Corin Dann discusses GCSB legislation with Peters
Sunday 21 July, 2013
Political editor Corin
Dann discusses the GCSB legislation with New Zealand First
leader Winston Peters
Q+A, 9-10am
Sundays on TV ONE and one hour later on TV ONE
plus 1. Repeated Sunday evening at 11:30pm.
Streamed live at www.tvnz.co.nz
Thanks to the support from NZ On
Air.
Q+A is on Facebook, http://www.facebook.com/NZQandA#!/NZQandA
and on Twitter, http://twitter.com/#!/NZQandA
Q
+ A
CORIN DANN INTERVIEWS WINSTON
PETERS
CORIN
Winston Peters, New Zealand First leader, thank you
very much for joining us on Q+A this morning. The GCSB
bill is coming to the crunch now with the report back to
select committee this week coming. Where is New Zealand
First at in terms of its possible support for
it?
WINSTON PETERS – NZ First
Leader
Look, we haven’t got the information,
and I don’t think most parliamentarians have the
information required to make a decision or give you an
answer of the type you’re looking for. The fact is
it’s been done with breathtaking speed. The sittings and
submissions have been done more on the basis, from my
observation – and I was there as an observer – more on
the basis of, ‘Let’s get it over with as fast as
possible. We’ll get them out of here within 10 minutes
or quarter of an hour.’ And this was when you had
serious submissions made by pretty serious entities. So,
look, we haven’t got the information. The balance of
Parliament and observers outside of Parliament who are
seriously interested and, I believe, the media just don’t
know what’s going on here, and so one can’t answer your
question.
CORIN
Initially, it sounded like you were prepared to try
and offer support if there was some concessions made,
particularly around a panel. Has your position changed
now? Are you saying that it’s harder for you to support
this legislation?
WINSTON
No, it’s a matter of principle. From the word
go, you recall we said back in April that if the legislation
had the following features – that is it was going to be
overseen by three independent people in whom the public can
have confidence; if, second, it did not infringe the
rights – the human rights and civil rights – of New
Zealanders; and, thirdly, if it dealt with the issue of the
wider cyber issue that’s now not new but in a greater
dimension that it has ever been before – then we would
seriously look at it. We’ve not changed our mind on
that.
CORIN But hasn’t
John Key, though? I mean, he has offered up this idea of a
panel. Has he spoken to you about that? Has his office
spoken to your office about that? He is making steps
towards what you’ve asked
for.
WINSTON No, no, he hasn’t.
What he’s done is say, ‘Look, we’re looking for two
people to be in the panel. One is internal, and one is
external. It’s Peter Dunne’s idea, and that’s what
we’re going to do.’ Now, that’s not what New Zealand
First said. We said we wanted three external people,
independent, and in whom the public could have total
confidence. And on the question of public safety as to
their privacy and their fundamental rights, he has not
addressed that at all. And you cannot go past the Privacy
Commissioner, the Human Rights Commissioner and the Law
Society and all the rest, who are all— I mean, they’re
not left-wing, violent radicals, these people. They’re
fundamentally pillars of our society if you look at our
good— our institutions as a modern country and a great
civil society. So we had a legal problem that arose
because of Kim Dotcom and legal activity, and instead of
addressing that, we have got a massive expansion, we’re
now an international surveillance body, the GCSB is to
become a domestic surveillance
body—
CORIN That’s an
interesting point, because—
WINSTON
…and having all the powers if they are
helping a New Zealand enforcement agency like the SIS and
Police.
CORIN
So you’re very clear, because John Key says this
is not an expansion of the powers of the GCSB, you don’t
believe that?
WINSTON Well,
look, John Key is, with the greatest respect to him, a
sharemarket trader who likes to get a deal done as fast as
possible and is not a lawyer. All the Law Society— The
Law Society is saying that. The Human Rights Commissioner is
saying that. The Privacy Commissioner, who was a long-term
Secretary of Cabinet with high regard across the political
divide, Marie Shroff, is saying that. Now, Mr Key cannot
get away with the argument, ‘Well, if you’re not doing
anything wrong, what have you got to worry about?’
