Bakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Electronic Data Safety Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Electronic Data Safety Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 18 March 2015. Volume:704;Page:2392. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI (National): Thank you for the opportunity to speak on the first reading of the Electronic Data Safety Bill in the name of Clare Curran. First of all I would like to clarify that the National Party will not be supporting this bill. The second thing that I would like to emphasise is what the Hon David Cunliffe mentioned as an example: that during the Labour period there were 13 breaches; during National’s period there have been 86 breaches.Hon David Cunliffe: Just in the last year.KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI: Yes yes. So here I would like to give an example. When I became a member of Parliament in 2008 we used to do everything on paper in the select committees. We did not have anything electronic; everything was done on paper. Today everything is online which means there is an increase in the data and in electronic transactions in Parliament itself. I am not trying to justify that even a single breach is acceptable but I am telling you that there is an increase in the data that is happening right now. Technology is changing and so much is happening.Coming back to what this Government wants to do and what it has done in the past 6 years we have time and again stated our commitment towards providing better public services. Furthermore we have taken dramatic steps towards providing an online platform for the delivery of many Government services such as electronic passport applications. Here I would especially like to mention the Hon Chris Tremain who was the architect of getting passports online and introducing RealMe. It is very important that we follow the technology. Of course when we want to provide ease of services to New Zealanders we want to also ensure that the private and personal information of those using these services is protected and that the general public has got confidence while using these services.The Government has already accepted that there have been many lapses but there have been remedies that have been put in place. We have also moved swiftly towards ensuring that any further lapses do not take place. The need to set up a royal commission of inquiry which will cost taxpayers between $4.5 million and $11 million appears to be very futile. I think New Zealanders will appreciate that if this kind of money was invested in providing front-line services at our schools and hospitals or building infrastructure it would be a better utilisation of money than setting up an inquiry. There are other reviews that are being used or can be used in case of lapses if required.I think history will tell us that the royal commission has been used only when a situation has been so unusual that no other approach will work. The Ministry of Social Development contracted Deloitte one of the big four auditing firms in the world to study the privacy breaches in its information security system management. ACC contracted KPMG another one of the big four auditing firms in the world to look into its information systems. I think both these reviews would have served the purpose far better than a review of agencies’ IT systems. Furthermore it is highly likely that the royal commission may end up asking for the IT system to be reviewed and for necessary measures taken to ensure that such mistakes are not repeated. Basically what the member wants to achieve in multiple areas can be achieved by taking this straightforward approach. With these words I once again confirm that the National Party will not be supporting this bill.