12. SANDRA GOUDIE (National—Coromandel) Link to this
to the Minister of Internal Affairs
Is he satisfied that the new passport microchips are tamper-proof; if not, why not?
Hon RICK BARKER (Minister of Internal Affairs) Link to this
No passport could be tamper-proof. Tampering with a passport does not mean that the passport can be credibly forged. Any attempt to tamper with the chip in an e-passport will be detected when the e-passport is presented to border control authorities. A microchip is only one of the security features in an e-passport.
Has the Minister seen reports that Auckland University researcher Peter Gutmann and a group of computer experts have cracked the chip, and described the security flaws as serious, and will the Minister ask his department to report on the integrity of the chip, which stores digital information on the new passports; if not, why not?
I have seen the reports, I have asked my department for a report, and I can assure the member and the House that the passport chip has not been cracked. What they have done is to clone some elements of the passport, but that they have been able to clone it does not mean to say that they then can pass the information off as genuine, because the security codes that go with it, necessary for it to be a genuine passport, and read as such, were not present.
H V Ross Robertson Link to this
Can the Minister tell the House or explain how the Government is improving passport security, generally?
This morning I unveiled a new passport design cover, which I have here, which adds to a much better-looking passport for Kiwis, and I can assure the House that the new passport will have better security features physically, and in the chip as well. So there is a good-looking, new passport on the way with much better security.
Does the Minister think it acceptable that the passport microchips are “embarrassingly simple to hack into”; if so, why?
People have over-egged their claims for a gullible audience before today. I want to assure the member that that is not the case.
Gerry BrownleeI raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. In line with your ruling in the House the other day, we will take one of our Thursday supplementary questions, if that is all right, and offer it to—
Madam SPEAKERAs the member well knows, since I made sure he got a copy of the ruling, that applies only to the smaller parties that are specifically named. So I am sorry that—
Why is that? [ Interruption] I see, you are just acknowledging that that is a fundamental unfairness approved by the Labour Party.
No, the member is being silly. This matter has been discussed, and it is for the obvious reason that the smaller parties get very, very few supplementary questions. At times they have a question and they wish for the opportunity to exercise their freedom of speech, which we hear so much about and which we do try to ensure happens in this House. It has been a rule for over 3 years or so.
I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. The smaller parties have every opportunity to get more questions in the House, simply by getting more members here. To say that our opportunities will be curtailed, simply because of some fairness to the small parties, is, I think, quite wrong.
I am sorry, Mr Brownlee. I have ruled on the matter, and that is the end of it. I suggest if you wish to change it, that you bring the matter up at the Business Committee. That will be an opportunity to be able to establish a new rule; but meanwhile, that is what has been decided.
I seek leave to table the press release, dated 3 November 2005, which stated: “NZ passports to contain security chip”.
I seek leave to table the Sunday Star-Times 17 August 2008 release: “Kiwi ‘geek’ cracks passport”.
I seek leave to table today’s press release by the Minister saying that the New Zealand passport is one of the most trusted passports—