CORIN It must
be—
WINSTON That’s the North
Korean answer—
CORIN But it
must be your instinct – you have been a Minister of
Foreign Affairs. You have signed off warrants. It must
be in your instincts to want to pass this legislation, to
want to have that level of security there for New
Zealanders.
WINSTON It
is. I know what this is like and what’s important about
these issues. But if you do that, and in terms of hunting
for people who are a clear and present danger to New Zealand
and you yourself endanger New Zealanders, that is a bridge
far too far. And the Prime Minister should’ve stopped
this process at the very beginning and said, ‘Look,
let’s get a group of parliamentarians across the political
divide together and try and solve this issue.’ Instead,
he’s attempted, sad to say— And this is regrettable
because it is about an issue far bigger than politics –
national security – he’s attempted to ram it through,
and frankly, there have got to be people, surely like the
Attorney General and other lawyers in his caucus, who think
this is really
bad.
CORIN You
must be— What are the threats? I mean, I asked this of
Russel Norman a couple of weeks ago. Do we need a GCSB?
What are these threats? Because we don’t know. They
didn’t come to the select committees. We don’t know
what they are. Do you know what they
are?
WINSTON Yes, I
do.
CORIN Can you tell
us?
WINSTON Well, I’ve sat—
I’ve signed out warrants when there was a clear and
present danger to New Zealand in what people were doing
offshore. And if that’s happening onshore, then we would
rue the day we did nothing. Now—
CORIN Are you
talking terrorism here?
WINSTON
Well, issues like terrorism, a massive drug
importation – potential importation – by another
country. There’s a whole range of issues, and, you know,
I look at these legal submissions from a wide group of
different people. They all admit the need to have laws in
place to protect us against
that.
CORIN
But isn’t the issue—?
WINSTON
But that’s far too
far—
CORIN But we
haven’t got them in place at the moment, have we? Those
agencies aren’t able to necessarily act on those threats
at the moment, because the law has been deficient, so surely
there is an onus on a parliamentarian like yourself to work
with John Key and get this through as quick as
possible.
WINSTON If you’re saying the
law’s in limbo, you’re right, but that’s no reason to
panic and end up with something worse than— dramatically
worse than we’ve had before and we’re all now being
spied upon. And when I see the guy— What the guy Snowden
is saying in Moscow, that has widened things considerably
because there is information that shows New Zealand itself
may well have been spied upon by our allies.
CORIN Can you
just give us a sense – so are you saying you can’t
support this bill as it stands at the moment, that John
Key’s going to have to make some serious concessions
either in the next week before the bill is reported back
from select committee or in the committee stages in
Parliament? You’re still leaving open the possibility
you could support it?
WINSTON
Well, what’s one’s duty in Parliament? Put
aside the politics, it is to ensure that you have a law that
protects the security and safety of New Zealanders whilst
protecting their fundamental basic human rights and their
privacy. Now, everyone recognises sometimes you have to
make a compromise when the risk and danger is so great, and
that’s what the community needs to understand. But we
will not support…it will give the Government a blank
cheque that goes from a situation of crisis of their own
making, don’t forget – of their own making – and then
massively widen the law by, how say I put it, railroading us
into some sort of compromise. The answer to your question
is, no, we won’t on what we’ve seen so
far.
CORIN
Okay, that means he’s going to need to talk to
you. Have your offices talked on this
issue?
WINSTON Not really,
no. I haven’t talked to John Key on this
issue.
CORIN What about
your chief of
staff?
WINSTON Well, they’ve had the
odd conversation but of no merit and no value to us,
because—
CORIN
So you’re saying today that you want to actually
sit down with John Key—?
WINSTON
No, no. John Key was never interested until he
got desperate. Don’t forget John Key put on this
committee, the Intelligence and Security Committee, the head
of the ACT Party, the head of the United Party, and we have
got far more members in Parliament in New Zealand First than
those two parties put together. And more importantly, the
leader of New Zealand First, myself, I’ve been on the
Intelligence and Security Committee, and I have been a
Foreign Minister and signed out— have got far more
experience about warrants. Now, when Mr Dunne got found
out, what did he do? He didn’t put any relief on from
another party. He again went for Tony Ryall from his own
party, so it shows he had no good faith in trying to get
together a non-political bipartisan
arrangement.
ENDS