Editorial: State agencies must take more care using private eyes

COMMENT:

The use of private investigators by arms of the state is fraught with dangers for the rights of citizens in a liberal democracy. The word "liberal" in that phrase means the rights and freedom of citizens are as important as the powers of the state to keep them safe and secure.

It means New Zealanders' rights to privacy and freedom of association cannot be compromised unless there is good reason to suspect they pose a threat to the safety of others or national security.

Concerns were first raised about government agencies' use of the company Thompson and Clark Investigations Ltd as far back as 2008. But it took until this year for a wide ranging inquiry to be set up by the State Services Commission, prompted by complaints about surveillance of some Christchurch earthquake insurance claimants from the Government-owned Southern Response.

Once begun, the inquiry soon had to be extended to the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, the Ministry or Primary Industries, Ministry of Social Development. In all, a total of 131 government agencies and subsidiaries engaged the firm founded in 2003 by former police officers.

The inquiry's report is troubling. It records that Thompson and Clark positions itself as expert in "issue motivated groups", by which it means environmental, animal rights, peace campaigners and the like.

But the most disturbing targets were the insurance claimants whose meetings were monitored and sometimes secretly recorded to assess threats to the safety of staff of Southern Response.

The inquiry finds that even after the insurer took steps to protect its staff and train them to deal with angry claimants, it continued to use Thompson and Clark to monitor them for the sake of its "corporate reputation". The spies attended and recorded several meetings, including two led by lawyers discussing legal options and strategy.

The State Services Commission's code of conduct for government agencies using private investigators requires impartiality to be upheld.

The inquiry finds MBIE failed in this respect when Thompson and Clark, acting for the oil and gas industry, was able to "embed itself as a crucial participant within the regulatory and enforcement function" of the ministry under the Crown Minerals Act.

Among those Thompson and Clark calls "issue motivated groups" are Safe (Save Animals from Exploitation), Farmwatch, The Green Party, the Mana Movement, Greenpeace and some iwi groups.

The report is rightly concerned that labelling these groups in this way can undermine legitimate peaceful protest and inhibit constructive relationships between them and the government.

The law on surveillance sets boundaries that should be broken only by state agents with a judicial warrant.

For everybody else, including private security consultants, it can be an offence to secretly record private communications, trespass on private property or intrude in situations where people have a reasonable expectation of privacy.

If private investigators respect those boundaries, everybody's liberties should be safer.