Prasad Rajen: Governor-General Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Prasad Rajen: Governor-General Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:668;Page:14797] 
Dr RAJEN PRASAD (Labour) 
: 
 I am pleased to take a call on Part 1 of the Governor-General Bill. I agree with a previous speaker Nikki Kaye that the present Governor-General is doing a great job. That is the feeling of people around the country. I am really pleased to share a nationality with the Governor-General and that is the nationality of being a New Zealander which is great. The provisions of Part 1 require an understanding of the role of Governor-General and they make sense when one understands what the role entails. The Governor-General has to be a person with extensive experience in diverse fields in New Zealand. Certainly all modern Governors-General have had that background and the role is that of no ordinary person. More often than not the person is a professional and has tremendous experience. It would be a person of great mana and understanding. It would be someone who commands great respect throughout New Zealand. 
When we understand the role from that perspective we understand the provisions of Part 1. Governors-General have to forgo their former careers when they are appointed to the position so there is no chance at all of returning to those careers. The present Governor-General had been a judge and an Ombudsman. There is no chance of his ever going back to those types of paid public positions. Undertaking any paid office generally of that type in New Zealand would not be possible. When we look at the provisions of Part 1 from that perspective they make a lot of sense. The other aspect is that Governors-General often cannot defend themselves against criticism. Speaking as a former Race Relations Conciliator I certainly would have immediately defended the Governor-General and criticised Paul Henry’s criticism of him. I would not have waited until later on. 
Perhaps the one aspect of clause 4 that I find particularly satisfying is the definition of “family member”. It really shows an appreciation of the modern family. It shows that Governors-General could take different family forms and there should be no discrimination on the basis of the type of family. Therefore the definition of “family member” modernises the term and brings it into currency. That is a good thing for families in New Zealand. It reflects the reality of family life and the various forms of families that exist in New Zealand. 
Clause 5 talks about a paid salary for the Governor-General. That is the first use of the term “salary” in respect of a Governor-General. It is a payment for a particular job. The salary will be determined by the Remuneration Authority—our highest authority. A group of independent people will think about this role size it and determine the salary that fits the role. That will modernise the role in terms of how we treat it by way of remuneration. It is good that the salary cannot be reduced during the term of a Governor-General and that protection is certainly required. Clause 6 separates the allowances from being part of the current remuneration package if you like of the Governor-General. The allowance part of it is not taxable; the allowance is simply what it costs the Governor-General to satisfy the role that is undertaken. Clause 8 talks about an annuity for former Governors-General.