Media Statement from the Director of Security


Inspector-General’s report to the Prime Minister

Tuesday 17 March 2009

NZ Security Intelligence Service Director Dr Warren Tucker said today that he welcomed the Inspector-General’s report to the Prime Minister.

“The report, released yesterday by Prime Minister the Hon. John Key, (Minister in Charge of the Security and Intelligence Service), reveals that the NZSIS processes are within the law,” Dr Tucker said.

“The NZSIS welcomes and accepts the recommendations of the report, and we will work swiftly and constructively with the relevant authorities to address these, and to further develop protocols for dealing with information,” Dr Tucker said.

The Prime Minister had requested an inquiry by the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security, the Hon. Paul Neazor, into the adequacy and suitability of NZSIS policies relating to the creation, maintenance and closure of files on New Zealanders and in light of the Service’s functions under the NZSIS Act 1969.

The inquiry also covered the adequacy and suitability of the Service’s compliance with such policies in light of matters raised in the public domain.

The key elements of the Inspector-General’s report are:

  • “On the first term of reference I report that in my view, the Service’s recently introduced templates and procedures are suitable in respect of the starting of an investigation and collecting information. The only question which I recommend should be given further consideration is whether criteria can and should be developed to help determine whether there should be limits to what is put into the Service’s records. That will always involve judgment, but it may be possible to express guidelines. That would best be worked out in my view by those who know what the Service needs to be able to do to carry out its functions, with involvement of the Inspector-General on your direction and the Privacy Commissioner, who has special expertise in her area, as consultants to add independent views.
  • Second, I report that in my opinion, attention should be paid to the periodic review of personal records, paper or electronic, to determine whether the information in them remains reasonably necessary for the Service's function, including reference and research, or whether information relating to a particular person should be destroyed or in effect closed and neither referred to nor added to. The exception to that would be something coming to light which would justify establishment of a new file and is accepted by an officer of appropriate seniority as a justification for action. The review would also check when necessary that appropriate caveats on any information passed to a liaison body were in place.”
  • “As to the second term of reference, I report that it is difficult to make sensible assessment of exactly what policies in respect of collection and retention were applied at various times in the past. Material arising before the Service was instituted came from collectors who may have been applying other criteria. As to disposal, the Service's practice of disposing of files before 1995 (subject to how the choices were made) would in my view have been proper. What has been done since then appears to comply with current legal requirements. If current activity is continued, I expect that the Service will within a reasonable time release from its custody, one way or another, all records of no current relevance.”

The two recommendations from the report are:

  • “I recommend that work be done towards such an agreement on the basis that:


    • Any personal file or record existing when a person becomes a Member be de-activated in some appropriate way and not referred to or added to whilst the person remains a Member, with one exception;
    • That a formula be developed, which will reflect the conscience of the House, for the circumstances in which it would be proper for the Service to collect and act on information on a Member as a person of security interest.
  • In relation to constituent communications, if a proper security case exists in my view they should be open to monitoring within the Act, in the same way as those of others may be, and subject to the Service recording and using information in the exercise of its statutory function. The changes discussed above will close off, other than in exceptional cases, information about Member’s dealings.”

The Inspector-General’s full report is attached, together with the letter from Prime Minister the Hon. John Key to Dr Tucker inviting action to incorporate the recommendations and judgments about the Service’s procedures.

Click HERE to read Hon. John Key's letter [PDF, 117KB]

Click HERE to read the Inspector-General's full report [PDF, 1.4MB]