te Heuheu Georgina: New Zealand Symphony Orchestra Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
te Heuheu Georgina: New Zealand Symphony Orchestra Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:12309] 
Hon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU (National) 
: 
 I do not mind at all having a little bit of an opportunity to sing the praises of the New Zealand Symphony Orchestra. I am an avid follower of the orchestra. I think it is rightly recognised as one of the leading institutions in the arts sector and we should all be singing its praises. National supports artistic excellence and artistic independence and the New Zealand Symphony Orchestra has shown itself to represent the best of that. The opportunity to sing its praises is certainly welcomed. 
However the time of this House is being taken up with a bill that is overly prescriptive and overly controlling of an institution that is being asked to maintain its artistic independence and artistic integrity. That in my view is rather unfortunate and totally unnecessary. I recall some words that Minister Maharey said when the bill first surfaced. He said that nothing in the legislation would diminish the Symphony Orchestra’s artistic independence or integrity. He said it would continue to act without ministerial or indeed parliamentary direction in artistic matters. He said it would be required to seek to contribute to the development of a distinctly New Zealand cultural environment—whatever that is. This Government is great for adding provisions to legislation that seem to indicate that the one-size-fits-all concept is right for New Zealanders. New Zealand has a multilayered multicultural environment and one has to have a little bit of sympathy for any organisation or institution that has that as its primary objective. 
This is a Government that applauds the artistic independence and artistic integrity of the New Zealand Symphony Orchestra yet after reading clauses 8 and 9 which set out both the principal objectives and functions of the orchestra we have to wonder if this Government means what it says about maintaining the artistic independence of our cultural and artistic institutions. This bill is very prescriptive. It brings more State control into an area where we want to encourage creativity and artistic imagination. Even though the Minister was at pains to reassure New Zealanders that there would be no ministerial interference again we have to wonder. Because if the Government means to be this prescriptive—and I would echo the comments of Deborah Coddington—what happens if the orchestra does not deliver on the prescription? What do we do about the orchestra if that does not happen? 
The bill states that one principal objective of the orchestra is “to provide the public of New Zealand with live and recorded performances of symphonic music performed to an international standard.” Who measures the international standard? How do we measure that? If in someone’s view it does not reach the international standard do we then “can” the orchestra? These sorts of provisions in legislation in my view are stupid. They are a nonsense and they become meaningless because there is no way of measuring whether such music is being performed to an international standard. That is mostly because somebody has to make a judgment on that and the judgment of Helen Clark may be different from my judgment. 
This bill is an overkill. It purports to be a supporter and a maintainer of artistic independence and integrity yet in its establishment and powers it sets out some pretty prescriptive provisions. National certainly does not support that. If we want artistic creativity to fly then we have to have a supportive framework and some provisions for financial accountability—because taxpayers’ money is involved in the Symphony Orchestra. But those provisions should be as few as possible otherwise the board scurries around worrying whether it is applying the prescription and always with the Minister hovering over it. 
Even though clause 14 relates just to governance where does governance begin and end? We are not sure with this Government most of the time. Clause 14 talks about the role of the Minister. It says that the Minister may review the operations of the orchestra even though clause 16 states that the orchestra is independent in all artistic matters. We cannot trust that sort of thing when the bill is laying down a prescription for the artistic activities of the institution. This legislation is a bit of a worry—it is a bit of an overkill. It is typical Labour Government State control and typical Labour Government State prescription. What happens when the prescription is not followed? Who knows? How do we measure it? Who measures it? We cannot measure it. These provisions are entirely unnecessary and inappropriate. National opposes this bill most strenuously. 
The other point I want to make in that regard is that there is probably some reservation on the part of our regional orchestras about the closeness of the relationship that will develop under this bill between the Minister the Government and the New Zealand Symphony Orchestra. As we all know we have some wonderful professional regional orchestras. I remember a concert that the Auckland Philharmonia Orchestra held about 5 years ago in Rotorua’s redwood forest. It was absolutely marvellous. I am pleased that the select committee was of a mind not to give the Symphony Orchestra recognition that would seem to give it favoured status over and above the regional orchestras. I think that is very important. 
Overall though this bill has taken up the time of the House which it should not have done. We last debated it in urgency and here it is again. If we mean what we say about wanting to encourage creativity imagination and artistic integrity in the arts sector then our watch over those things should be minimal. This bill is way over the top and is not appropriate in any way. 
I applaud the New Zealand Symphony Orchestra. Of course it knows it needs a certain amount of accountability but outside of that it should be left to do what it does best and what it has done in the past—that is continue to favour New Zealand audiences with symphonies and music of the highest order.