Horan Brendan: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill — Referral to Government Administration Committee In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHoran Brendan: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill — Referral to Government Administration Committee In Committee[Sitting date: 08 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12536. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]BRENDAN HORAN (Independent):“Dulce et Decorumest”. It is fitting and proper that every good New Zealander opposes Part 1 of this Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill because what it is doing is legalising John Key’s practice of having his secret police spy on law-abiding New Zealanders. Where are the hopes and dreams of our forefathers who died and who fought in world wars for future generations in the hope that we may live in a democratic society? Where are our hopes and dreams that we will live in a democratic society when this Government would allow secret police to spy on law-abiding New Zealanders?Where is democracy? New Zealand is turning into a police State. We need only have a look at theDominion Postthis morning. The call has gone up by the police: “No drinking—no drinking.” After a certain time that is it. What has ever happened to education? What has ever happened to this Government actually? Instead of cutting money from the police we should be putting money into the police so that we do not have these Draconian-type measures. This is a step back in time. We have seen the SS we have seen the KGB and now we have John Key’s secret spy police.People jump to conclusions. Words can be twisted and actions can be misinterpreted and guided with evil intent. As someone who has been spied on as someone who has had their telephone records leaked and used with evil and libellous intent I feel I am qualified—more than qualified—to speak on this and I can confirm that it is a violation in the extreme.Actually even if we deviate a little and we look at what has happened with Fonterra where that has been twisted and turned has anybody in the world died? No. Has anybody in the world been violently ill? No. Fonterra was open in its administration. It found something that could possibly cause an illness and it let the world know. But those who would twist and turn it have twisted and turned it and now we have a situation where New Zealand’s reputation is at stake and all New Zealanders want to have a say. I look forward to when we have good informed debate on this. Let us take a look at what happens to Fonterra in a few weeks’ time and I hope sanity prevails.When I think about democratic rights—all over New Zealand in other areas this Government is stomping and trampling on New Zealanders’ democratic rights. We need look no further than snapper. Here we have a police State and the Government is going to say that no New Zealanders cannot even have the democratic right to feed their family. It is absolutely appalling.I turn now to Supplementary Order Paper 327 which is in my name and which amends clause 6 within Part 1. Although the bill is odious I will propose and support measures that might strengthen it. As reported from the Intelligence and Security Committee a new section 8CA would be inserted by clause 6 “to provide for a set of principles that would underpin the performance of the Bureau’s functions.” It sounds good but the wording is essentially window dressing.So to add some meaning to the wording two amendments are needed. The first adds a new subsection (1)(e) which says that the Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB) must act “subject to effective thorough and genuine oversight.” At first blush Government members might think that that is little different from the existing subsection (1)(d) which says that the GCSB must act “in a manner that facilitates … oversight.” but there is a difference. The existing wording that it must act “in a manner that facilitates … oversight.” does not require that there will actually be oversight. My new subsection (1)(e) does add that requirement so I think it is appropriate to seek the support of the Committee for that.The second change is to turn round the subsequent subsection (2) of section 8CA as reported from the statutory committee. This says that the principles underpinning the performance of the Bureau’s functions do not “impose particular duties on … the Bureau” and its people. [Bell rung ]