As the smallest and most centralized in the Five Eyes community, New Zealand’s intelligence and security community, and the system that holds it accountable, is an outlier. New Zealand’s proximity to Australia is reflected in parallels in intelligence accountability between the two Tasman allies. On the one hand, its relatively smaller size is reflected in certain unique attributes of intelligence accountability, such as its limited scope and access to sensitive material. On the other hand, its more modest size has been beneficial in driving innovation that has subsequently been adopted elsewhere, notably the double lock system for warrants. The chapter reviews the member organizations of the New Zealand’s National Intelligence Community, the particular strategic environment that has informed intelligence and accountability in New Zealand, its rather distinct national security threats, as well as New Zealand’s modest, centralized yet innovative intelligence accountability architecture: the Inspector General of Intelligence and Security, which has an Advisory Panel that is an attribute unique to New Zealand, the Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament, and the Commissioner of Intelligence Warrants. New Zealand’s experience draws attention to economies of effort to be harnessed for scarce resources on the big collectors and assessor rather than other government clients that only receive intelligence. New Zealand also differs from other Five Eyes parliamentary intelligence committees in granting only limited access to sensitive operational matters or information. Mandatory regular review of legislation offers an opportunity to assess for efficacy and propose comprehensive improvements to innovate agencies and practices.
Quantification of diabetes consultations by the main primary health care nurse groups in Auckland, New Zealand