Hughes Gareth: State Sector Management Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Hughes Gareth: State Sector Management Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Sitting date: 09 December 2010. Volume:669;Page:16279. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
GARETH HUGHES (Green) 
: 
 Kia ora Mr Chair. We have heard a couple of excellent calls— 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: But I haven’t spoken yet. 
GARETH HUGHES 
: —from Grant Robertson and Steve Chadwick. I am sure we will have some excellent calls from the member Darren Hughes later. 
I disagree with one part Grant Robertson talked about which is that the State Services Management Bill will not be discussed over summer barbecues. I for one being particularly geeky will be talking about this at my summer barbecues— 
Grant Robertson 
: Go to Judith Collins’ barbecue because she will be. 
GARETH HUGHES 
: Oh and Judith Collins. Maybe we will be at the same barbecue. A whole sector of the country will be talking about this bill at summer barbecues: the historians the archivists and those involved in the science and technology sector. They will be talking about it. Steve Chadwick is right: some of those people are feeling insulted professionally by what is happening in this bill. 
I said I am geeky; it is true. I have been campaigning this year to stop library fee introductions at libraries in Taranaki and in Tauranga. I introduced an amendment to the Local Government Act to ensure free access to library books. It is just so important. Our libraries are our community hubs. The National Library is the hub of our country. It is the host of our nation’s intellect our creativity our entertainment. It is an amazing source. It is particularly important for those 3000 other libraries around the country that it supplies. 
What questions will be asked at those summer barbecues? One of the questions is why we are doing it. Another relevant question is why we are doing it under urgency. But why are we doing it full stop? When we look at the Cabinet paper that sparked this bill we see that the National Library and Archives New Zealand were described as well-regarded institutions. The Library and Information Association of New Zealand wrote in its submission: “structural changes made should enhance rather than detract from the many services provided by the National Library and enjoyed by New Zealanders today. The rationale for the merger is superficial the savings seem to be minimal and inevitably there will be a loss of productivity during and after such a major restructure.” 
The key question—which is absent from the Cabinet papers and from mention by the Government officials and the Minister of State Services—is what the impact will be for library users. It is amazing that in a bill that talks about library users and archive users there is hardly any mention of what the improvements will be for those who access the National Library. There is no mention of that. There is no mention of how we are enshrining best library practice in this bill. 
Hon Steve Chadwick 
: Professionalism doesn’t matter. 
GARETH HUGHES 
: Professionalism does not matter. 
I will touch on four points to do with Part 2. First I will look at the role of the National Librarian; second I will look at the technology and digitisation debate; third I will look at the overseas image and the impact this bill will have on that; and fourth I will ask why. 
First I will look at the role of the National Librarian. This bill changes the role seriously. It reduces the role from an executive to an employee. It puts the role into a third-tier relationship. One submitter commented that it is like being dropped from the All Blacks and moving down to a provincial second XV. We are seeing the National Librarian drop in mana in influence and in the ability to talk to the responsible Minister and convince him or her of the need for action. When it comes to the Alexander Turnbull Library the position has dropped even further to a position that is even worse than the provincial team—maybe to a high school first XV bench. It has dropped down to the fourth tier. Ironically the Guardians/Kaitiaki of the Alexander Turnbull Library will have more access to the Minister than the National Librarian will have under this bill. 
The Green Party will today support many of the Labour amendments including changing clause 25 in order to bring back access to the Minister for the National Librarian. I am thinking of the Minister when I support this amendment because it is important that the Minister gets the best possible advice. He does not want to be given the low-down on the National Library by a dry Chief Executive of the Department of Internal Affairs; he wants to hear from someone with fire in their belly someone with a bit of passion for libraries and for the importance of libraries. I am thinking of the Minister. I hope that National supports that amendment because the Minister needs all the advice he can get. I support it. Likewise the public needs all the good advice it can get. We will support the amendment to add new clause 29A. 
Part 2 changes the relationship with the Minister. We can write all we want in the bill about ensuring statutory independence but the reality is that it will come down to the people who are in those positions. Who will the Department of Internal Affairs chief executive be? Who will the National Librarian be? How will they work together? 
It is a false premise that because the Department of Internal Affairs and the National Library do broadly similar material they should be merged together. Conglomeration can be good but in this case it seems to be conglomeration for conglomeration’s sake. 
When we look at technology we see that we need to take our hat off to the National Library. These excellent hard-working Kiwis are world leaders in their field. It is not a huge proportion of its income that deals with digitisation but they are leaders in their field already. If it ain’t broke let us not try to fix it. I am a fan of digitisation personally. I think we should be digitising as much as we can. But that is not the major rationale for literally pulling an independent department and having it taken over by the Department of Internal Affairs. 
I have heard no reason presented by anyone as to why digitisation needs to be in conglomerated departments. Already the National Library is sharing information with things like the EPIC database and the Matapihi website. It is working with other Government departments in backroom service provision. 
When it comes to digitisation the key issue like many things in life simply comes down to cold hard cash. If we want to see more digitisation of our national treasures in New Zealand this Government needs to put more cash into it. It cannot do it on the cheap. It is not just a convenient way of looking like we are acting. If it is serious about it it needs to put in more cash not shuffle the deckchairs. 
In terms of our overseas image this bill is taking us backwards. A third-tier position for our National Librarian is not best practice. The Library and Information Association of New Zealand said that we risk “losing standing as a major culture and heritage organisation for New Zealand.” which will have impacts nationally and internationally. 
Why are we doing this? Ultimately it is all because we want to have fewer Government departments to remember. It is all about trimming the State sector. 
Hon Steve Chadwick 
: Slash-and-burn. 
GARETH HUGHES 
: It is about slashing and burning. Dr Don Gilling pointed out that 28 departments and programmes out of 69 that were funded in the last financial year are smaller than the National Library and 16 are smaller than Archives New Zealand. The fact that those departments are small is not a robust argument for their being taken over by this new super-department the Department of Internal Affairs. I tell those 16 and 28 smaller departments to watch out because Steven Joyce is coming. Ultimately we might have one super-department under Minister Steven Joyce. Kia ora.