Questions on right to privacy - Children’s Convention from the United Nations

Please provide information about the measures taken to:

Question 14(a)

  1. Protect children’s right to privacy in the use of the Approved Information Sharing Agreement for Improving Public Services for At-risk Children, adopted in 2015;

Reply to 14(a)

The Approved Information Sharing Agreement (AISA) has been superseded by the OTA information sharing provisions. From 2019, the changes to section 66 of the OTA give child welfare and protection agencies (agencies) the ability to request, collect, use and share personal information for purposes related to the wellbeing and safety of children. The new provisions are designed to put the child at the centre of the provision of support and services. Oranga Tamariki has provided comprehensive guidance for agencies on using the new information sharing provisions in the OTA.

The Children’s Teams to which the AISA applied are gradually shifting to new, community-based approaches as these are developed.

Question 14(b)

  1. Ensure that any legislation enabling the collection, storage and sharing of personal information about children and their families explicitly requires the consideration of the best interests of the child;

Reply to 14(b)

The OTA information sharing provisions explicitly require that the best interests of the child are at the forefront of decisions made around the collection, use, storage and dissemination of information regarding that child where that information is to be collected, used or disclosure for the purposes set out in the legislation.

MOE has prepared education specific guidelines to assist staff to apply the information sharing provisions appropriately in context of working with learners. Their evaluation teams work with privacy experts to ensure that the information being collected is appropriate and is being collected in a way that is appropriate when information is required from a learner.

Question 14(c)

  1. Ensure that the privacy, human rights and ethics framework governing predictive risk modelling is made public and is referenced in all relevant legislation;

Reply to question 14(c)

MSD has developed the publicly available Privacy, Human Rights and Ethics Framework (PHRaE). This consists of a set of materials, including an interactive tool with built in guidance, and a team of specialists. The PHRaE provides a structured tool to assess the privacy, human rights and ethical impacts of using personal information to develop new services, which helps ensure MSD acts responsibly in relation to these matters. Information about PHRaE is publicly available online.

Several government agencies are signatory to Stats NZ’s Algorithmic Transparency Charter and the Data Protection and Use Policy run by the Social Wellbeing Agency. Oranga Tamariki does not use predictive risk modelling in front line decision making, however ensures it has rigorous ethics, privacy and confidentiality protocol for the use of data and research in all areas of work concerning the children in its system.

Question 14(d)

  1. Carry out a child rights impact assessment of the implementation of surveillance for law enforcement and intelligence-gathering purposes.

Reply to 14(d)

The Privacy Act 2020 repealed and replaced the Privacy Act 1993 from 1 December 2020.

Principle 4 of the Privacy Act 2020 requires that agencies take particular care when they are collecting information from children and young people and that they do so in a way that is fair and reasonable. This includes recognition that children’s personal information merits specific protection because children may be less aware of the risks, consequences and safeguards of providing personal information.

While security intelligence agencies in New Zealand are exempt from most of the privacy principles, an access request can still be made for the information collected. If any intelligence agency refuses an access request, a complaint can be made to the Office of the Privacy Commissioner who can investigate and independently verify whether there is good reason to withhold some or all of the information.


Previous page | Next page