Privacy Amendment Bill — Third Reading
Press Release – Hansard
Privacy Amendment Bill Third Reading – 3 April 2025
Sitting date: 3 Apr 2025
PRIVACY AMENDMENT BILL
Third Reading
Hon NICOLE McKEE (Associate Minister of Justice) on behalf of the Minister of Justice: I present a legislative statement on the Privacy Amendment Bill.
DEPUTY SPEAKER: That legislative statement is published under the authority of the House and can be found on the Parliament website.
Hon NICOLE McKEE: I move, That the Privacy Amendment Bill be now read a third time.
The purpose of the Privacy Act is to provide a framework for the protection of an individual's right to privacy and to give effect to internationally recognised privacy obligations and standards with regard to personal information. This bill will uphold that purpose. Its main objective is to improve transparency for individuals about the collection of their personal information and better enable people to exercise their privacy rights. It achieves this by introducing a new obligation on agencies who collect personal information indirectly by third party.
This change is reflected in Part 1 of the bill, which amends the Privacy Act 2020 to introduce a new information privacy principle: 3A. Agencies must now take reasonable steps to ensure that an individual is aware of the indirect collection of their personal information, as well as the purpose for which that information has been collected, the intended recipients of that information, and their rights under the Privacy Act information privacy principles. In making these changes, the bill updates New Zealand's privacy laws to be in line with international best practice. Many countries, including Australia and the United Kingdom, already require notification where information is collected indirectly.
I want to draw the House's attention to the origin story of this bill. Since 2012, New Zealand has held European Union 'adequacy' status—one of only 15 jurisdictions to do so. This is an assessment from the European Union that New Zealand's privacy framework affords comparable protections to its own, and is a vote of confidence in our law. Holding EU adequacy means Kiwi businesses looking to work with their counterparts in the European Union are able to share information without more onerous contractual requirements. It provides what one submitter on this bill called 'a mini free-trade agreement' for the cross-border flow of personal information.
In its first review of our adequacy status, the European Union highlighted a transparency gap in our Privacy Act where personal information is collected indirectly. This bill represents the missing piece of the puzzle that is needed for us to maintain our prized 'adequacy' status. As I've already mentioned, the bill will improve transparency about who is collecting our personal information, and that is important. Knowing which agencies hold information can empower people to exercise their privacy rights.
The bill also makes a number of technical amendments to address some minor issues that have arisen since the principal Act came into force. These small fixes will improve the operation of the Act and make it more workable for agencies.
Some time has passed since the bill was originally introduced in 2023 and I want to acknowledge the many people who have been involved in the process, including legal and privacy professionals, former and current members of this House, and the Office of the Privacy Commissioner.
I'd like to thank again the members of the Justice Committee for its work in considering this bill. The committee received 55 submissions on the bill, including a significant contribution from galleries, libraries, archives, and the museum sector. The major change to the bill at select committee was the addition of an exception for archiving in public interest, and I know Minister Goldsmith was pleased to see how the committee incorporated the submissions from this sector into its report.
As acknowledged at second reading, the new requirement in the bill will mean that some agencies may need to make additional effort to comply with the Act. There are several design features of the new information privacy principle which aim to reduce unnecessary compliance burden while upholding the privacy of individuals.
At second reading, Government shared with the House its intention to submit an Amendment Paper to maintain a six-month implementation period for the new information privacy principle to help agencies prepare to comply. It has since been decided to extend this period to a full year. A 12-month implementation period will allow agencies more time to get up to speed on what compliance with the new principle looks like for them. I'd like to thank the House for agreeing to this Amendment Paper during the committee of the whole House last week.
Finally, I want to acknowledge the Office of the Privacy Commissioner, which is developing guidance for agencies on applying the new privacy principle. The Office of the Privacy Commissioner is carrying out targeted engagement to understand what issues matter most to agencies when thinking about compliance with the new principle. More information about this can be found on its website.
