Former GCSB director challenges Kitteridge's claims

The former GCSB director, Sir Bruce Ferguson, is now challening the findings of the Kitteridge report into the agency.

Speaking this weekend on TV3’s “The Nation” Sir Bruce denies that the agency believed it could access so-called “meta data” about New Zealanders communications without a warrant.

Ms Kitteridge said it did.

She describes “meta data” as information about information, such as that contained on a phone bill but which applied to phone calls, text messages and emails.

Her report says: “The understanding within the Bureau (as reflected in its internal guidance) was that metadata was not a “communication” for the purposes of the prohibition expressed in section 14 of the GCSB Act.

“It was the view within GCSB that GCSB could, on request, lawfully obtain and provide information about metadata involving New Zealanders, without the authority of a warrant, in accordance with its function of co-operating with and providing assistance to public authorities.”

But Sir Bruce claimed the only time “as Rebecca has found out” that New Zealanders were targeted was as a result of a request from another agency.”

ABOVE: Watch Sir Bruce's interview on TV3's The Nation.

‘”Now those two agencies who have the legal power to do so are the Security Intelligence Service and the New Zealand Police,” he said.

“The understanding was right throughout from 2003 until the present, or until last year, that if they asked under warrant, under a legal warrant for the GCSB's assistance, then the GCSB could provide that assistance.”

He also rejected claims that the agency did not keep proper records.

Ms Kitteridge said there had been many basic documents that she had been unable to find and that others had struggled to find for her.

Sir Bruce said this was because the whole nature of the organisation was very compartmentalised.

“That’s what intelligence organisations are,” he said.

“If you don’t need to know what's going on with the person next to you, you simply aren't allowed to access it.”

However he denied that the agency kept information from him when he was Director.

He also said that neither Prime Minister he served under --- Helen Clark and John Key --- ever raised with him any question about the legality of the GCSB’s operation.

ABOVE: Watch Mai Chen's interview.

Mai Chen shocked
Lawyer Mai Chen said on the programme that if the GCSB was a private sector organisation “heads would roll, people would be sacked.”

She said the report revealed serious misconduct.

“Is it better that they didn’t know it was illegal, or that they were deliberately trying to flout the law.

“It wouldn’t matter if they were selling a product, but they're not they're overseeing the security and intelligence of New Zealand, and look at their powers.

“They are able to intrude into people's lives and that’s really the concern here.”

Ms Chen says what the agency needs is a properly funded oversight body like Australia.

She says the current Inspector General of Intelligence, Sir Paul Neazor has no resources, is only part time and yet is required to oversee an agency with 800 employees.

"I think we need to focus on Australia because that's really what Rebecca Kitteridge says we need to aim towards. There of course they have an office of 12, they are full time, and on top of that they run a model which looks to me a lot like the independent commissioner into Police conduct."

Ms Chen recommends that a new watchdog over the agency should be more pro-active than reactive like our Australian counterparts.

"They (Australia)have a much more active, proactive, not ex-post-facto role, but of course you can do that when you've got resourcing, and I'm sure they resource that a lot more than we do."