3. Question No. 3—GCSBHon PAULA BENNETT (Deputy Leader—National) to the Minister responsible for the GCSBQuestion No. 3—GCSB3. Hon PAULA BENNETT (Deputy Leader—National) to the Minister responsible for the GCSB: Was he advised by the director of the GCSB on the evening of Tuesday 28 May that what happened to the Treasury's website was not a hack in the commonly understood sense" and that "it would be best to refer to it as unauthorised access" and was that same information provided to the Minister of Finance and the Treasury that evening?Hon ANDREW LITTLE (Minister responsible for the GCSB): Yes I was advised by the Director-General of the GCSB on that evening that the member refers to in her question that from the information available at that time the GCSB could not characterise accurately what had happened as a hack in what they regarded as the commonly understood sense of the term and that we agreed that the best description of what had happened at that point was there was unauthorised access. I passed that advice on to the Minister of Finance. I did not pass anything on to Treasury.Hon Paula Bennett: When did GCSB advise Treasury that there had not been a hack; was it before Treasury put out their PR at around 8 p.m. on Tuesday evening?Hon ANDREW LITTLE: What I know from my involvement in the events is that the GCSB did not become aware of Treasury's characterisation of what had happened as a hack until after Treasury had issued its press release.Hon Paula Bennett: So when did GCSB advise Treasury that there had not been a hack and that they should not be using that language?Hon ANDREW LITTLE: I go back to my first answer and that is when I spoke to the Director-General of the GCSB at roughly quarter to 10 that evening he advised me that the GCSB's assessment was that they could not characterise what had happened as a hack at that point that they were yet to do a fulsome assessment of what had happened and that did not happen until the following day.SPEAKER: No I'm actually going to ask the Hon Paula Bennett to ask the question again and the Minister to answer it.Hon Paula Bennett: My question was: when did GCSB advise Treasury that there had not been a hack and was it before Treasury put out their PR? Hon ANDREW LITTLE: I am not aware of direct contact between the GCSB and Treasury and therefore when the GCSB advised Treasury. I am aware that the GCSB did not provide personnel to assist Treasury to understand what had happened until the following day—that is the Wednesday. Rt Hon Winston Peters: Could I ask the Minister would he have answered those questions much earlier if he had been given the information that another political party in this House had? Hon ANDREW LITTLE: Well I think certainly on the Tuesday Government departments and Ministers were grappling with how to effectively deal with what at the very least was unethical conduct. We did not know by whom but clearly there was a breach of Budget confidentiality and it was important that Ministers and departments got on top of it. Hon Paula Bennett: Do you think that Treasury should have corrected their press release—SPEAKER: Order! Order! "Does the Minister". Hon Paula Bennett: Sorry. Does the Minister think that Treasury should have corrected their press release and not allowed the language of "hack" to continue all day Wednesday and into Thursday morning? SPEAKER: Order! That's not something that this Minister has responsibility for. Hon Paula Bennett: Was he concerned that Treasury let the language of "hack" continue to be reported all day Wednesday and into Thursday morning when GCSB had been specific with them that that was not what they had believed had happened to the systems? Hon ANDREW LITTLE: That is a question that I understand falls squarely in the centre of the terms of reference of the State Services Commission inquiry into this matter and it's not in the public interest for me to provide an answer to that question.Kieran McAnulty: Was there anybody at the GCSB who conclusively knew on the evening of Tuesday 28 May how Budget information had become public? Hon ANDREW LITTLE: No. The GCSB's advice to me on the Tuesday evening was that they did not think that the incident could be characterised as a hack but until they had closely examined what had happened—which did not happen until the Wednesday—they could not provide a definitive definition of what exactly it was. Hon Paula Bennett: What specific contact was there between the Prime Minister's communications staff and the GCSB on the evening of 28 May? Hon ANDREW LITTLE: I have no knowledge or awareness of direct contact between the GCSB and staff of the Prime Minister's office but I can confirm that I contacted a staff member in the Prime Minister's office after I had spoken to the Director-General of the GCSB."