Hutchison Paul: National Library of New Zealand (Te Puna MAtauranga o Aotearoa) Bill — In Committee 
Hutchison Paul: National Library of New Zealand (Te Puna MAtauranga o Aotearoa) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:607;Page:4945] 
Dr PAUL HUTCHISON (NZ National—Port Waikato) 
: 
 I am absolutely delighted to be able to speak on this National Library of New Zealand Bill otherwise known as Te Puna Matauranga o Aotearoa Bill. In saying that I know that it is usual to say something about the title. There was considerable discussion and submission on the title itself. Indeed— 
Sandra Goudie 
: There’s an amendment from me. 
Dr PAUL HUTCHISON 
: Apparently there’s a an amendment but as I say there was considerable submission and discussion on it and concern that there may be a degree of tokenism in the way that Maoridom is being treated in this bill—concern that there is a lack of sensitivity. Nevertheless it is important that there are two names and I am certainly very happy about that because the library is such an icon and because it celebrates all New Zealanders’ archives. Even now I see just in front of me one of my colleagues who is concerned about that aspect. 
National did not support the first reading of this bill but due to the parliamentary process working well and the various parties working cooperatively a consensus was arrived at over some pretty tricky issues. One of them was the area of legal deposit and the commercial problems associated with it. The other concerned the area of the oral archives and I would like to speak to that for a moment or two. 
For some decades oral archives were being collected in New Zealand particularly in relation to our Prime Ministers and Governors-General. I am aware that the former Governor-General Mr Hardie Boys was deeply concerned that the oral histories he was involved with during the MMP era would not be available. The difficulty was that under the Official Information Act there was a possibility that anything said by a Minister or the Governor-General could be available—hence even their private recollections would be available—and many of them did not want that to happen. However through the mechanism in clause 10 we now have an explicit provision so that the wonderful collection started off by Hugo Manson and Judith Fyfe can be recommenced. 
Clause 10(2) states: “If an oral history has been provided to the National Library by a person on conditions (for example conditions relating to access to the information) that have been agreed to in writing by or on behalf of the National Librarian the Crown and its agents … must comply with those conditions.” Clause 10(3) goes on to state: “This section—(a) applies whether or not the oral history was created or acquired by or on behalf of the Crown; and (b) does not limit the Archives Act 1957.” The effect of that is that those very valuable oral histories will be able to be recommenced. That is a great achievement for the future. 
I must say that during the submissions to the bill I was deeply impressed by the incredibly sincere and extremely conscientious views aired by the submitters. There is something about librarians—and I think there might be a few up in the gallery tonight—but I certainly pay tribute to their extraordinary zeal towards this wonderful institute the National Library. It was a great learning exercise to have their contributions.