The Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security (IGIS) watchdog has criticised the Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB) for hosting foreign signals intelligence (SIGINT) hardware for seven years, without briefing the Minister in charge.
Brendan Horsley, Inspector of Intelligence, wrote in his report that the GCSB agreed to host the hardware in question on its premises in 2012. Furthermore, the hosting involved "the capability selecting and transmitting certain signals, collected by GCSB under authorisation, to the partner agency through the hardware."
It also involved "the transmitted signals being analysed, in combination with other information, to produce intelligence that could help find remote targets," Horsley wrote.
What the exact nature of the hardware is and who the foreign partner was is classified. GCSB did not have visibility of whether or not the hardware was used for military purposes.
The hardware operated from 2013 to 2020, when it broke down and was returned to the un-named partner agency.
GCSB contacted IGIS the same year with concerns being raised about another, unspecified partner system hosted by the intelligence agency being unauthorised, at which stage the signals intelligence hardware was being "rediscovered" at senior level.
The bureau had been hosting the hardware under a memorandum of understanding between itself and the foreign partner agency, but Horsley said there was no indication that the Minister responsible for the GCSB had been briefed on the system, or asked to approve it.
Horsley didn't consider the hosting of the hardware and the capability it provided without Ministerial approval unlawful. However, he considered it improper for the bureau not to inform the Minister responsible.
"Not briefing the Minister was not just a failure to observe the “no surprises” convention. It was a failure to respect and facilitate the control the Minister was entitled to exercise over the GCSB," Horsley wrote.
Horsley was also concerned that the GCSB's current senior leadership and legal team apparently knew nothing of the system until it was brought to their attention in 2020, which led to the Inspector of Intelligence commencing an inquiry.
In the report, Horsley was scathing about the shortcomings of hosting the signals intelligence hardware, which was done:
- without adequate record keeping;
- without due diligence by GCSB on the capability tasking requests;
- without full visibility for GCSB of the capability tasking;
- without adequate training, support or guidance for GCSB operational staff;
- with negligible awareness of the capability at a senior level within GCSB after the signing of the MOU;
- with no apparent access for GCSB to the outcomes of the capability’s operation at GCSB;
- without any auditing;
- without the required review of the MOU;
- without due attention to the possibility, recognised within the Bureau, that support for the capability could contribute to military targeting; and
- without clarity, in consequence, as to whether data supplied by the GCSB to the capability did in fact support military action.
Horsley made several recommendations in his inquiry, including the GSCB producing internal guidance to reflect existing requirements that the Minister would be consulted on international agreements and arrangements of significance.
The GSCB has accepted all of Horsley's recommendations.
Update The GCSB has responded to the IGIS report, with Director-General Andrew Clark saying the spy agency is a very different organisation today.
“Since I joined the Bureau in late 2023/five months ago I have looked carefully at how it fulfils its requirements in terms of compliance, relevant legislation, human rights and oversight.
“The GCSB exists to protect and enhance New Zealand’s national security, and our international partnerships play a significant part in how we fulfil our mission. It is important that we have effective processes in place that enable us to do our job in accordance with all our obligations.
We welcome the robust and independent oversight of the Inspector-General and the assurance the office provides in helping maintain public trust and confidence in the work we do, which is often carried out in secret.
“We are continually looking to improve how we work. While this IGIS report examines what could be described as a historical issue, its recommendations will nonetheless help us further refine our current processes that ensure we act with propriety in everything we do.”
9 Comments
Liz Truss, "In Britain we only have 100 political appointees.. None of them run gov departments.. Every gov dept, every agency is a permanent civil servant" Steve Bannon, "How can Britain be saved?" LT, "We need to change that.. When I got into No 10, I thought I got to the top of the tree and could implement policies" SB, "You thought you'd become like Churchill and change the country?" LT, "Exactly.. And what I discovered, I was not holding the levers.. The levers were held by the Bank of England, the Office of Budget Responsibility, they weren't held by the Prime Minister, or the Chancellor" Link
We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.
Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.