SpeechHon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National): That's helpful. And I think the comments of the Privacy Commissioner are relevant. I've just brought up the comment though because what I think I heard the Minister say was that there was no real regime for the provision of data for research in the 1975 Act so my two questions really are in relation to that. Because what the Chief Ombudsman said when he said in his submission—It is unclear to me what purpose this alternative information access regime will serve."—he was referring to an access regime that was an alternative to the Official Information Act. So my questions are first does that mean that prior the passage of this bill requests for information for the basis of research was always done under the Official Information Act? Is that how researchers got access to their data because that wasn't my understanding. And secondly when this bill is passed how will it actually sit beside the Official Information Act and are the two compatible? So for example if the Chief Statistician determines that it's not appropriate to release certain information based on the criteria set out in Part 5 could the applicant then go through the Official Information Act to get the same data? Because it seems to me that the Official Information Act in section 9—grounds for refusal—is quite different from the grounds for acceptance and the conditions for acceptance set out in Part 5 of this bill. So they don't actually dovetail together. And I don't think it would be appropriate for somebody who the Statistician deemed inappropriate to get information to then actually use the Official Information Act in order to do so. But the Chief Ombudsman had kind of the opposite view. He was saying that because the Official Information Act exists Part 5 was unnecessary and he recommended it be deleted altogether. So it's just a kind of—again perhaps to put on the record—a wrap-up of the combined effect and power of those two pieces of legislation once they're passed.I think Part 5 is actually in reasonably good shape but the Chief Ombudsman is no dummy. He's having to deal with these sorts of requests all the time and so it does behove us to make sure we've considered carefully what he said.Hon Dr DAVID CLARK (Minister of Statistics): Section 18 of the Official Information Act (OIA)—I think the member raised a very good question—provides for the Official Information Act to be overridden by other Acts and in this case the updated Data and Statistics Act would override it. The member asked the question "Could a member of the public having not received the information they wished for with a request under this Act go to the Official Information Act request the same information and receive it?" And the answer is no.While the OIA provides some protection to personal or commercially sensitive information the bill's research access framework and its confidentiality requirements go beyond what is required for an Official Information Act release by ensuring that people and organisations cannot be identified by data published in research. And also while conditions can technically be placed on information released under the provisions of the OIA the conditions aren't enforceable. So you would choose to use this Act to override it because it is enforceable. The provisions in the bill that provide for statistical confidentiality are in clauses 39 to 42; safe and appropriate data access clauses 48 to 54; and the ability of individuals and organisations to specify access conditions clause 33 ensures that those providing data can have confidence that their data will be subject to the highest standards of protection. I do thank the member for raising this so that we can put that clearly on the record."