Clare Curran folds under scrutiny of her use of a personal email account to conduct Government Business

Embattled minister Clare Curran is struggling to explain her use of a personal email account to conduct Government business.

Curran has already been stripped of two of her portfolios after she failed to be upfront about dealings with people related to her portfolios.

Under a tough line of questioning in the House on Wednesday from National MP Melissa Lee, it was revealed Curran had used a personal Gmail account for official Government business.

Formerly the minister of open government, her use of a Gmail account raises questions over the security of Government information handled in her office as well as issues of transparency.

READ MORE:

* Jacinda Ardern announces Clare Curran removed from Cabinet

* Clare Curran apologised to PM over Hirschfeld meeting

* Clare Curran releases text messages with Carol Hirschfeld

Curran stumbled over her answers in Parliament's debating chamber, as she was forced to admit that Government business was conducted on her personal email. She was not forthcoming with a response about why she used her Gmail account for official business from "time to time".

Asked "what Government business has she conducted via her Gmail account", Curran appeared flustered and claimed she'd answered the question before being told by the Speaker she had to answer it directly - she then required Lee to ask it again.

Curran answered: "To the best of my recollection, um, ah, ah, I haven't, um, I haven't used my, um I've answered um OIA, ah, ah, OIA responses and personal, um and parliamentary questions correctly and to the best of my recollection, um, ah, you know, that, that has, that's what I've done."

It pales in comparison to the email controversy surrounding former United States Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, during her 2016 presidential run against US President Donald Trump, but has raised similar questions over security and transparency of information.

MONIQUE FORD/STUFF Another gaffe from Minister Clare Curran - this time using her personal Gmail to conduct Government business.

Despite the public controversy arising more than a year before the campaign, Clinton failed to shake accusations of dishonesty and secrecy from her opponents over revelations that during her tenure as Secretary of State she used her family's private email server for thousands of communications, some of which contained classified information.

All ministers were likely to have a security clearance, and Curran's portfolio in communications meant she did have some responsibilities relating to cyber security and secure information. It's unclear whether any sensitive materials were dealt with on her personal account.

The relatively short exchange during Parliament's Question Time has left another scar on the credibility of Curran, who was unceremoniously stripped of her major portfolios by Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern just over two weeks ago.

Curran remains a minister outside of Cabinet, but was ousted from her chair at the Cabinet table when she lost her government digital services portfolio and open government responsibilities due to substandard record-keeping. She retains broadcasting and associate ACC portfolios.

The meeting that led to Curran's demotion was with well-known entrepreneur Derek Handley over the role of the Government's chief technology officer (CTO).

In February, Curran met Handley at her Beehive office in her capacity as minister of government digital services to discuss his interest in the vacant CTO role. The meeting took place after the first unsuccessful recruitment round for the CTO.

It was not recorded in Curran's diary and neither the minister's staff nor officials were made aware of it.

It was a second strike for Curran. There were similar issues surrounding a meeting with Carol Hirschfeld, then senior executive of state-owned broadcaster RNZ, early in 2018. Hirschfeld now works for Stuff.

When her demotion was announced, Ardern said: "The failure to record the meeting in her diary; inform her staff and officials; and accurately answer Parliamentary questions has left the minister open to the accusation that she deliberately sought to hide the meeting."

And while the government business Curran conducted on her personal account would still fall under the Official Information Act, those accusations were likely to be strengthened in light of the difficulties posed in accessing it.

* Comments on this article have closed.