In conclusion, it is important that New Zealand maintains our commitment to strong privacy protections, both for individuals and for the businesses that benefit from our privacy framework being aligned with international data protection standards. This bill supports us to achieve that, and I commend this bill to the House.
DEPUTY SPEAKER: This debate is interrupted and set down for resumption next sitting day. The House stands adjourned until 2 p.m. on Tuesday, 8 April 2025.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scoop
10 hours ago
- Scoop
Suspended Te Pāti Māori MPs To Embark On National Tour
Te Pti Mori says it will continue to stand its ground as three MPs begin their record suspensions. , Political Reporter Te Pāti Māori says it will continue to stand its ground as three MPs begin their record suspensions. On Thursday night, Parliament dealt its harshest ever punishment by suspending co-leaders Rawiri Waititi and Debbie Ngarewa-Packer for 21 days, and Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke for seven. The trio were sanctioned for their actions during the first reading of the Treaty Principles Bill in November. Parliament's privileges committee deemed the haka the MPs performed could have 'intimidated' others. Government parties supported the recommended suspension. Labour agreed they should face some sanction, but disagreed with the length of time the committee had landed on. Speaking to media after their suspension was handed down, the MPs said they planned to use their time away from the House to organise. 'We're going to go home and show that we stood our ground,' Ngarewa-Packer said. The party now has the Regulatory Standards Bill in its sights, and will use its time away to encourage supporters to make submissions against it. Party president John Tamihere told Midday Report the party was feeling 'very chipper' and the co-leaders would embark on a national tour. 'What we've got to do is just get out on our streets, in all our pā up and down the country, activate, organise and that's where we're going now.' Accusing Parliament of being a 'very unhealthy place' for Māori, Tamihere said the MPs would apologise once it was made clear what they would be apologising for. 'If you're saying we should apologise for bringing the tikanga that displays our reo, which is the haka, into the House… see, we're not here to just appear for tourists. We're not here to start a rugby game, you know? 'We are here to display and practice who we are and what we are. We do that 24/7, and we don't do it because somebody says, 'No, when you walk in that Parliament you've got to stop being a Māori,' for goodness sake.' Waititi said there were 'many tools in the tikanga basket' when it came to opposing further legislation. 'It will be deemed, and probably sanctioned, by tipuna who guide us in our wairua, in our ngākau, and the people who guide us outside. They sent us in to be the unapologetic Māori voice. Māori voice means that everything that we have in our kete kōrero will be used.' He said Thursday's debate got 'pretty ugly and sad', referencing Winston Peters' 'scribble' jab at his mataora. 'I would be ashamed,' Waititi said. 'If I was his mokopuna, to look over those clips and to hear him denigrate not only something that was handed down by his ancestors, but also him as a future ancestor the legacy he will leave for his tamariki-mokopuna. I'm saddened by that, but also I feel ashamed that his family have to wear that legacy.' Peters agreed the debate was sad, though for different reasons – telling Morning Report Te Pāti Māori's behaviour was unprecedented and unforgivable. Disappointed by inevitable – former leader Te Ururoa Flavell, Te Pāti Māori co-leader from 2013 to 2018, said he was disappointed at the outcome, but it was inevitable. 'Māori and haka, that is part of who we are and what we do, as an expression of a message. No different to giving a speech in the House and pointing the finger at people. You sort of think, where's the consistency here?' he asked. 'Our people understand the protocols that go with various places. Our marae are run by tikanga and protocols about what you can and can't do. And we also know that there are consequences of actions, both for better or for worse. 'That's never an issue – the issue here is when you line it all up, you'd say that the three MPs were dealt with very, very harshly and unfairly.' Flavell said Parliament had come a long way from the days where MPs could not speak te reo in the House, but even that was hard fought for. He said Parliament allowed waiata and even Christmas carols, despite not being in the rules, but with an acceptance they were in the spirit of the occasion. 'Really, can we get to a point in time to accept that Māori are tangata whenua of this land? Can we not get to a time and have a conversation about actually accepting that kaupapa Māori is okay in this land and in the halls of Parliament, for goodness sake, and to allow it to happen on appropriate occasions?' Flavell said a debate about tikanga in the House was long overdue, but said any debate must run alongside education. 'I hope that we learn from the history and allow the debate to happen, but let's do it fairly, not in the sense of allowing every party to have their vehicle. That will move nothing, it will not move the dial, and we saw that yesterday, but allow actually, a debate to inform. 'Hopefully, the committee that's digging into the whole issue of the Treaty of Waitangi will raise some of those issues. But let's have the debate. Let's allow a discussion on kaupapa Māori within the halls of Parliament, and that, I believe, will go a long way to settle some of these grievances that will not only have come up in the past, but are likely to come up in the future.'
