Barker Rick: Police Complaints Authority (Commission of Inquiry into Police Conduct) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Barker Rick: Police Complaints Authority (Commission of Inquiry into Police Conduct) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:617;Page:12926] 
Hon RICK BARKER (Associate Minister of Justice)  
on behalf of the Minister of Justice 
: 
 I move  
That the Police Complaints Authority (Commission of Inquiry into Police Conduct) Amendment Bill be now read a third time 
. The Commission of Inquiry into Police Conduct is vital to maintaining public confidence in the New Zealand Police Force. This legislation has been designed to enable as much information as possible to be disclosed to the inquiry without fundamentally undermining the ongoing interests of the individuals concerned and the Police Complaints Authority. The unique circumstances surrounding the commission have highlighted the competing but equally important interests of the Police Complaints Authority the complainants to the authority the commission of inquiry and the New Zealand Police in relation to information provided to the authority in confidence. In summary four competing interests can be identified. Firstly the ability of the authority to continue to fulfil its statutory functions of investigating police conduct must be maintained secondly the privacy of complainants who have provided sensitive and intensely personal information must be respected thirdly natural justice should allow the police a fair opportunity to defend investigations they carry out on behalf of the authority and fourthly the commission should be able to effectively fulfil its terms of reference to inquire into the adequacy of any investigations carried out by the police on behalf of the authority. All those interests are important; some are also in conflict. 
It would be impossible to find a solution that everybody is entirely satisfied with. A legislative amendment to completely override the secrecy provisions that protect information provided to the Police Complaints Authority would not meet the privacy needs of the individuals who provided that information and it could compromise the ongoing ability of the authority to gather the sort of information in the future that it needs to do its job effectively. But without this legislation the commission of inquiry could not get any of the information provided to the Police Complaints Authority nor would the police be in a position to adequately defend their actions before the commission. That would undermine the ability of the commission to reach a fair and thorough conclusion and would also undermine the confidence of the public in the eventual outcome of the inquiry. This bill therefore is necessarily a balancing act between equally compelling but competing interests. 
Since this bill was read a second time Parliament has reached the consensus that some further direction in the legislation was desirable to reassure people that the confidentiality of information given to the authority would be taken into account. Supplementary Order Paper 209 in the name of Stephen Franks was therefore adopted in the Committee of the whole House to give people that added reassurance. Under the provisions of that Supplementary Order Paper the authority must obtain an acknowledgement from the commission that the commission is aware of the confidentiality attached to information before that information is disclosed to the commission. The authority must also obtain an undertaking that the commission will take all steps necessary or desirable to protect that confidentiality such as restricting or prohibiting publication or excluding persons from hearings. Those steps can be waived with the informed consent of any person who had the benefit of confidentiality when initially providing the information. The commission already has the necessary powers to restrict or prohibit publication of information or attendance at hearings. No legislative authority is required to enable the commission to treat the information received from the authority in a sensitive manner. However the amendments explicitly require the commission to turn its mind to the confidentiality of the information it receives and to take the steps deemed necessary or desirable to protect that confidentiality. 
The Government and the Law and Order Committee would have expected the commission to give those important issues due consideration irrespective of the amendment and to use its powers to protect such information appropriately. However the amendments offer an added assurance and do not presume to direct the commission on when or how it must exercise its discretions. Whether those steps are necessary or desirable is still a subjective assessment for the commission to make on a case-by-case basis. I believe this bill represents the best possible balance and its unanimous support by this Parliament is testament to the fact that the information required by the commission in order to do its job should be disclosed to it. Information produced by the authority in response to information received from police investigating on its behalf continues to be withheld in order to protect the integrity of the authority. Complainants must give their consent before their correspondence to the authority is disclosed to the commission and the police will be able to access information to defend their investigations. 
In conclusion this bill will assist the commission of inquiry to restore the public’s confidence in one of the world’s best police forces. I commend this bill to the House.