person, family or whanau focus.97 The coercive nature of the policy was of considerable concern to many NGO service providers working in those sectors. The Privacy Commissioner accordingly utilised his statutory function under s 13 of the Privacy Act to undertake a self-directed inquiry into the policy. The Commissioner concluded that the policy was inconsistent with the Privacy Act.98 He noted, among other things, that while the Government can legitimately require good information from its providers in order to evaluate the efficacy of a funded programme, the proposed policy was “excessive, disproportionate to the Government’s legitimate needs and therefore…inconsistent with the information privacy principles.”99 He also noted that “the manner in which the policy change has been effected risks undermining the trust between individual service users and NGOs” and may accordingly “deter some of the most in need from accessing necessary help.”100 The Privacy Commissioner accordingly recommended that the policy be amended to conform with the IPPs under the Privacy Act.101 Subsequently, the policy appears to have discontinued. 2.7 Intelligence and Security Act 2017 In March 2016, a major independent review of the intelligence and security legislation was presented to parliament.102 The review itself was conducted following calls by the Human Rights Commission103 in a report to the Prime Minister and in the wake of the arrest and surveillance of Kim Dotcom by New Zealand intelligence and law enforcement agencies in 2013, an event which highlighted significant deficiencies in New Zealand’s legislative framework. Reflecting the earlier recommendations of the Human 97 Ibid., para. 3.3.4. 98 Ibid, Executive Summary at point 99 Ibid., para 4.2. 100 Ibid, Executive Summary, at point 5 101 Ibid, point 8. 102 See Report of the First Independent Review of Intelligence and Security in New Zealand, Intelligence and Security in a Free Society, by Hon Sir Michael Cullen, KNZM and Dame Patsy Reddy, DNZM publicly released on 9 March 2016 http://www.igis.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Review-report-Part-1.pdf . 103 Human Rights Commission, Report to the Prime Minister: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill; Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill and associated wider issues relating to surveillance and the human rights of people in New Zealand, 9 July 2013. Rights Commission, the terms of reference of the review included scrutiny of New Zealand law against international human rights law and standards. It included recommendations to consolidate the legislation into one statute and strengthen oversight and accountability mechanisms, including those regarding access to information from other government agencies, and set out a proposed authorisation framework for intelligence and security activities. The Government accepted most of the reviewers’ recommendations and in April 2017 the Intelligence and Security Act was enacted, replacing the four separate laws that previously governed this area.104 The strong human rights-based approach adopted in the review is reflected in the new legislation, resulting in human rights considerations being elevated among the purposes of the law and decisionmaking principles. The purposes of the Act include: “ensuring that the functions of the intelligence and security agencies are performed – in accordance with New Zealand law and human rights obligations recognised by New Zealand law”; and ensuring “that the powers of the intelligence and security agencies are subject to institutional oversight and appropriate safeguards.” This has included enhancing the functions of the principal oversight entity, the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security and requiring the responsible Minister to issue Ministerial Policy Statements (MPS) which set out policy and practice standards concerning the operational activities of the intelligence and security services.105 Another legislative outcome of considerable significance was the amendment to section 57 of the Privacy Act to provide that intelligence and security agencies are subject to most of the Act’s IPPs,106 including the requirement under IPP 4(a) that personal information is collected by lawful means. Prior to the amendment, the agencies 104 http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2017/0010/37.0/ DLM6920823.html . 105 http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2017/0010/37.0/ DLM6920823.html . 106 Other than those regarding the source of personal information (IPP 2), collection of personal information (IPP3) and collection of personal information by unfair or unreasonably intrusive means (IPP 4(b)). 22