Privacy (Information Sharing) Bill

I rise to raise concern with the title of the Privacy (Information Sharing) Bill, which I think has an unfortunate acronym. But that perhaps reveals the inconsistency in the Government’s handling of privacy matters, which I raised in my earlier speech. If we were taking privacy information-sharing seriously, as the bill’s title might suggest on the face of it, rather than reading it as an acronym, we would probably suggest a more comprehensive approach to the legislation and the Law Commission’s recommendations, rather than one that takes bits and pieces, that cherry-picks, and that does not really take seriously the privacy of the citizens of New Zealand across the Government.

We have Skycity deals, the Inland Revenue Department tendering process, and other things that do not seem to suggest that this Government really does take privacy issues seriously. It does when it suits—it does when it suits. We have had some tough language, but as I was saying in my earlier Committee stage speech we have not yet seen a credible plan to fix the Inland Revenue Department’s computer system, which is ancient and is no longer able to handle privacy matters in the way a modern system might.

We have seen, in the case of ACC and Work and Income, some things that we in the Opposition do not think are proper. And we think that if this Government were taking privacy seriously it would do things differently. We also think the Government would be transparent and less private when it came to tendering arrangements—for example, around the Inland Revenue Department rebuild. I have raised some concerns about that in terms of the way in which those tendering documents ruled out New Zealand tendering parties simply by virtue of the way in which those tendering documents were written.

We see a Government determined to preserve transparency where it suits, and when there is a political gain to be made—such as when members of the public have their private details released for political purposes—but not being transparent when it comes to tendering Government contracts in a full and transparent way.

It is perhaps ironic that the title of this bill, the Privacy (Information Sharing) Bill, suggests an unfortunate acronym. It does suggest that the Government is taking the mickey, and I think the public can themselves form a judgment on this. Thank you.

on behalf of the Minister of Justice: I move, That the Committee divide the bill into the Privacy Amendment Bill, the Tax Administration Amendment Bill, and the Births, Deaths, Marriages, and Relationships Registration Amendment Bill, pursuant to Supplementary Order Paper 173.