Scoop
13 hours ago
- Scoop
The House: Parliamentary Week Achieves Two Out Of Three Goals
, Editor: The House While Parliament's week was dominated by its final event - Thursday's debate on the report from the Privileges Committee into a haka performed in the chamber - the rest of the week focussed on other business that, while more mundane, was still worthy of note. The Government appeared to have three objectives for this week in the house. Crucial to the administration's continuance, the first goal was to successfully complete the initial debate on the budget. The long initial budget debate could no longer dribble on over weeks, so the house spent six hours of the week completing the second reading debate, which is the first debate a budget gets. The reading was accomplished and so the Government continues. This may sound silly, but a Government cannot survive, if the house votes against its budget. Agreeing to vote for budget and taxation bills are the 'supply' portion of the 'confidence and supply' agreement that is the foundation of any coalition agreement. The budget focus now turns to select committees and what is called 'Scrutiny Week', when ministers appear before various subject committees to defend their budget plans. Scrutiny Week begins on 16 June. Slow seconds A second objective was possibly not in earlier plans for this week - to finally polish off the bills originally slated for completion two weeks ago during budget week urgency. Then, the Leader of the House had asked the house to accord urgency for 12 bills the Government hoped to progress through 30 stages of parliamentary debate. The plan was ambitious and it did not succeed. Despite day-long sittings until midnight Saturday (when urgency must end), only two bills were completed, others were untouched, and 13 stages were unfinished or unstarted. This week's plan for the house had MPs returning to the well for more of the same. Just like last time, progress was at a snail's pace. After quite a few hours, the Government had slugged its way through just a few more stages. The plan was slowed to a crawl by bills' committee stages (formally known as the Committee of the Whole House). Committee stages are a crucial way for MPs to publicly interrogate the minister in charge of a bill. With patience, they can tease out a lot about both a government's development of legislation and its intended real-world impacts. Because the committee stage has no set duration, it is also a way for the opposition to make the Government really work for progress. The Government did achieve progress on the bills left incomplete from budget week, but again, it was probably not what was hoped for. They will need to come back yet again in three weeks to have a third crack. The Opposition is showing itself to be quite effective at the filibuster. The Government's third objective was to have the debate on the recent Privileges Committee Report on three Te Pāti Māori MPs done by the week's end. As Leader of the House Chris Bishop said in re-initiating the debate: "My encouragement would be for everybody to finish this debate today. "Have a robust debate, but let's end this issue once and for all, and deal with the issue and get back to the major issues facing this country." That wish was fulfilled with apparent agreement from across the house. As 6pm neared, the MP who eventually moved that a vote be taken was Te Pāti Māori co-leader Rawiri Waititi. The frankly fascinating debate on the report will be reported separately. - RNZ's The House, with insights into Parliament, legislation and issues, is made with funding from Parliament's Office of the Clerk. Enjoy our articles or podcast at RNZ.
