Shirley Ken: New Zealand Trade and Enterprise Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Shirley Ken: New Zealand Trade and Enterprise Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:609;Page:6318] 
Hon KEN SHIRLEY (Deputy Leader—ACT NZ) 
: In speaking to the schedules I take up the point just made by Mr Carter who has just resumed his seat. I think that what we have in this legislation really is a clear weathervane of the culture of that organisation. It will be a State-controlled agency with ministerial control to do the bidding of Government. That is where the basic philosophical problem is with the legislation. We have seen reference to that in clauses that have already been referred to. But I would like to refer members to clause 11 of schedule 1: “Accountability for individual duties”. I totally take on board the comments that have already been made. It is quite inappropriate to spell out all those basic performance standards which anyone who is a director of a company or who is on a board knows are part of their fundamental duties. One does not spell them out unless one is indeed engaging imbeciles to undertake that role. The suggestion was made that the boards will be stacked with failed Labour candidates and perhaps on that point I would concede that they might need to have everything spelt out for them but even then it would not be spelt out in big and bold enough language for them. Be that as it may what really disturbs me— 
David Benson-Pope 
: Where’s Donna? 
Hon KEN SHIRLEY 
: The member from Dunedin Mr Benson-Pope is chirping. I ask him what his point is. Does the member have a point to make? No it appears not. He is just chirping away. I turn to clause 11: “Accountability for individual duties”. Clause 11(1) states: “The duties of members under clauses 5 to 9 … are duties owed to the Minister …”. Members should think about that. What that says is that one owes the duties to the Minister. Clause 11(2) states: “If a member does not comply with his or her individual duties”—that is the duty to the Minister—“that member may be removed from office.” 
 Let us just think where else we have seen that. Members of the Committee will remember that when the Government set up the district health boards it invoked gagging clauses. There are scores of men and women up and down this country on the district health boards who are absolutely fed up to here with the goings on—and they have a gagging clause. That is what we have in clause 11 of schedule 1. In other words a person cannot speak out against the Minister’s wishes because he or she will be kicked off the board. That is an exact parallel to the provisions in the district health boards legislation. Once again this Government in establishing this new Crown agency is putting in the condition that a member owes his or her duties to the Minister and if a member does not comply with that then he or she will be removed from office. That is used as a gagging clause. It has been used as such in the district health boards legislation and I put to the Committee that that is what this clause is intended to do. 
I will go through those collective duties of members which is schedule 1 keeping in mind that clause 5 of the bill states that a member means a member of the board; that is of the board of New Zealand Trade and Enterprise. The way we are spelling out the basic functions of any responsible board member is puerile. It does not need to be spelt out in special legislation—it is covered by existing legislation up and down and all over the place. We have legislation to cover the responsibility for directors of any such agency and to spell it out in this manner is rather foolish. Could the Minister in the chair Marian Hobbs please take a call? We have been asking her to take a call and respond to our questions. We have not had a peep out of Bo Peep and it would be nice— 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: That is out of order. Speaker’s ruling 6/1 (Supplement) states that one must refer to a member by full title name or portfolio. 
Hon KEN SHIRLEY 
: We have not had a peep out of Minister No. 16 the Hon Marian Hobbs and we would like to have a response. That is why we have Ministers in the chair during the Committee stage. They are there to actually respond and enter into the debate and if this Government cannot put in the chair a Minister who can actually take a call it is a pretty poor show.