Roy Eric: New Zealand Geographic Board (Nga Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa) Bill — Third Reading 
Roy Eric: New Zealand Geographic Board (Nga Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa) Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:647;Page:15895] 
ERIC ROY (National—Invercargill) 
: 
 I confess to the House that I had not even looked at this bill before tonight but I have listened with a great deal of interest to this debate and I am happy to support my colleagues in the National Party and to say that I too do not believe that we should support this bill. I can find no justification for it. There is an old adage that says “If it ain’t broke don’t fix it.” It has not been clearly laid out for me what is broken—what actually needs to be fixed. We in the National Party have looked at a number of layers of things that this Government has done across a whole range of areas and we see that they have all ended up with one result: more bureaucracy more office space in Wellington and more central control. 
I am going to talk a little bit later about nomenclature about a place name that is important to me and why and about why I think this bill will not help the cause. I am already involved in a process of determining the appropriate correct geographical name of a significant part of New Zealand. 
But first in looking at this bill I am quite intrigued by a lot of it. As I said it establishes a bureaucracy. It continues the Geographic Board which is to determine appropriate names. We have heard quite a bit in this debate tonight about the appropriateness adequacy or correctness of pronunciation. That is an entirely different issue. It is about education. It is about a desire to actually get it right and we should all want to get it right. It is a separate issue and creating a board in Wellington will not change the attitude of the nation in terms of their desire to give the correct pronunciation. That is the first point I would make. 
When I look at what the functions of the board are I see that under clause 10 one function is to “assign an official geographic name”. So the official geographic names we have got are wrong? Well in some cases they are. Then the question is how the board would know what the correct name was. When we look at the board’s other functions which are detailed in clause 11 we see that it has been given incredible powers. Under clause 11(1)(a) it may “adopt policies rules standards protocols guidelines or similar instruments for carrying out its own functions”. Well what a huge responsibility that is. 
But supposing that at the end of the day the board actually does not get it right; what is the critique process or the review process? What happens if the Geographic Board goes bad? What would we do then? Well hello! We are not told. What if it cannot actually work out what a name should be after going through the whole process prescribed in this bill and using all its powers? Well members should have a look at clause 20; that should make them feel better! If the board cannot determine what a name should be this is what happens: “(1) If the Board does not make a determination under section 19(1) it must report in writing to the Minister” and “(2) The Minister after making any inquiry he or she thinks fit may determine the proposal …”. So we set up a board but at the end of the day if it cannot get it right the Minister makes a determination and there is no other review process. I think that is not the right way to determine something as important as a geographic name. 
Let me explain my interest in this. I live in a small rural district in the lee of the Hokonuis. It has different names depending on which map one looks at. On most road maps of New Zealand—on those in which it appears because it is quite a small district—it is Te Tipua. 
Hon Tau Henare 
: What is it? 
ERIC ROY 
: Te Tipua. But the locals across most of Southland call it “Titty-poo”. 
Sandra Goudie 
: What is that—call it what? 
ERIC ROY 
: “Titty-poo”. That is what it is known as. That is clearly the incorrect pronunciation—or is it? 
Sandra Goudie 
: No— 
ERIC ROY 
: Just hold on; I will explain. The interesting thing is that a nephew said to me one day: “Uncle Eric it must be really bad living in a place whose name has two swear words in it.” Just by chance— 
Hon Member 
: Which one’s the swear word? 
ERIC ROY 
: —the middle one—this year is the sesquicentennial of this august district. In the course of the celebrations of the centenary of the school and the sesquicentennial of the district I have been trying to determine the original name. All the original maps have it as “Titipua”—one word. But interestingly when the education board got involved in 1907—it created a school—it decided without consulting anybody that the correct spelling was ”Te Tipua”. 
Some of my colleagues may wish to correct my interpretation of te reo but “te tipua” means the devil the goblin the ogre or the spirit. That is my understanding. Maybe the board named it after the schoolteacher—I do not know. Also the river has not changed its name; it is still Titipua but the district is called Te Tipua which the locals pronounce “Titty-poo”. As part of the sesquicentennial celebrations I determined that we would sort out all this stuff and find the correct name. There is only one place after all. 
The interesting thing is that the district was originally native reed tussock country. I wonder whether the name “Titipua” comes from “titi” the sooty shearwater—although the district is a long way from the coast. I asked my learned colleague Tau Henare about it; I have asked everybody. I do not have any confidence that the Geographic Board could determine it. I have asked every single te reo - speaking person of authority including Tau Henare what it means. Tau’s missus gave me— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The member knows that he should use a member’s full name. 
ERIC ROY 
: Tau Henare’s wife his lady gave me the best interpretation I have heard. Maybe she should be on the Geographic Board. She said that “pua” is the seed of reed grass. I can see that that would be a good explanation of the name of the district given that it was reed tussock country. It is far far better than a name meaning “the ogre” because that could refer to me or to anybody else living there. 
But my point is this. There is a whole range of names like that out there and I do not have any confidence that the Geographic Board would come any closer to determining and sorting out what those names should be. I have spent about 10 years on this project and I cannot find anybody in New Zealand of authority who can determine what the correct name is so the decision will fall back to the Minister. Tau Henare made the point originally that the locals should decide and should have some say. That certainly makes a whole lot more sense to me than our creating a whole bureaucracy that may not be able to resolve the matter. Quite clearly names capture identity. They are significant and important things. There is a great deal of feeling around them. The local ethos is captured in them. 
Let me conclude by saying that this bill might be a principled bill but it will not resolve the issue of pronunciation. I suggest that it will not resolve the complex issue of what precisely and exactly is the correct name. For that reason National members say that it is unnecessary that it will be ineffectual and that it is most unlikely to add anything to the geographic distinction of any place in New Zealand.