Personal Explanations — Dotcom Case—Government Communications Security Bureau Briefings

I seek leave to make a personal explanation to correct answers I gave to oral questions during the last sitting week.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is no objection.

A number of oral questions put to me and the Minister answering on my behalf in the House between 25 and 27 September were based on public statements by me that the first I knew of the Government Communications Security Bureau’s involvement in the Dotcom matter was on 17 September. That response was based on my recollection. It was shared by the director of the bureau.

A subsequent review of all material held by the bureau found that on 29 February I had viewed a presentation that was not related to the Dotcom file, during a visit to the bureau. I am advised that the talking points for the presentation included a short reference to the Dotcom arrest as an example of cooperation between the bureau and the police. The cover slide was a montage of 11 small images, one of which was of Dotcom. Neither the presentation nor the talking points were provided to me in hard copy. Neither the director of the bureau nor I can recall the reference to the Dotcom matter during the visit, but I accept that it may well have been made.

I wish to make it clear that I was not briefed by the bureau on its role in the Dotcom matter, nor any issues of potential illegality, until Monday, 17 September. This information affects the answers to three specific supplementary questions during oral question No. 1 and oral question No. 10 on 26 September, and oral question No. 2 on 27 September, but I also accept that it did impact on the questions that were asked during the course of the week. My answers to questions were based on my recollection at the time and the view of the director. There was no intention to mislead the House.