Radio New Zealand Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRadio New Zealand Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 20 May 2015. Volume:705;Page:3475. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Radio New Zealand Amendment BillSecond ReadingDebate resumed from 19 May.Hon JUDITH COLLINS (National—Papakura): Yet another day in paradise. Is it not wonderful to be here having listened to the general debate and knowing that the taxpayer dollar is so well spent listening to us debate? Some of it of course was errant nonsense but there you go. It is a democracy and if those members want to spend their time wasting it—great. We are back to Radio New Zealand and radio generally. We have already established that every year we have been giving as a Government $25 million to Radio New Zealand.Brett Hudson: How much? How much?Hon JUDITH COLLINS: $25 million. That is a wonderful amount of money is it not? And that compares very favourably with all the other money that we give to radio stations in New Zealand. That is because we give them not a cent—zero zip nothing. So Radio New Zealand does really well. For that of course Radio New Zealand does not have to go cap in hand to advertisers and does not have to justify itself other than to select committees. That is a price that we pay as taxpayers because actually Radio New Zealand has a charter and it has to produce certain things that may not be commercially efficient and probably would not survive the commercial rule being run over it. But are we not lucky that we live in a society where not only do we have Radio New Zealand but we have so much more choice? If we do not want to hear the dulcet tones of Checkpoint we can in fact listen instead to that fabulous person on Newstalk ZB Larry Williams or we could listen instead in the morning to the fabulous Paul Henry someone whom I listen to quite a lot now and I know that my friend Annette King does too. That is the sort of thing. We have choice. Is that not wonderful?But I would also say that we need to be very aware—and I am sure that the people in the industry are—that there are very interesting times ahead for the industry. As we have been hearing in the debate so much in terms of technological change is happening. It is so fast. Multimedia solutions are now being trialled and used and we can see that with the Radio Live Paul Henry show. We can also see it with others as well. I think that is one of the things. We are going to see a lot of consolidation in the industry and a lot of new and innovative ways of doing things. Radio New Zealand is well placed and I am really pleased with the progress it has made in the last 6 and a bit years.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): The next call I understand is a split call. Gareth Hughes—5 minutes.GARETH HUGHES (Green):Kia ora Mr Assistant Speaker. Ngā mihi nui ki a koutou. Kia ora. Following on from the contribution by Ms Collins I am sure that there are a few National Cabinet Ministers who would like to hear the end of those dulcet tones on Checkpoint given what we have seen over the years.I want to touch on a theme. This is my third term of Parliament and something I have noticed is that inexorably when the Clerk reads out the new legislation being introduced at the beginning of Parliament the numbers are massively down. It has been an awfully long time since we have seen any new ideas any new legislation and here is a classic example. The Radio New Zealand Amendment Bill is something that has been referred from the review of a committee from 2006 and it did not get around to being issued to a select committee until 2009 and here is the Government with nothing else pressing on the legislative agenda finally getting around to this bill 6 years later. It is finally getting around to looking at this bill. That tells you a few things.If public broadcasting was a priority this bill could have been knocked off many many years ago. It is an uncontroversial bill. This bill simply enshrines in statute the charter for Radio New Zealand which is something that all parties in this Parliament agree on. It also says something about the Government’s priorities because the only public broadcasting change except for a massive funding freeze to the sector is in fact an uncontroversial bill doing something that should have come about in the mid-2000s. It is setting up finally the charter for Radio New Zealand.It is not controversial. We are talking about a charter that talks about Radio New Zealand being “independent and commercial-free”—which it is at the moment—and having freedom of thought and expression fostering a sense of national identity providing independent freely accessible news and enriching our broadcasting environment. It is all good stuff which none of the 165 submissions could be opposed to. But I do want to talk about something Ms Collins said. In her contribution she talked about nothing being available for other broadcasters