McCully Murray: Maori Television Service Bill — Second Reading 
McCully Murray: Maori Television Service Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:607;Page:4920] 
Hon MURRAY McCULLY (NZ National—East Coast Bays) 
: 
 This bill which is being reported back from the Maori Affairs Committee is a huge and lasting monument to the incompetence of the Minister of Maori Affairs and of the Government. As my colleague Georgina te Heuheu has told the House the National Party will be voting against it. I tell the Minister that on the basis of the vast array of political riches that have been forthcoming from the Maori Television Service to date I look forward to many many happy hours in the select committee in parliamentary question time and in dealing with the media at his expense. Because that has been the track record of this bill to date and it will no doubt be the track record of this legislation in the future. 
It is worth reminding the House today that the Minister of Maori Affairs announced the launching of the Maori Television Service on 11 November 2000. He said that during the next year—2001—we would see the Maori Television Service. Well we have seen a few changes a few modifications and a few updates since that time. Indeed the major one would have had us believe that the service would be on air in June of last year. Now we are told that if we are lucky—if I might use that word—we will see something at the end of this year. Whichever way we look at it—whether we look at the funding the governance the appointment of management the programming or the transmission—it is hard to imagine a bigger cock-up than this bill at any level. 
I tell the Minister that I do not think his stocks with the Prime Minister will be looking too flash because I recall something that the Prime Minister said on 18 February 2001. She said: “I saw it was going round in circles and so I raised it at cabinet and what we’ve done is brought a group of officials together to get the clear options up to the cabinet. We just weren’t getting any proper advice to be honest.” That is what the Prime Minister said about the Maori Television Service on 18 February way back in 2001. Over 2 years ago she said: “We want some options—and fast ... I want some decisions. I want to be in a position to make decisions instead of seeing the issue go round in circles at a bureaucratic level.” That is what the Prime Minister said about this legislation and about this service over 2 years ago. 
We now know that the Minister in whose name this bill sits before the House today has piece by piece had most of the decisions taken off him and given to the Minister of Finance. The reason is that the Prime Minister has been losing confidence in the Minister who is in charge of this bill as has this House. 
My colleagues and I in the National Party believe that this has been a very sorry saga and I thank Deborah Coddington for reminding the House today of the genesis of this service. She reminded the House that the starting point for the bill was in the plan of Mr Derek Fox now the chief executive previously the chairman to set up a new Maori political party to challenge the Labour Party in the Maori seats and that he personally—Mr Fox—was going to challenge the Minister of Maori Affairs in his own electorate. Then the Prime Minister who could see the Government’s hold on the Maori seats looking a bit shaky decided to invite Mr Fox to afternoon tea—and a very nice afternoon tea it must have been indeed as Ms Coddington has reminded the House because Mr Fox walked out of that afternoon tea a very happy man. He was told of the wonderful prospects that lay ahead for him as the chairman-to-be of the new Maori Television Service. 
Perceptive members on this side of the House said: “Ah there’s something rotten going on here! This sounds like something that should happen in one of those Third World African countries not something that should happen in New Zealand. It looks like this man has been bought off.” We were told by the Prime Minister: “Oh no no! Mr Fox is still going to set up his new Maori political party and Mr Fox is going to be paid only $36000 a year for a very very part-time job as chairman of the Maori Television Service.” We thought that maybe we were wrong that maybe this was kosher after all. But revelation after revelation in documents that came out under the Official Information Act told us that our original suspicions were right. There was something very very rotten indeed in the genesis of this Maori Television Service. The intention was to buy Mr Fox off from setting up his new Maori political party and the $36000 which was the maximum fee he was going to get turned into a very much larger director’s fee. Then it got topped up again by a new consultancy arrangement so that he was to receive $100000 near as damn it and $50000 in expenses on top not even for a full year either. 
So members on this side of the House scratch their heads and say in amazement that they were suspicious initially about this arrangement but that in no way did they envisage things could go as far and as badly wrong as they have done. Having gone through the saga of the Davy appointment we now have the very same Mr Fox on $160000 as the chief executive. I have been flicking through some of the papers that have just been released as the State Services Commission was asked to comment on Mr Fox’s contract. These are indeed revealing because there is a requirement for the State Services Commission to comment on these contracts and in particular on the job descriptions. I quote Mr Dave Cox on the job description for Mr Fox: “I am a bit worried about the job description. If as you say it is the same as used for Davy then defending the Fox appointment on the grounds of te reo intimate knowledge of the establishment process so far and broadcasting background could be problematic. Will you line Davy up against these criteria?” . 
What he is saying is that the appointment of Mr Fox could not possibly be the result of the application of the job description to his particular set of skills. It goes on: “However if the job description were now to change it is even worse as Fox has already been identified as the preferred candidate. An alteration of the job description after the event is a no-no.” That is what the State Services Commission told the Minister’s own officials who signed the cheques and okayed the process. It said that there was no proper basis in process for the appointment of Mr Fox as the chief executive that the job description that got Mr Davy appointed was the same job description that got Mr Fox appointed and that one could not possibly line up both those candidates and justify both of their appointments under the same job description. Then it went on to say that of course changing that job description was a “no-no” so we have a little bit of a problem on our hands in terms of process. 
Finally because the directors decided to push the announcement out anyway the Government had to go along for the ride. I say to the Minister today that as I vote to oppose this service I promise him that in the select committee in the questions process in the House and in the other avenues under the Official Information Act that are available to members I will be very vigilant about this service because I know and he knows that the Government’s motives in passing this bill are entirely political. They are entirely concerned with propping up the political fortunes of the Labour Party and with ensuring that Mr Fox is taken out of the play as a candidate and as the leader of a new political party and we will hold the Government to account.