McCully Murray: Television New Zealand Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
McCully Murray: Television New Zealand Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:606;Page:3754] 
Hon MURRAY McCULLY (NZ National—East Coast Bays) 
: 
 On behalf of other members who have asked questions of the Minister in the chair Steve Maharey I am disappointed that we do not yet have the answers we have sought. I want to go back to where I focused earlier—to clauses 8 and 10 which provide the mechanism by which the new State-owned enterprise Transmission Holdings Ltd—currently known as BCL—will be established. Essentially what will happen is that the directors of Television New Zealand will be charged with formulating a separation plan. Is that right Minister? The Minister does not know the answer so maybe I will ask his officials. But this is a very important part of the bill. The directors of TVNZ will effectively be in charge of the shaping of a new State-owned enterprise which is to be confirmed by way of an Order in Council as provided for in clause 10. The Minister owes it to the Committee to tell us who will be playing that important role. Television New Zealand today has an acting chairman. After the demise of the late unlamented Dr Ross Armstrong Helen Clark’s close friend— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Could be the member’s close mate! 
Hon MURRAY McCULLY 
: If the Minister wants to take a call that would be refreshing because the Minister in the chair will not. The Minister owes it to us to say whether Mr Boyce who we put in the chair as the acting chairman is to be the chairman who will do the important things that are described particularly in clause 8. I understand that Cabinet and the Cabinet Appointments And Honours Committee have been focused on that issue over the last few days. Is that right Minister? The Minister does not know. Would the Minister like to tell the Committee whether the Government will appoint a permanent chairman to oversee the important task that is contained in clause 8 or will it not? To discharge the functions outlined in clause 8 will the Government appoint the two additional board directors for whom there are vacancies at the moment or will it not?  
The Minister will know that there is widespread discontent within Television New Zealand that the board is a bit light in terms of some of its commercial aspects. There has been a desire to see a strong commercial board put in place to do the important things that follow the passage of this legislation including the bits that are contained in clause 8. The Minister would give us comfort tonight if he could tell us whether Mr Boyce will be the permanent chairman to do the things that are in clause 8 and which directors will be appointed to participate in the important functions contained in clauses 8 and 10.  
I also want him to assure the Committee that there is no substance to the rumours that I have picked up in United Future circles that the reason its members are supporting this bill is that they have done a deal with the Minister over some of the board appointments. I ask the members of United Future whether they can give an assurance that they have not done a deal over the appointment of directors for TVNZ or for the new BCL. [ 
Interruption 
] I do not believe that because I have heard it widely mooted in United Future circles that they have been promoting candidates for those boards. Will the Minister give an assurance? The Minister will not. The Minister by his silence speaks volumes. The Minister is effectively confirming that there has been a dirty grubby deal done in relation to this bill which sees United Future get some of their boys or girls on to the boards of either the transmission company or Television New Zealand. [ 
Interruption 
] Well why will the Minister not stand up to take a call? Why will the Minister not even move his head to deny it? 
Hon David Carter 
: Because he’s asleep! 
Hon MURRAY McCULLY 
: The Minister might be asleep. That Minister knows that if he were to give such an assurance in the Chamber he might be accountable in a privileges case later on. I think he should take that responsibility seriously. If the Minister wants to deny that important assertion this is his chance to do it.