which highlighted somehow the Government’s exceedingly high generosity in funding public broadcasting—or Radio New Zealand—in New Zealand. One word: it is MediaWorks. We saw a fantastically huge bailout for MediaWorks and its stable of commercial radio stations from this Government.Let us look at the facts. In the last year of the previous Labour Government KPMG produced a report saying that Radio New Zealand was suffering from a funding shortfall in 2007. It recommended a $6.7 million urgent reinjection. What have we seen since then since the National Government was elected in 2008? Zero. It has seen an absolute funding freeze across that period which has been an effective funding cut to the only public broadcaster in this country—that is Radio New Zealand. Television One and TV2 of course are not public broadcasters. Māori Television serves a different service—an important service. We have seen a 9 percent funding cut in real terms.This is something that needs to be addressed because it is important for all those reasons that we are passing into law now to foster that sense of national identity—to have that freely available independent news and to hear those Kiwi voices. I would not call the $25 million exceedingly generous. This is half on a per capita basis of what the Australians fund for the Australian Broadcasting Corporation and a third what the Brits do when it comes to the BBC. We are a laggard when it comes to public broadcasting.So I challenge the Government: if it is serious it should put its money where its mouth is tomorrow. This is part of the foundation for a strong civic society a foundation for our democracy. That is why the Greens are supporting public broadcasting and it is why we need a public television broadcaster. Really the question is for the Government to put its money where its mouth is.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I call Chris Hipkins—5 minutes.CHRIS HIPKINS (Labour—Rimutaka): I am very happy to take a call on the Radio New Zealand Amendment Bill. My last contribution was so good. I am very happy to take a call on this bill. My cold is catching up with me so you will have to forgive me if my voice is not perhaps quite as booming as it was in my last contribution.Hon Annette King: Have a glass of water.CHRIS HIPKINS: I have had lots of water so I will be fine. I am very strongly in favour of this bill and it is good to see that it is finally going to progress through the House. I think it is disappointing that it has taken such a long period of time to get it through the House. Of course the Radio New Zealand Act requires that the Radio New Zealand charter is reviewed every 5 years. So the fact that this is based on a review that happened nearly 10 years ago means that we are probably a couple of reviews behind and hopefully there will be further amendments required in due course.I think one of the things that we have to keep in mind is that technological change is happening really rapidly in this area. Just reading through the charter that is attached to this bill it is important to note the really strong emphasis that is placed on broadcasting within that. And yet the lines between broadcasting and other forms of technology are becoming so blurred now that there will inevitably need to be further change and further evolution in this area. Actually Radio New Zealand in my strong view should not necessarily be about public non-commercial broadcast content but public non-commercial content and making sure that that is widely available and that will be through a variety of different mediums including online content. Radio New Zealand is increasingly doing more work in that area and I think that that is a very welcome thing.Tim Macindoe: Programmes about throats?CHRIS HIPKINS: Programmes about colds sore throats and all those sorts of things would be useful.I think that Judith Collins was wrong when she said that commercial broadcasters in New Zealand do not get one cent of Government subsidy. That is not true. As Gareth Hughes has just pointed out MediaWorks has done pretty well out of the current Government. And she mentioned a few high-profile broadcasters in her contribution including Paul Henry Mike Hosking and others. I want to say that I think that is absolutely fine. I think there is a legitimate place in the New Zealand media for those voices just as there is a legitimate place for the John Campbells and others.I think that really what we should be aiming for in New Zealand is a wide diversity of views and opinions within the New Zealand media. But the niche if you like that Radio New Zealand fills within that is that it can do more in-depth fact checking more in-depth investigative journalism which the commercial broadcasters and commercial media outlets are struggling to do not because they do not want to do it not because the journalists working for those organisations are not very very good journalists—they are—but simply because they