and Income self-service kiosks. This included medical records personal data and pay rates.I think electronic data protection is important because we are using information technology a lot more these days. Some of us are buying our groceries online some of us are reading books online and I have heard of some people finding love online. I am very much proud of our Government which is committing to essential infrastructure and information technology around our ultra-fast broadband and our Rural Broadband Initiative. This essential infrastructure is valued by all constituents in my electorate of Waimakariri a rural electorate. You very much need essential infrastructure for a strong economy and for the well-being of our people.Data management and protection are vital. I think back to the stories I read post-earthquake when there were a lot of health care systems and IT systems that had crashed so patients were presenting to health care services they had not been to before and health care professionals were making treatment decisions that were not based on the data they would normally have if their health IT system had been up and running. So it is great to hear about the innovation now of sharing vital primary secondary and allied health information but that will come at a risk when you share information across boundaries across sectors and across organisations.I do not believe that a commission of inquiry with an expense of about $4 million to $10 million is the way forward. I also think a commission of inquiry should be for an unusual situation; it should not be used for business as usual. We do have precedent and we do have benchmarking from other reviews into privacy breaches and information management security. These are the Ministry of Social Development contracting Deloitte and ACC contracting KPMG.What we do know is that across the government IT work is under way to address electronic data protection issues. We have a cyber-security plan for Government information and assets and agencies are already systematically working towards addressing some of these issues. I know from my own career working in health—specifically mental health—and setting out new health care services that you do need to think along the whole system and along the whole continuum around data protection not only in terms of simple things like passwords for tablets phones and PCs but right up to risk management strategies and looking at issues around risk assessments in plans. We know from our own experience in this precinct of using our swipe cards and levels of accessibility are paramount to that data as well. We know in health and social services that as there are bigger multi-agencies working now we need to understand how much our patients are consenting to their data being shared and ensuring their data is protected as it goes across sectors and organisations.To conclude we have a Government Chief Information Officer who is working to address data security and has been asked by the head of State services to look into data security. We have a Privacy Commissioner. This is why I do not support this bill. Thank you.