11. SANDRA GOUDIE (National—Coromandel) Link to this
to the Minister of Internal Affairs
Is he confident that his proposed amendments to the Births, Deaths, Marriages and Relationships Registration Amendment Bill will result in a workable bill; if so, why?
Hon RICK BARKER (Minister of Internal Affairs) Link to this
Yes. The proposed amendments to the Births, Deaths, Marriages and Relationships Registration Amendment Bill contained in my letter to the select committee for its consideration seek to strike a balance between protecting private and personal information while still allowing access to that information for legitimate purposes. My proposals will require applicants for certificates and printouts of registered information to present adequate identification, create an access register so people can find out who has accessed their records, and enable persons, on request, to see that their records are not disclosed to the public. This would keep the bill workable and more agreeable.
What benefit will be achieved by severely restricting access to public information, setting up more bureaucracy, and increasing costs for the New Zealand public?
I think the member should listen to her staff member whom I am well advised expressed her dismay that her parents’ marriage certificate could be obtained and used to present for access to other services without her, her family, or anybody else being aware of it. Sandra Goudie’s member of staff expressed to her that no one should have access to her personal records or to her family’s personal records without their sanction.
Darien FentonIdentity fraud has been a growing problem in New Zealand and this is of growing concern to New Zealanders. This Labour-led Government is determined to take action on this. I am aware that in 2006 a Unisys security index survey found that 52 percent of New Zealanders were very concerned about unauthorised access or misuse of their personal information. In 2006 a fraud survey conducted by KPMG reported that 61 percent of respondents believed identity fraud was a major problem for business. It reported that it represents a reported 546 cases of identity fraud with a total value of $2.8 million. I would also draw to the House’s attention the concern raised by Sandra Goudie’s bench mate David Bennett, who wrote to me because he was concerned about one of his constituents whose birth certificate had been taken without authorisation. A driver’s licence was obtained and debts were incurred in that person’s name. David Bennett wrote to me and asked: “Could you please advise whether there are any plans to make the requirements more stringent when obtaining a birth certificate, in order to reduce the opportunity for identity theft?”. I suggest that National members get their heads together, see that this is a serious issue, and take a unified line on it.
Dr Pita SharplesTēnā koe, Madam Speaker. Tēnā tātou katoa. What definition of “whānau” will be applied in the amended Births, Deaths, Marriages and Relationships Registration Amendment Bill to ensure that tangata whenua have access to whakapapa information?
Under the proposals that I put to the select committee there would be no requirement for a definition of “whānau”; any person would be able to obtain access to the records, providing that person correctly identifies himself or herself to the registrar. There would be no restrictions in that regard.
Does he agree with the KPMG report that identified no link between identity theft or fraud and access to birth, death, and marriage information, and does he agree with the New Zealand Herald editorial that stated that the bill seeks to make a change that is wrong and to make it for the wrong reasons; if not, how has he managed to anger just about every interested party to this bill?
It is very interesting to see in a recently published paper that a person has been convicted for stealing the identity of a baby born in 1962 by using the birth certificate obtained from the record. That person is now facing conviction. As for media commentators, I would make this point. They have no responsibility at all for protecting individual citizens from identity theft—they are merely commentators. This Government takes the protection of New Zealand citizens against identity theft very seriously, and we want to make sure we do the best job we can whilst maintaining the balance of giving legitimate access to these records for legitimate reasons.
Peter BrownWill the Minister give the House a firm assurance that his proposed amendments to the bill will not impact adversely on adoptees and prevent them from obtaining, or even make it more difficult for them to obtain, relevant personal information?
Why is he seeking to establish a costly bureaucracy to administer a problem that does not exist when the only person seeking to change the status quo is himself?
I suggest that the member wake up to the reality that identity theft is a real problem. To have open and unrestricted remote digital access to New Zealand’s births, deaths, and marriages records would give an unparalleled scope for identity fraudsters. In this Parliament we need to be careful to ensure that we protect New Zealand citizens from identity theft. I take that responsibility seriously, even if that member does not.