are far more resource constrained. If the commercial media environment cannot fund that level of investigative journalism inquiry and diverse debate then we do need as a society to ensure that it is publicly available in some other form. Radio New Zealand in the radio sphere has certainly been a bastion of that.I have heard people on the other side of the House refer to Radio New Zealand as a bastion of left-wing propaganda. Radio New Zealand deals with facts and it is one of the organisations that do a lot of fact checking. If dealing in facts makes it left wing then yes I guess it will have to wear that particular label but I do not believe that it has any bias politically. I think what it does do—Tim Macindoe: Ha ha!CHRIS HIPKINS: I do not believe that Radio New Zealand is politically biased at all. I think it strives very very hard not to be politically biased but there are some journalists out there who make no bones about their political bias and that is fine if they are open and upfront about it. I think Radio New Zealand tries very carefully to not do that as the State broadcaster. I think we have a lot less bias in Radio New Zealand for example than we do in Television New Zealand where Mike Hosking’s editorials are very biased. But he is upfront about that and that is OK but I think there is a need to balance that by ensuring that an equally compelling alternative view is put forward and I do not think Television New Zealand does that very well. I think it lets New Zealand down as the nation’s television broadcaster in not providing that diversity something I know that Radio New Zealand strives very very hard to provide.I am very supportive of this bill. I am also very supportive of the Government taking the foot off Radio New Zealand’s throat in terms of the funding constraints it has been under. Overall this is a good piece of legislation.CHRIS BISHOP (National): It is a pleasure to take a call on this important bill. I think members will agree that there is consensus across the House that the bill is sensible. Members opposite have I think fairly raised some concern about the length of time it has taken to pass this bill. Of course the bill was first introduced I think in 2009. Yes indeed; its first reading was on 4 June and it was referred to the Commerce Committee.I think that members opposite cry crocodile tears when it comes to complaints about the length of time it takes to pass bills. Members in general may be interested to learn the names of a number of bills that were on the Order Paper in 2008 when National took office. We had of course the Education (Establishment of Universities) Amendment Bill. It was first introduced in 2006. There was no progress under Labour. We had the Oaths Modernisation Bill and the Rail Network Bill and there was a real doozy the Conservation (Protection of Trout as a Non-commercial Species) Amendment Bill. It was first introduced in 1998 under the last National Government and it made no progress in 9 years under the Labour GovernmentBrett Hudson: Nine long years.CHRIS BISHOP: Nine long years—thank you very much Mr Hudson. So I think that those members cry crocodile tears about it. But regardless of the time it has taken to get to this point it is an important bill that we are progressing.I also want to make a few points in rebuttal to Clare Curran’s speech last night. I was—privileged is slightly the wrong word. I was present in the Chamber to hear her contribution to the debate last night. There were a few odd remarks that I want to pick up on in rebuttal. The first thing is to point out that the major thrust of some of the criticism in the first part of her speech seems to be based on a speech that Tony Ryall gave in 1993 presumably as a Government backbencher about Radio New Zealand and one quote he had given in 1993. It seems to be drawing a slightly long bow to criticise current Government policy in 2015 based on a comment from a member who is actually no longer a member of Parliament when he was a Government backbencher in the previous National Government. So I think that Clare clearly was struggling with her material if she had to go right back in the archives to 1993. I suggest to the Labour Party research unit which is clearly listening to this contribution to the debate that it needs to do its homework better.The second thing I want to mention about Ms Curran’s contribution is her comments about the Television New Zealandcharter. The Labour Party is very proud of the famed Television New Zealand (TVNZ) charter. The reality is that the TVNZ charter was a debacle. TVNZ turned up at the Commerce Committee in 2007 and in response to a question about its commitment to Māori broadcasting said that the Police Ten 7 show was an example of its commitment to Māori broadcasting—Police Ten 7. That is how it got away with fulfilling its mandate under the charter. It got given free money by Steve Maharey and the other Ministers of Broadcasting under Labour to