Scoop
13 hours ago
- Scoop
Suspended Te Pāti Māori MPs To Embark On National Tour
Te Pāti Māori says it will continue to stand its ground as three MPs begin their record suspensions. On Thursday night, Parliament dealt its harshest ever punishment by suspending co-leaders Rawiri Waititi and Debbie Ngarewa-Packer for 21 days, and Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke for seven. The trio were sanctioned for their actions during the first reading of the Treaty Principles Bill in November. Parliament's privileges committee deemed the haka the MPs performed could have "intimidated" others. Government parties supported the recommended suspension. Labour agreed they should face some sanction, but disagreed with the length of time the committee had landed on. Speaking to media after their suspension was handed down, the MPs said they planned to use their time away from the House to organise. "We're going to go home and show that we stood our ground," Ngarewa-Packer said. The party now has the Regulatory Standards Bill in its sights, and will use its time away to encourage supporters to make submissions against it. Party president John Tamihere told Midday Report the party was feeling "very chipper" and the co-leaders would embark on a national tour. "What we've got to do is just get out on our streets, in all our pā up and down the country, activate, organise and that's where we're going now." Accusing Parliament of being a "very unhealthy place" for Māori, Tamihere said the MPs would apologise once it was made clear what they would be apologising for. "If you're saying we should apologise for bringing the tikanga that displays our reo, which is the haka, into the House... see, we're not here to just appear for tourists. We're not here to start a rugby game, you know? "We are here to display and practice who we are and what we are. We do that 24/7, and we don't do it because somebody says, 'No, when you walk in that Parliament you've got to stop being a Māori,' for goodness sake." Waititi said there were "many tools in the tikanga basket" when it came to opposing further legislation. "It will be deemed, and probably sanctioned, by tipuna who guide us in our wairua, in our ngākau, and the people who guide us outside. They sent us in to be the unapologetic Māori voice. Māori voice means that everything that we have in our kete kōrero will be used." He said Thursday's debate got "pretty ugly and sad", referencing Winston Peters' "scribble" jab at his mataora. "I would be ashamed," Waititi said. "If I was his mokopuna, to look over those clips and to hear him denigrate not only something that was handed down by his ancestors, but also him as a future ancestor the legacy he will leave for his tamariki-mokopuna. I'm saddened by that, but also I feel ashamed that his family have to wear that legacy." Peters agreed the debate was sad, though for different reasons - telling Morning Report Te Pāti Māori's behaviour was unprecedented and unforgivable. Disappointed by inevitable - former leader Te Ururoa Flavell, Te Pāti Māori co-leader from 2013 to 2018, said he was disappointed at the outcome, but it was inevitable. "Māori and haka, that is part of who we are and what we do, as an expression of a message. No different to giving a speech in the House and pointing the finger at people. You sort of think, where's the consistency here?" he asked. "Our people understand the protocols that go with various places. Our marae are run by tikanga and protocols about what you can and can't do. And we also know that there are consequences of actions, both for better or for worse. "That's never an issue - the issue here is when you line it all up, you'd say that the three MPs were dealt with very, very harshly and unfairly." Flavell said Parliament had come a long way from the days where MPs could not speak te reo in the House, but even that was hard fought for. He said Parliament allowed waiata and even Christmas carols, despite not being in the rules, but with an acceptance they were in the spirit of the occasion. "Really, can we get to a point in time to accept that Māori are tangata whenua of this land? Can we not get to a time and have a conversation about actually accepting that kaupapa Māori is okay in this land and in the halls of Parliament, for goodness sake, and to allow it to happen on appropriate occasions?" Flavell said a debate about tikanga in the House was long overdue, but said any debate must run alongside education. "I hope that we learn from the history and allow the debate to happen, but let's do it fairly, not in the sense of allowing every party to have their vehicle. That will move nothing, it will not move the dial, and we saw that yesterday, but allow actually, a debate to inform. "Hopefully, the committee that's digging into the whole issue of the Treaty of Waitangi will raise some of those issues. But let's have the debate. Let's allow a discussion on kaupapa Māori within the halls of Parliament, and that, I believe, will go a long way to settle some of these grievances that will not only have come up in the past, but are likely to come up in the future."
