Donald Rod: Government Communications Security Bureau Bill — In Committee 
Donald Rod: Government Communications Security Bureau Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:607;Page:4369] 
ROD DONALD (Co-Leader—Green) 
: 
 As my colleague Keith Locke said the only good thing about this bill is that it confirms the existence of the Government Communications Security Bureau but that is where its virtue ends. The first problem with this bill is that this has been the first opportunity for the New Zealand Parliament to debate it clause by clause. This is an extraordinary bill because unlike most other legislation that comes before this Parliament it was not referred to a parliamentary select committee. In fact it would have been impossible for this bill to be referred to a parliamentary select committee because of the existence of the Intelligence and Security Committee Act and the Intelligence and Security Committee. That is a creature of statute. In our view that should be abolished because the existence of that committee stopped this bill— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: We are discussing the title. 
ROD DONALD 
: That is what I thought I was talking about—that is the Government Communications Security Bureau Bill—that stopped this bill going to a parliamentary select committee. In fact this bill should have a title along the lines of the “Government Communications Security Bureau (Mandated by the Statutory Select Committee and not by a Parliamentary Select Committee) Bill”. It has not had the scrutiny it deserves. I look forward to a decent debate on this bill. I hope the chairperson will allow a wide-ranging debate given that this bill has not had the parliamentary scrutiny that legislation of this significance deserves. So I call upon his good offices to do that because it is of real concern that a bill with this title should be dealt with by the Parliament without thorough scrutiny particularly at this time of international crisis. There are very serious questions revolving round the mandate this bill gives to the Government and I am worried that it allows the Government to proceed without being fulsome in its explanation of what the bill involves. Again perhaps the title should more appropriately be along the lines of the “Government Communications Security Bureau (Secret Spying on Pacific Island Neighbours and Trading Partners) Bill”. That is one of the issues we should be able to address in considering this legislation because we do not know the extent to which that sort of activity is taking place. 
We were told in the briefing that the bureau is a member of a long-standing collaborative international partnership for the exchange of foreign intelligence and the sharing of information systems security technology but we do not know the extent to which our friends and neighbours are being spied upon. The advantage of the bill as described by the Government Communications Security Bureau is that it is a further step towards greater openness on the part of the Government in relation to intelligence and security matters. The bill’s title does not meet our expectations in that regard and it should therefore be entitled the “Government Communications Security Bureau (Extension of the Surveillance State) Bill” because that is exactly what it does. Another suitable title would be the “Government Communications Security Bureau (Insult to the Privacy of New Zealand Citizens) Bill” because again we have no confidence that this legislation will give New Zealanders the security they deserve or that it will not undermine their privacy as a result of legalising what are in our view the illegal activities carried out at the Waihopai spy base and the Tangimoana surveillance station. We look forward to a decent debate on this bill given the fact that it is among the most unusual legislation to come before this Parliament and that it has not been referred to a select committee where parties like the Greens and ACT—was Mr Prebble on the Intelligence and Security Committee? 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: I was on it when this bill was going through. 
ROD DONALD 
: Is the member not on the committee any more? 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: No. Winston Peters wanted to have a go. 
ROD DONALD 
: The Government has consistently denied the Greens representation on the committee.