basically reclassify existing commercial programmes like Police Ten 7 and say that that was its commitment to public service broadcasting.Actually the National Government took an enlightened policy to the 2008 election. We said that rather than give TVNZ $15 million of free money let us unshackle it from its dual mandate let us let it do what it wants to do anyway—be commercial—and let us give that $15 million to New Zealand On Air which will be medium-neutral as to where that money goes. In other words New Zealand On Airwould select the programmes. A programme could be on TV3 it could be on TVNZ or it could be on a variety of other platforms. Increasingly in the modern world it is actually through digital and New Zealand On Air has now got a digital media fund which is a world first. It was an enlightened policy and we think it has actually made for much better delivery. It has unshackled TVNZ from that mandate.The other mistake Clare Curran made was to say that National has made TVNZ commercial. Actually that was done by the fourth Labour Government in 1989 when it deregulated the broadcasting sector and allowed TV3 to enter the market. In fact you could arguably say that TVNZ has always been commercial because only 1 year after the inception of television in New Zealand in the 1960s we had ads on television. Clare Curran suggested in a tweet last night that one of the problems with television in New Zealand is that we have ads during prime time—ads during prime time. So the Labour Party broadcasting policy at the next election is going to be very interesting. It will be interesting to see the Labour Party’s commitment to the abolition of advertisements on TVNZ during prime time. That will be a slightly odd policy but it will be in keeping with its general modus operandi when it comes to policies which is that it has got no idea how to pay for things and it has no idea about the actual policies it is trying to pursue. So we are looking forward to that broadcasting policy.This is an important bill. Radio New Zealand makes an important contribution to the life of this nation. It is something that I and many New Zealanders listen to. In 2014 Radio New Zealand’s live cumulative audience was 484000. Increasingly it is moving into the online space. In 2013-14 there were 3.5 million podcasts downloaded. I have got many friends around the world and I know that many of them like to download the Radio New Zealand podcasts of Morning Report Nine to Noon and Checkpoint and listen to them when they wake up in the morning in the United Kingdom or America or wherever they are and keep up with the news from New Zealand because it is a very good source of information and the podcasts are well produced.Increasingly the Wireless which is the youth-oriented website that Radio New Zealand has set up has grown in popularity as well. I have had a couple of friends who have worked for that website and it does produce good content. One of the things people used to talk about back in the 1990swas a youth radio network—that New Zealand needed a triple j like Australia has which would be an advertisement-free radio station. I know that Neil Finn the musician and a few other people were very very keen on a youth radio network.Actually to be fair I used to be an advocate for a youth radio network as well. I was once a youth parliamentarian and I advocated for a youth radio network in my question in the Youth Parliament’s question time to the Minister of Broadcasting Marian Hobbs. Despite the fact that it was apparently Labour Government policy at the time she gave me the brush-off.People used to talk about having a youth radio network but I think that now people would generally agree that the way technology has evolved for the Government to fund a dedicated commercial youth radio frequency would probably be a retrograde step and that actually the way of the future is something like the Wireless website something like the youth-oriented website that is associated with Radio New Zealand. Actually the Wireless was a finalist in the category of best site in the Canon Media Awards of 2014 and Radio New Zealand continues to do well at the New Zealand Radio Awards as well. That is no surprise because as I said before it fulfils an important role in the cultural and social life of this nation.With that in mind it is important that we amend the Radio New Zealand Act 1995 because we need to update the Act and make it clear that the revised charter text makes for a stronger statement about its role as the public broadcaster and makes sure it is more accessible to the general public. There is also an update requirement for a 5-yearly charter review.This is an important bill. Radio New Zealand continues to play an important role in the cultural and social life of this nation. I commend the bill to the House.KELVIN DAVIS (Labour—Te Tai Tokerau): Tēnā rā koe e te Māngai o te Whare. I a mātou e kōrero ana mō tēnei mea te reo irirangi e hiahia ana ahau ki te tū ki te mihi atu ki tērā o ngā whānau kei roto i a Mangamuka. I tērā Mane kua kaingatia tō rātou teihana irirangi e te ahi. Arā ko tērā teihana reo irirangi ko Tautoko FM. I te Mane kua pahure ake nei i ahau e haere ana ki te wāhi rererangi o Kerikeri ka pahure ahau i taua teihana. Kīhai i pau te ono hāora i muri atu kua kāpurangia e te ahi. Nā reira ka tuku atu ahau i ōku mihimihi ki tērā whānau nā rātou i whakapau i ō rātou kaha ki te hāpai i Te Reo Māori i ngā take Māori ki a Cyril Chapman mā ngā mihi aroha atu ki a rātou.