Lee Melissa: Radio New Zealand Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Lee Melissa: Radio New Zealand Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:655;Page:4644] 
MELISSA LEE (National) 
: 
 I rise to support the Radio New Zealand Amendment Bill. It seems like a lifetime ago when I last spoke in this House. It is a pleasure to be standing here tonight to speak in this Whare. Kia ora tatou. Before I talk about the bill I will go through some things Mr Robertson mentioned. The Television New Zealand (TVNZ) charter has disappeared according to him. It has not disappeared. I tell Mr Robertson that it has not gone anywhere. Perhaps he should study it a little bit more. The TVNZ charter did not disappear; it is being managed by New Zealand On Air so that it can provide transparency. TVNZ did nothing with the charter money—absolutely nothing. 
Hon Tony Ryall 
:  
Willy Nilly 
 got funded. 
MELISSA LEE 
:  
Willy Nilly 
 got funded apparently. Mr Robertson also talked about the wonderful programme called  
Attitude 
. I agree with him that it is absolutely fantastic. 
Brendon Burns 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I draw your attention to the claim that the TVNZ charter did nothing. It funded a programme the MP was involved in. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Rick Barker) 
: That was not a point of order. Order is about order. That was a debatable point and the member was being discourteous by interrupting the member’s speech. 
MELISSA LEE 
: I will correct Mr Burns. The charter money did not fund  
Asia Down Under 
—I will get to that subject. Mr Robertson talked about the  
Attitude 
 programme and he was right—Robyn Scott-Vincent and the production team do a wonderful job. But that funding does not come directly from the charter fund.  
Asia Down Under 
 is not funded from charter money either. It is so typical of members opposite to mislead people—so very typical. Jacinda Ardern mentioned that I parked apparently in a disabled car park. I remind people that I took a cab and left my car at home—so what was that about being misleading? 
The bill amends the Radio New Zealand Act 1995 and contains a new Radio New Zealand charter that has come about as a result of a parliamentary review that was completed in 2006 as required by the Act. Although it is a small bill it speaks volumes beyond its few pages. Do members know why? The Radio New Zealand Act 1995 requires that the charter be reviewed at 5-yearly intervals. After the last review of Radio New Zealand was completed in 2006—after a preliminary review that was followed by a public consultation process on the revised charter—the previous Labour Government should have done what this Government is proposing to do tonight. The select committee of the day recommended the charter. The previous Labour Government never finished the job. That is how committed the Labour Party is to public broadcasting! Well are we not lucky that the John Key - led National Government cares about public broadcasting and that the Minister of Broadcasting Jonathan Coleman is making sure we get on with the programme? That is unlike the previous Government which never finished the job—it never did it right. 
The amended charter is divided into two parts: purpose and delivery. Before I get on to the purpose and delivery of the charter as reflected in the bill I will take a moment to talk a little about the vibrancy of radio and the important role it plays in our daily lives. The sheer speed at which it happens is absolutely incredible. I have never worked in radio but as someone who once worked in television I found that compared with television radio has speed simplicity and connectivity with the public. I used to get rather jealous of my colleagues who worked in radio. 
I am an avid listener to the radio. Instead of the latest single that my son would rather I listen to while I am driving I like to listen to talkback radio when I get the time. Often talkback is one way of gauging what people around New Zealand are concerned incensed or even passionate about. Perhaps some of those members opposite should ring up talkback radio stations and get their anger out and sorted. Radio—in particular Radio New Zealand—provides a raft of programming that commercial radio does not cater for such as children’s drama the Radio New Zealand Concert programme and poetry reading to name just a few things that do not happen on commercially driven radio stations. Radio New Zealand’s radio drama is incredibly engaging and even without pictures and special effects by using just sound it can inspire and trigger great imagination which I believe is incredibly powerful. 
The purpose of Radio New Zealand as a public broadcaster is to “serve the public interest”. That purpose supports the National Government’s commitment to providing certainty to the operations of public broadcasters and that is a good thing. The revised wording suggested by the bill streamlines and clarifies the Radio New Zealand charter. For example clause 4 amends section 2 of the Radio New Zealand Act by defining “commercial-free” to mean “without advertising or sponsorship; but (b) to avoid doubt does not include announcements by Radio New Zealand of its own services”. 
Grant Robertson 
: Say “I don’t know.” 
MELISSA LEE 
: What this means I say to Mr Robertson is that although Radio New Zealand is commercial-free it can run its own station advertising as is common in television and radio to promote its own brand or programmes. Perhaps the Labour Party should try that. 
Proposed new section 8(5) deals with the delivery of service—which the previous Labour Government was very lax in doing never even completing the process during its term—in Radio New Zealand’s endeavour to serve the public interest. That is the bit I really care and am pleased about. In my maiden speech I spoke about my concern for New Zealand’s youth as they become exposed to more and more overseas content than our very own New Zealand content. The revised charter puts in plain language what is expected of Radio New Zealand in that regard stating that in its endeavour to provide the highest quality it must provide content that is “predominantly and distinctively of New Zealand”. To me that is absolutely wonderful because I have a 10-year-old child who can now listen to the radio and hear about New Zealand. 
The delivery provisions further state that Radio New Zealand’s services must “inform entertain and enlighten the people of New Zealand” and that the content must be “challenging innovative and engaging” unlike some members opposite. It also demands that services must reflect the diversity that exists in culture drama comedy literature and the performing arts. They must also reflect New Zealand’s cultural identity including Maori language te reo and Maori culture. This one I really like: services must “provide comprehensive independent accurate impartial and balanced regional national and international news and current affairs:” which I have to say are lacking in our media sometimes. 
Stuart Nash 
: Is this another speech Jonathan wrote for you? 
Chris Hipkins 
: “The Maestro” wrote it. 
MELISSA LEE 
: Ha ha! Oh dear! It is so good to be back in the House. The amazing thing about radio is that it has the function of reliving some of the most historic moments in our history. I remember Sir Edmund Hillary climbing Mount Everest. 
Stuart Nash 
: You remember that? 
MELISSA LEE 
: I do not remember it because I had not been born then but the thing is that when I heard the story on the radio I could picture it. Radio has an amazing function. 
This amendment bill clarifies the uncertainty Radio New Zealand had previously over its status. The previous Government proposed to disestablish Radio New Zealand as a Crown entity company and establish it as an autonomous entity. But in Minister Coleman’s wisdom—and I am sure Radio New Zealand will breathe a sigh of relief—that will not go ahead. Radio New Zealand can go about its business of producing good local New Zealand content. 
It is lovely to be back in this New Zealand Parliament as a member of Parliament. Regardless of what Labour members might say this bill is a National Government bill and the Minister is finishing what the previous Government should have done but which it never did for years and years. I commend this bill to the House.