Twyford Phil: Fair Trading (Soliciting on Behalf of Charities) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Twyford Phil: Fair Trading (Soliciting on Behalf of Charities) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 09 May 2012. Volume:679;Page:2135. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
PHIL TWYFORD (Labour—Te Atatu) 
: 
 It certainly is an unorthodox approach to lawmaking to pass a primary piece of legislation that basically hands to the Minister of Consumer Affairs the unfettered right to write regulations to deal with a problem. I do not think— 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: In a private member’s bill. 
PHIL TWYFORD 
: That is right—in a private member’s bill. I do not think the Hon David Parker was being too uncharitable when he described in less than flattering tones the final product of this extensive piece of work by the member Amy Adams and by the Commerce Committee. It is a strange thing to bring effectively a hollow bill to the House that hands to the Minister the ability to write regulations to solve the purported problem. It is pretty clear reading the report that goes with this member’s bill the Fair Trading (Soliciting on Behalf of Charities) Amendment Bill that the committee was overcome by the complexity. If that is the case—if it was overcome by the complexity of this issue—it might have been a bit more sensible to go back to the drawing board rather than proceed with this hollow bill.  
I want to focus on two issues in particular following on from the member’s contribution. The cost of donation is the critical factor in this. The cost of donation is the key factor that this bill is setting out to regulate. But the reality is that for almost all fund-raising work in New Zealand today when you make that first phone call that first direct-mail letter or that first conversation on the street that is the beginning of what the charity hopes will be a lifelong relationship with the donor and in all cases that first contact with the donor the first donation is always very expensive. What I would like to know is why this bill does not cover direct mail because actually what most charities do is capture their donors their prospects for the first time through direct-mail fund-raising. It is the first cheque that gets written or the first credit card transaction that is the beginning of the lifelong donor relationship. The cost of that direct-mail transaction for most charities is about 100 percent. Most charities would consider that to be money well spent—if they could capture a donor with that first donation at a cost of 100 percent. So why is that not included in this bill? I think it is a fundamental misunderstanding of the way that fund-raising works and the way that the fund-raising business model for almost all charities in this country works and that misunderstanding is captured in this bill and the so-called complexity that led to a non-bill being brought to this House.  
The other thing that is inexplicable to me is why the bill focuses on face-to-face fund-raising and telemarketing. Why not charitable events? Charitable events are one of the main ways that charities strike up a relationship with new donors. The cost ratio for charitable events is generally very very high—far higher than the cost ratio for street-based face-to-face fund-raising or telemarketing. So why does the bill not include charitable events within its ambit? I invite the member in the chair Michael Woodhouse to explain why this bill does not cover fund-raising events or direct-mail fund-raising because in the fund-raising business model that almost every charity in this country uses those two things are just as important as actually or more important than street-based face-to-face fund-raising or telemarketing. 
I know Labour members are supporting this bill and it is out of a sense of charity I say to members. No one disagrees with the principles of accountability disclosure and transparency. But I am sad to say that this bill is an example of woolly thinking and really it needs further work.