[Thank you indeed Mr Speaker. While we are speaking about this radio thing I want to rise and acknowledge one of the families living in Mangamuka. Last Monday their radio station Tautoko FM was consumed by fire. As I was travelling to the aerodrome of Kerikeri this Monday just gone I went past that station. Not quite 6 hours afterwards and fire razed it. So I want to extend my sympathies to that family who worked hard to elevate the Māori language and Māori matters to Cyril Chapman and them loving concerns to them.]Just while we are speaking about the Radio New Zealand Amendment Bill I want to acknowledge Mangamuka and the whanau who on Monday had their iwi radio station burnt to the ground. On Monday afternoon I passed over Mangamuka Bridge and Radio Tautoko was on the left. It was not some 6 hours later that a fire razed the whole station to the ground. I just want to extend my thoughts to the whanau there at Tautoko FM—in particular to Cyril Chapman a man who has been involved in running that stationfor a number of decades and I believe that they have made the commitment to have their station up and running again as soon as possible. I think it is important just to acknowledge Tautoko FM and the whanau there. For a number of decades Mangamuka has done such a great job in uplifting our Reo and our culture.In 1996 Christopher Phillips an American lamented the fact that anytime he turned on the media he was dissatisfied with the way people engaged in supposed intellectual discourse. More often than not he said he heard browbeating and one-upmanship. There was intellectual snootiness. People were using knowledge as a cloak and shield rather than using it to diffuse enlightenment. And he said that democracy hinges on an enlightened citizenry. These days the content of many commercially driven radio stations tends to be more infotainment than information. They tend to be going for the 30-second sound bite and in some cases it is not even a 30-second sound bite; it is a 3 to 5-second sound bite. Citizens of New Zealand are becoming deprived of real meaningful broadcasting where opinions and information are disseminated and where people can hear people politicians sportspeople and other members of the community putting forward their points of view. That is why this bill through which the Radio New Zealand charter is going to be amended is a great bill.I would like to refer to a couple of points in new section 8 of the Charter the “Purpose” in particular the point that says: “Freedom of thought and expression are foundations of democratic society and the public radio company as a public service broadcaster plays an essential role in exercising these freedoms.” Another point in the “Purpose” says: “The public radio company provides reliable independent and freely accessible news and information.” Those purposes I can only commend. The charter’s “Delivery” says: “In achieving its purpose the public radio company must endeavour to provide services of the highest quality which—(b) inform entertain and enlighten the people of New Zealand:” and that endorses the quotation from Christopher Phillips in 1996. It also says under the “Delivery” that Radio New Zealand needs to “(d) foster critical thought and informed and wide-ranging debate:” We are often bereft of wide-ranging debate in broadcasting. We have heard that a number of people whose opinions are often politically cloudedare just out there and we do not actually get to hear wide-ranging debate; we just get to hear certain reporters’ jaundiced views of the world.I would just like to go to the first reading of this bill and throw a bouquet to Jonathan Young. I like what he had to say. He said: “this charter not only speaks to the necessity of those with political or commercial interests not exerting their influence in appropriate ways but also just as important places on broadcasters the serious responsibility to maintain their editorial independence and integrity in the execution of their responsibilities and duties.” He also said: “Radio New Zealand does not make the news but reports it; does not create opinions but accurately reflects the views and opinions of New Zealanders in a legitimate and appropriate way.” But I would just like to contrast that with the then - Minister of Broadcasting the Hon Dr Jonathan Coleman and his silly contribution which said: “This bill languished under the last administration”. It is funny how