Carter David: Television New Zealand Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Carter David: Television New Zealand Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:606;Page:3729] 
Hon DAVID CARTER (NZ National) 
: 
 I certainly want to speak to the title and I want to speak particularly to the interesting contribution from Marc Alexander who suggested that he would table an amendment naming the bill the “Thank God for United Future Bill”. I say to Mr Alexander that he should put his money where his mouth is and table that amendment. I will work with my colleagues on this side of the Chamber and with the votes of “Mr United Future” I think we could get a change to this legislation. So I am challenging Mr Marc Alexander as we debate the title to be honest. He said he would put an amendment. I am challenging him to table the amendment and I will work with ACT New Zealand First and National to get support for it. I tell him that we would have the numbers to change the title of this bill successfully. 
I think he has gone a shade of white and I do not think that he wants to persist with his first suggestion which was to call the Television New Zealand Bill the “Thank God for United Future Bill”. I do not think that would do his electoral chances any good. We have had that suggestion from Marc Alexander for a change of title but I think that one is probably not going to see the light of day. 
My colleague the Hon Tony Ryall suggested the bill should be called the “Television New Zealand Destruction Bill”. I would be very supportive of that. I think it goes a long way towards tallying with the comments from Deborah Coddington who reminded the Committee that as we debate the Television New Zealand Bill we are debating an organisation that was once a proud organisation worth a lot of money. Now we are dealing with an organisation that is far from being a proud organisation. It is nothing like the organisation it used to be. It is certainly not worth anywhere near what it was worth only a few years ago. 
As we debate clause 1 “Title” I am interested in whether Helen Clark is going to unshackle the previous Minister the Hon Marian Hobbs as this legislation is her brainchild. I am most surprised that she has not taken a call to date as we debate the title “Television New Zealand Bill” and I will be interested to see whether she is allowed to make any further useful contributions as we proceed through the debate. 
I have one further comment to make as we debate the title. It is really a question of who will be happy to see this legislation passed. I cannot imagine that many average Television New Zealand viewers will be rapt with the changes being engineered in the Committee today. But those who will be happy are the many thousands of New Zealanders who have bought shares in Sky television. As we debate the title “Television New Zealand Bill” I say that mark my words the beneficiaries of this legislation will be the people who own shares in Sky television. It is going to become the channel of choice. People are not going to be interested in watching what Marian Hobbs tells them they are meant to watch. They are going to use the thing that she referred to as the “what-d’you-call-it”. She was unsure what a remote was called when she debated something concerning television a year or so ago. 
As we debate the Television New Zealand Bill today I say that the shareholders of Sky television will be the big beneficiaries. They will see that people up and down the country find that this bill the Television New Zealand Bill does nothing to improve the quality of what they enjoy watching. It might have something to do with Jill Pettis telling people what they should be watching and her feeling a lot better because— 
Hon Tony Ryall 
: Cartoons. 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: Oh no I think she talked about documentaries. It would be a documentary on Sonja Davies or somebody like her—some well-known Labour Party member.