Parker David: Governor-General Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Parker David: Governor-General Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:668;Page:14794] 
Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour) 
: 
 I am taking a call following the previous speaker John Hayes who wearing his dapper little bow tie is obviously auditioning for a future role as Governor-General. I do not know whether it will do the trick! 
There is a need to tidy up the rules relating to the remuneration allowances of the Governor-General. I will raise two examples that show the need for the changes outlined in Part 1. The first relates to the fact that the rules are so old—and someone might have already mentioned that earlier while I was out of the Chamber—they currently entitle the Governor-General upon appointment to a sailing trip from old Blighty. The Governor-General currently is entitled to a sailing trip between the United Kingdom and New Zealand. I am not sure whether it is one trip a year but anyway it is ridiculous. That entitlement is well outmoded and we no longer have any need for that allowance that still sits within the existing provisions. 
The other provision goes the other way. It concerns a Governor-General who by Paul Henry’s rating would have been a real New Zealander. A previous Governor-General used to run a car importing business and relied upon his—and it was a male Governor-General—exemption from income tax and import duty. He repeatedly imported a large number of vehicles from overseas and resold them in New Zealand. This was some time ago when New Zealand imposed very high tariffs on imported vehicles particularly high-end English Jaguars and suchlike which he was importing from the United Kingdom. He supplemented his stipend by importing vehicles and repeatedly flogging them off in New Zealand. He had a car sales business on the side which was tax-free because of his status as Governor-General. Clearly that was not a very good way to run the affairs of the Governor-General. We need to stop that sort of thing happening again in the future by making it clear that the salary and allowances paid to the Governor-General are in appropriate circumstances—the salary at least—taxable. The sort of thing we have seen in the past should not happen again. 
The office of Governor-General is a high office. It is very important that we have proper rules in relation to the operation of the office of Governor-General. The Governor-General’s office sits as a very important part of our constitutional affairs. The Governor-General is the representative of Her Majesty the Queen of New Zealand who is the titular head of New Zealand. The Governor-General is bound by various traditions protocols and conventions as to how he or she acts. The Governor-General acts generally on the recommendation of the Government of the day through the Executive Council which effectively makes recommendations to the Governor-General about what regulations should be passed. The Governor-General also signs into law by giving the Royal assent on behalf of the Queen legislation that is passed by this House. 
The important constitutional role that the Governor-General fulfils ought to be properly administered and properly paid. The rules about payment ought to be clear. That is what Part 1 makes clear by setting out the salary that is properly payable. It also sets out the annuity that is payable to former Governors-General upon their retirement—how that annuity carries on to the surviving spouse of a former Governor-General and when those sorts of things arise and when they stop—and the other sorts of allowances that are payable to Governors-General. 
I ask the Minister in the chair the Hon Phil Heatley if he can recall the instance that I spoke of in relation to a previous Governor-General. The name if he wants a hint began with B. The Governor-General whose name began with B had an import business on the side. He imported large numbers of cars and sold them at a profit. He may have been using that business in part to fund the office of Governor-General but he may also have been personally profiting. I am not sure where the truth lies! None the less— 
John Hayes 
: A lawyer was he? 
Hon DAVID PARKER 
: He may well have been a lawyer. In fact he may bear the same name as another lawyer who got into trouble for other judicial matters.