Concerns about the mass surveillance of New Zealanders reached a crescendo before the last election, when internet entrepreneur Kim Dotcom engaged the services of Edward Snowden and others to reveal what he claimed was untoward information-gathering operations.
Also enlisted was Glenn Greenwald, who worked with Mr Snowden to pull together stolen data into a book which shocked many.
Mr Snowden revealed the lengths United States government agencies went to regarding spying on their enemies and their friends - including New Zealand, Australia, Canada and Great Britain, its fellow members in the Five Eyes alliance.
The National Security Agency's widespread, systemic overreach proved to be some of the most explosive and consequential news in recent history, triggering a fierce debate over national security and information privacy.
As arguments rage on and governments consider various proposals for reform, New Zealand has appointed former Labour deputy prime minister and finance minister Sir Michael Cullen and lawyer Dame Patsy Reddy to lead the first review of this country's intelligence agencies.
They will examine laws governing the Government Communications Security Bureau and the Security Intelligence Service, and decide whether there are enough safeguards to ensure those agencies are acting lawfully and maintaining public confidence.
In a wide-ranging interview at the weekend, Sir Michael said he and Dame Patsy could look at the nature of surveillance powers, including the surveillance of so-called metadata - data about data.
It is an interesting task in light of the US Congress recently deciding to reduce the powers of their agencies with respect to metadata.
Now, US agencies have to go in with a degree of specificity, rather than just undertake a huge general trawl.
Looking at issues in a New Zealand context will be important for the review, given the country gets most of its information from offshore.
The GCSB is a small organisation compared with its intelligence partners, and much of the information used in New Zealand to inform what governments do comes from offshore, particularly through our Five Eyes partners.
Sir Michael has formed a preliminary view of there being a need for New Zealand agencies to be more open about what they do.
Having seen documents and attended briefings during his political life, Sir Michael has the view it is hard to justify some information not being made public.
More openness will give the public a better idea of the need for agencies, he says.
While acknowledging the agencies have to keep private details of their sources and agents in the field, there is much information and briefings that could be open to the public.
Sir Michael's admission that it is doubtful whether an email can remain private should come as no surprise, and yet it will.
The capturing of emails before the last election by rogue hackers allowed the publication of a book damning the practices of some National-aligned bloggers.
And while the revelations from Messrs Dotcom, Snowden and Greenwald failed to resonate with voters during the election campaign, there was enough information available through leaked documents to cause some concern.
One of the challenges Sir Michael and Dame Patsy face is how to distinguish between social media outlets, such as Facebook, and other electronic communications that users want kept private.
Sir Michael has promised the inquiry will be conducted in the most open and transparent way possible, with submissions from the public to play an important part.
He is calling for the broadest possible response from New Zealanders to be put before the inquiry.
There is no guarantee any government will adopt the inquiry's recommendations, as the suggestions will largely relate to matters of legislation.
The task is how to put together a balanced package which ensures the agencies can do what they need to do, do not do more than they need to, and do what they need to do properly and legally - with appropriate oversight.
