Henare Tau: Veterinarians Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Henare Tau: Veterinarians Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:628;Page:956] 
Hon TAU HENARE (National) 
: 
 I want to ask the Minister about clause 79(1) and (2). Clause 79(1)(b) states: “(1) Any matter approved or prescribed by the Council under this Act must—… (b) be made available so that members of the public may inspect the documents relating to the matter free of charge.” Clause 79(2) goes on to state: “(2) However a person may be charged a reasonable fee if the person is supplied with a copy of any particulars.” I would ask the Minister what in his mind constitutes a reasonable fee. The interpretation of a reasonable fee is rather large. Is it $10 60c per page or 40c per page—what does that term actually constitute? 
I thought that that was the only thing I would ask about Part 5 but as we read on we see Part 5 sets out the fee structure. It is just another grubby little Labour Government grab of taxpayers’ money. The fees are all over the place. Clause 87 “Council may prescribe fees” states: “(1) the Council may from time to time by notice in the  
Gazette 
 …” prescribe fees. I go on to clause 88 “Principles guiding prescribing of fees” to clause 89 which is also about fees and to clause 90 “Further provisions relating to fees”. The Government could have called Part 5 “Miscellaneous provisions about fees”. It is a tax—exactly! 
The point is that people out there will have to pay for that. The spin-off from this legislation is that vet fees will go up. The issue is not just about Veterinary Council fees and about how the council does its business; it is about putting the hand of the Government into the back pocket of the worker who may have a German shepherd— 
Shane Ardern 
: No a cocky. 
Hon TAU HENARE 
: Exactly! How many dogs do farmers have to help them run the farm? Let us say it is six or seven little Australian cattle dogs maybe. It means that when those dogs have to be taken to the vet because there may be a problem one that is not of the farmer’s doing but basically because dogs may become sick the farmer will be charged more. The Minister of Maori Affairs who is sitting on the Government side of the Chamber and looking really interested in this point may want to know about the dogs on his property too. When he takes them to the vet the vet will think that in case he or she has to front up to the council one day he or she should put his or her charges up and there we have the flow-on effect. So I am afraid that Part 5 is really about a tax grab and I suppose that all the cockies and people who own pets and animals will most probably say the Government should take its hand out of their pockets. 
Dr Jackie Blue raised the issue of clause 82 “Power of Council to supply evidence for registration overseas”. That would have been all right if there was a clause at about that point in the bill regarding the registration of overseas people as well in order to bring them together so that we were not actually losing people. 
Phil Heatley 
: Exporting them. 
Hon TAU HENARE 
: Exactly! As my learned colleague from Whangarei said we are exporting the skills of this country. That is what that is. What about the people in this country for goodness sake! Do we not care about the people who have the Biancas the Gees—do people remember Gee? He was the dog that was run over. This part of the bill is nothing more than a tax grab. 
In closing I just want to ask the Minister about clause 84 “Crown not liable for debts of Council”. However in every other part of this bill basically the Crown wants to have a say. The Crown is to appoint a couple of people to the board. The Crown is to do this and the Crown is to do that but when it comes time to front up the Crown does not want to be liable. It says it is not its fault if something goes wrong and that it only appoints people and makes the laws. So what is that all about? That is a serious question and I ask the Minister what that is all about. But I also want to ask why in clause 84 the reference is to the Crown and not the Government. I ask whether somebody could explain to me the difference between the Crown and the Government. Who is the Crown and who is the Government and is that reference just a ruse? 
Lastly I also want to say this. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: Go on treat yourself. 
Hon TAU HENARE 
: I will actually. Nowhere in this bill is there a reference to the tangata whenua.