Jones Dail: Television New Zealand Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Jones Dail: Television New Zealand Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:606;Page:3724] 
DAIL JONES (NZ First) 
: 
 Speaking to clause 1 the title of the Television New Zealand Bill I feel that title could be amended to read the “Television New Zealand (Sale of New Zealanders’ Assets) Bill”. Once again the Labour Government has not learned from the lessons of the past when it sold off billions of dollars worth of New Zealand’s assets in the 1980s. Here it is setting up a new structure for Television New Zealand in order to sell it off to the first available bidder so that Labour can try to cover up some of the problems it is having with its budgetary requirements.  
New Zealand First’s essential starting-off principle was to ensure that New Zealanders retained the assets that they had built up. This Labour Government is barely into its second and last term—as far as New Zealand First is concerned this is the second and the last term of this Clark Labour Government if Helen Clark is not unseated before the end of it—and it is proceeding with a bill that proposes by the way it is structured the sale of Television New Zealand. That is why I suggest the name of the bill should be the “Television New Zealand (Sale of New Zealanders’ Assets) Bill”. That is what this bill does. I suggest Labour is now creating a situation whereby it is setting up structures that will allow our television asset to be sold. That asset has been built up by New Zealanders since about 1962 when programmes were transmitted in black and white from 7 p.m. until 10 p.m.  
The name of the bill could also be the “Television New Zealand (Silly Ideas) Bill”. If members look at the proposals for the charter on Supplementary Order Paper 57 dated Thursday 20 February 2003—which has been thrown at us today—they can see at last what that charter is all about. It has been talked about for a long long time and finally we have the charter with all its silly ideas. I say the bill could have that title because the charter suggests for example that various measures could be included in the bill to provide for a wide group of people. In particular the amendment on the Supplementary Order Paper to clause 10 states in subclause (2)(b)(ix): “include in programming intended for a mass audience material that deals with minority interests;”. Is that not silly? That is why I say this bill should be called the Television New Zealand (Silly Ideas) Bill. There is a proposal that programming for a mass audience must have things for a minority audience but how often will a mass audience be interested in things with a minority interest? There is no better way to turn the mass audience off watching television than to start dealing with minority interests. If people are watching one of those thrilling Arnold Schwarzenegger movies will they keep watching that movie if there is suddenly a little excerpt of Thai dancing or some other fancy little thing of interest to a minority audience in the middle of it? Will we have a sudden break in a movie for something that appeals to a minority interest?  
What a silly idea this legislation is. It has been rushed into the House at the last minute. This bill has been before Parliament for a long long time. It has been before the Commerce Committee and we had the second reading last October. New Zealand First abstained from voting on the second reading because we wanted to know what the bill would do. I am still pleased that we did abstain because clearly the bill could as I have suggested have two titles one being the “Television New Zealand (Sale of New Zealanders’ Assets) Bill” and the other being the “Television New Zealand (Silly Ideas) Bill”. For reasons like that we will not be supporting this bill.