your words can come back to haunt you because if this bill languished in his opinion under the previous Labour administration then what do we call 7 years’ sitting on the Order Paper gathering dust if that is not languishing? He said: “whereas this Government”—his Government—“is committed to fulfilling its legislative responsibilities.”This makes it sound like there was a sense of urgency around this bill. We know that after 7 years that was definitely not the case. “This should have been done but the previous Government just never got around to doing it. This is an unfair situation for Radio New Zealand”—well if it was unfair 7 years ago imagine what the situation is like for Radio New Zealand right now. I mean this charter was meant to be amended every 5 years. It was meant to be amended in around 2010. It has now been 10 years since it was amended and this is a Government that is saying it is doing all it can. The previous Minister of Broadcasting—this is again the Hon Dr Jonathan Coleman—said the previous Labour Minister of Broadcasting had other priorities. Well the Minister of Broadcasting in the last Labour Government probably did have other priorities. He was a hard-working Minister.“It is highly desirable that the related legislative process be concluded as soon as possible”. Well let me tell you if 7 years is this Government’s idea of “as soon as possible” then we wonder whether the Budget surplus is also going to come to fruition as soon as possible or in terms of this bill go through the rest of the stages—the Committee stage and the third reading. Are we just going to have to wait until tomorrow? As my colleague Phil Twyford says every time this Government says that it is going to do something it is always: “We’re on the cusp. We’re on the cusp of something great.” Well maybe we are just on the cusp of this bill being passed. “It is highly desirable that the related legislative process be concluded as soon as possible to ensure that Radio New Zealand can operate with an up-to-date and clear public service mandate.”Another member who is a Minister now Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga in a similar vein said: “This bill is an example of the Labour Party resting on its laurels and not getting legislation through this House. It is a brave move to take on this legislation and move it quickly through the House.” Seven years in anybody’s opinion is not moving quickly. We have concerns about the budget freeze for Radio New Zealand because the honourable Minister back in 2009 had all these plans and everything was going to happen. He wanted to do this; he wanted to do that. And then the Government froze the budget which we know through inflation and over time is essentially a budget cut for Radio New Zealand. We hope that in tomorrow’s Budget after one more sleep we will find out that Radio New Zealand is actually going to get some more money in its coffers so that it can fulfil its charter. Kia ora.KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI (National): Thank you for allowing me to speak on the second reading of the Radio New Zealand Amendment Bill. It is a well-established fact that Radio New Zealand delivers quality content to its listeners. I am a big fan of radio and normally whenever I am travelling I prefer to listen to the radio rather than to any other media. The technology is changing but still I am a big fan of radio. The four radio stations that I normally switch between are: Radio New Zealand Newstalk ZB BBC and Radio Tarana. When I came to New Zealand in 2001 Radio Tarana was the only Indian radio channel available for a few hours in the day which kept us connected to our homeland. I appreciate that having gone from strength to strength Radio Tarana is now a 24-hour Indian radio channel and it has a very wide audience. I congratulate that team.Radio New Zealand is one of those stations that deliver an unbiased viewpoint and I normally listen to this radio station from time to time. It has got a long history. It was established as a public broadcaster in 1925 and at that time the funding was given through the radio licences—25 shillings out of each licence issued at that time. Then it continued and as the demand grew the company was established in 1931 when the Government appointed the New Zealand Broadcasting Board. It was dependent upon the licence fee. In 1936 the Government established the New Zealand Broadcasting Service as a Government department which soon added fully commercial radio stations also. After the war the New Zealand Broadcasting Service’s Government department status was ended in 1962 and the Government established the New Zealand Broadcasting Corporation. During the next 30 years the system was changed numerous times but public non-commercial radio service remained its integral part.Given the changing technology there are some other facts that are very relevant today that I would like to share with this House. In 2014 Radio New Zealand’s