KEY POINTS:
The Government appears headed for an embarrassing defeat over its proposal to tightly restrict access to birth, death and marriage certificates.
An outcry from historians, genealogists and researchers has prompted several of Parliament's smaller parties to revisit their stances on the Government's Births, Deaths, Marriages and Relationships Amendment
Bill.
It now seems that the group of smaller parties demanding significant change to the access provisions is large enough, with the National Party, to scuttle the Government bill.
United Future leader Peter Dunne yesterday said he felt that the Government bill in its present form was "sledgehammer to crack a nut stuff".
Mr Dunne said he accepted the principle of the Government's argument that access needed to be tightened for security reasons, particularly around identity fraud.
But he was concerned that the bill would be a hindrance to historians, researchers and genealogists.
"People are going to find that they're going to have some considerable difficulty getting access to data," Mr Dunne said.
"I've been approached by professional historians, by professional writers, by amateur genealogists, all with a common concern - I just don't think it's well thought through."
Mr Dunne said his party was against the provisions in the bill that affected research.
If they were not tidied up during the select committee process United Future would not support the bill any further, he said.
"There has to be some form of compromise that recognises the legitimate rights of family and professional researchers," he said.
After initially supporting the bill to a select committee at its first reading, the Green Party has also adopted a stance against the bill.
Spokesman Keith Locke said the party had been unaware of the bill's wider implications when it was first introduced, and is now critical of the clamp-down on access to certificates.
"We're quite strongly opposed to the bill," he said yesterday.
It is believed that the Maori Party also shares concerns about the bill's access provisions.
Together the three parties hold 13 votes and when put with National's 48 they total 61 - enough to vote down Labour's proposal.
The bill could turn out to be the second clear example of Parliament's smaller parties flexing their muscle.
This week United Future, Act, the Greens and the Maori Party teamed up to call for the repeal of the country's sedition laws.
The Government's move to restrict access to birth, death and marriage certificates is linked to a high-profile attempt by two suspected Israeli spies to fraudulently obtain New Zealand passports in 2004.
The pair were caught trying to get a passport using the birth certificate of an Auckland tetraplegic with cerebral palsy.
But background documents relating to the bill reveal that the review of public access also arose as a result of concerns expressed by the police and the Office of the Privacy Commissioner during consultation on proposals to put birth, death and marriage indexes on the internet for public search.
The National Party opposed the bill at its first reading and was critical of the fact that no public consultation had been carried out before it was introduced.
Consultation was limited to various Government departments, the Privacy Commissioner and the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet.
What happens now
Any member of the public can obtain the registered information of virtually anyone else.
What would happen if the bill passed
A person would be able to access:
* Only his or her own birth records
* Or those of an immediate family member
* Or someone born more than 100 years ago.
For anyone else's details, authorisation would be needed from the person concerned.
