Finlayson Christopher: Urgent Debates — SIS—Report on Release of InformationText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFinlayson Christopher: Urgent Debates — SIS—Report on Release of Information[Sitting date: 25 November 2014. Volume:702;Page:778. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Minister in charge of the NZ Security Intelligence Service):As the Minister in charge of the NZ Security Intelligence Service I acknowledge the report of the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security especially her eight recommendations and I have every confidence that the director who I think is a professional and exemplary civil servant will see that these recommendations are implemented forthwith. I believe that it is under way already. As L V Martin used to say: “It’s the putting right that counts.”For the benefit of the Greens I would say that L V Martin was a Wellingtonian who used to sell washing machines but they would not know much about those because I think they prefer to wallow in filth as illustrated by Ms Turei’s disgraceful question this afternoon. If she has any decency she would come back to this House and she would apologise for the foul attacks that were made on a person who as I said is an exemplary civil servant and I am sure Labour Party members would acknowledge that she is as I have described in that way. I do exempt specifically James Shaw from those vicious criticisms because I think he is a man of integrity. I say to him that the sooner he is the leader of the Green Party the better.I want to set out what this report actually found because there were mistakes. They were serious mistakes and they do need to be addressed. The findings first related to the release of information: that the SIS disclosed incomplete inaccurate information and that is not good; that the then director and the SIS itself failed to clarify matters when they should have; that the SIS was inconsistent in the way it dealt with Official Information Act requests and that its process for dealing with them was inadequate; and that documents were however released to Mr Slater and others that were not properly declassified. So that was very important and I do not diminish that these are errors that need to be addressed but they are errors none the less.The second bunch of concerns related to political neutrality findings and it is very important to emphasise that the inspector-general found no partisan political motive on the part of the SIS or its directors—no partisan political motive. But because of the way matters were handled it called into question whether section 4AA of the New Zealand Security Intelligence Act had in fact been complied with. A number of recommendations that have been made address that issue because it is extremely important that political neutrality never be questioned. So that is an important matter and does need to be addressed. It is a duty on the director—not the Minister but the director—to ensure that he or she consults regularly with the Leader of the Opposition on these important matters. It is incredibly important that the Leader of the Opposition has confidence in the director and is able to discuss these issues because they are issues that are too big for party politics.And thirdly in relation to propriety the inspector-general found that the director and senior staff of the SIS failed to realise the gravity of the situation and the potential for political exposure and I think that that was really probably the most serious error. Mr Tucker who I am happy to acknowledge in my dealings with him was a good and professional man at least had the guts as it were to come out today and say that he had made mistakes. His successor said we are going to get on to them and that is as it should be.But there have been a number of extraordinary claims today. I do not propose to talk about the Brothers Grimm fiction that was peddled by Dr Norman today or the incoherent contribution as we expect from Mr Peters but I do want to refer to what Mr Robertson said because he is a person for whom I have some respect. He said hyperbolically that “John Key and his office have used State intelligence agencies as a political tool.” That is a very very serious allegation but it is not borne out by the evidence. Indeed I say to him with the greatest of respect and affection that it was a sloppy accusation. The report in fact said exactly the opposite. As Mr English said if poor old Mr Robertson had paid more attention to detail he would not have gone into the leadership announcement last week thinking he had Mr Twyford’s vote and that he had won it.So I have emphasised and acknowledged that mistakes were made. They need to be addressed. But they were not the mistakes as characterised by contributions this afternoon and I think it incredibly important that when we are dealing in this area we address the facts. At the risk of sounding like Thomas Gradgrind—whom I am sure you Mr Assistant Speaker will remember from your days of reading Hard Times—facts matter and that is incredibly important.The other thing I want to talk about is that this is actually a very good day for democracy because whether the Government liked it or not at 10 o’clock this morning the inspector-general released her report—we had no say over the timing—on the very day we want to debate the foreign fighters bill. We had no say over the timing or the content. What has happened as a consequence of the reforms of last year is that the inspector-general’s office has been greatly strengthened and she has the ability to proactively commence inquiries and that is exactly what she did in August this year.But it is very interesting to go back to 2013 when these reforms were being debated. Russel Norman claimed in the first reading debate that “the role of the Inspector-General would not work because she would not be an officer of Parliament”. Mr Goff addressed me in the Committee stage and said: “So Attorney-General you are telling us to have confidence in an inspector-general who will be appointed almost solely by the Prime Minister … That is why I say Attorney-General that your assurances will not carry much weight with the people of New Zealand and certainly no weight with the people on this side of the Chamber.” So they were the comments that were made. The office was denigrated and the ability of the inspector-general to act independently and make these sorts of recommendations was questioned but the fact of the matter is that that is exactly what she has done. She has acted independently she has acted strongly and she has made a number of serious recommendations. As the Minister responsible for the agency I give this House my unequivocal undertaking that I will be very anxious to see that those recommendations which are ultimately the responsibility of the director will be enforced as soon as possible. So I think it is a very good day for democracy that we have the inspector-general making those recommendations.I am concerned about the disrespect that was shown to her and her office by the person who leaked the report. I say this as Attorney-General: I consider that the sorts of politicians who break the law by leaking documents or breaching suppression orders—be they National Labour or Green—behave in a way that is at the expense of the system itself. All members have to be ultimately respectful of the system and it is certainly not something that one can make a joke of.Mr Goff made a very important contribution towards the end of his speech. He rightly said that the Prime Minister had talked about the need for bipartisanship. We have gone out of our way in relation to the bill that is shortly coming up to ensure—or do our very best to ensure—that that can be done and I am looking forward to working with Mr Little and Mrs King and other members of the party on these issues. As I say they are too big for partisan debate. I think I said in my Address in Reply debate speech that at least the two big beasts of politics the Labour Party and the National Party have to have a common view on this stuff. Judging from the contribution—the juvenile and dreadful contribution—of Ms Turei today I cannot expect anything better of the Greens but I believe that National and Labour can work productively on these matters.The debate having concluded the motion lapsed.