live accumulative audience for its National and Concert audience was 484000. In 2013-14 3.5 million podcasts were downloaded. In 2013-14 Radio New Zealand’s homepage reached 21 million viewings. In 2014 unique users of the website grew by over 50 percent. In 2013 again on a regular basis Radio New Zealand’s mobile app grew by almost 62 percent. I am sharing this with the House because the technology is changing. Nowadays youngsters prefer using different media from the normal radio. I inherited this habit of listening to the radio from my father who used to listen to the radio all the time. At that time there were no satellite televisions and there was not much broadcasting on television. I remember that the last news broadcast used to be at 12 o’clock midnight. He used to listen to that before going to bed. I inherited that habit of listening to the radio from him.It is because of the quality of its programmes that Radio New Zealand remains the preferred radio station. Radio New Zealand provides content that some of the private broadcasters may not be able to do due to their commercial realities. In contrast Radio New Zealand delivers its content independently. By way of this bill we want to ensure that Radio New Zealand continues to deliver quality unbiased content to its listeners. Furthermore by way of legislation we also want to ensure that new media and technologies that Radio New Zealand intends to implement are also allowed to deliver quality and unbiased programmes.Some of the previous speakers mentioned that the budget has been frozen and no additional money has been given to Radio New Zealand. But I want to say that I appreciate the Radio New Zealand team the technicians and the leadership for using what they are given. They manage their programmes very well. I remember at one of the briefings that we had from Radio New Zealand at the Commerce Committee they mentioned that the technology that has been developed at Radio New Zealand helped them to go further and use that technology within the budget so that they can improve the quality of the programmes.This once again shows the National-led Government’s commitment to delivering better public services. I take this opportunity to congratulate the honourable Minister Amy Adams on taking the initiative of progressing this bill. We have time and again shown how serious we are towards our commitment to improving public services in all areas big or small.The current legislation is focused towards simplifying Radio New Zealand’s charter. It makes a strong statement on the purpose of Radio New Zealand and how its charter will deliver for the benefit of all New Zealanders. The charter was prepared after public consultation and was well deliberated on by the select committee. The committee received over 165 submissions. The committee also considered the existing charter and the legislation. After thorough analysis of all aspects the bill we are debating today was introduced to the House in 2009. All this work has meant that we have legislation that ensures futuristic thinking and the best results for the public of New Zealand.Based on the review we now have a clause that caters to the new and emerging technologies in the media space. The world of technology is ever-evolving and now everywhere we see more and new media in use. The other day while watching the New Zealand - South Africa Cricket World Cup semi-final I saw a drone flying over Eden Park covering the entire match from an eagle’s-eye view. We thought that drones were limited only to defence technology—in this case it was for New Zealand radio. This clause will ensure that the broadcaster takes advantage of the most effective means of delivery and provides the best user experience.Furthermore the charter recognises that New Zealand is now a very multicultural society. Keeping this in mind the charter states that the diverse forms of cultural programming including but not limited to drama comedy literature and the performing arts need to form an essential part of Radio New Zealand’s programming. I remember when I once asked the Radio New Zealand officials what their thoughts were about the diverse communities and the diaspora of New Zealand. They mentioned that they are planning to have in the near future as communities are getting diverse traditional programmes available like in Hindi Mandarin and Cantonese. I hope the day is not far away when the technology will allow Radio New Zealand to have such programmes to be broadcast from its platforms.Of course the modern-day era requires that there be a balance between providing social content and the ability of the organisation to earn commercial revenue from its operations. Amongst its various social obligations Radio New Zealand remains our go-to station in case of any civil defence emergencies. The legislation permits Radio New Zealand to be able to market its products and services such as broadcasting and media services.Bill read a second time.