Coddington Deborah: Television New Zealand Bill — In Committee 
Coddington Deborah: Television New Zealand Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:606;Page:3824] 
DEBORAH CODDINGTON (ACT NZ) 
: 
 I took care when going over Part 5 and I refer to new clause 41 “Savings of certain transactions” on Supplementary Order Paper 57 which has changed a little from the original clause. I cannot find any offence provisions anywhere else in the legislation. Perhaps the Minister might like to take a call and point them out if I have missed them. But new clause 41 seems to be the only clause that touches on any consequences of a breach of the legislation and in essence it states that it does not actually matter if there is a breach. So I ask the Government where the guts of its convictions are if it is to have a clause 10 in this legislation. New clause 41 states: “A failure by TVNZ to comply with section 10 section 12 or section 22”. Basically if TVNZ does not comply with those provisions it does not matter. So why have clause 10 which covers this absolutely abhorrent charter that deals with things like having to feature programming that supports the learning and personal development of New Zealanders? How can we have public broadcasting which is what this is trying to be—it is actually not public broadcasting but a sort of hybrid; it is a clone from a State-owned enterprise and is not real public broadcasting because it still has to depend on advertising and try to return a dividend to the Crown—that deals with the personal development of New Zealanders? How abhorrent that is! That could mean anything. It could mean the sexual development of New Zealanders. What business is it of the State to deal with the sexual development—the personal development—of New Zealanders?  
Members might laugh at that but this is a serious matter. I would have thought that the United Future party would be seriously concerned about provisions like that. What if TVNZ breaches the charter by not concerning itself with personal development? Well it does not matter anyway. So why does this Government have such a charter in the bill if it does not have some sort of consequence for breaching it? I come back to clause 41 because that exempts TVNZ from sticking to any of the conditions it has in the charter. New clause 41 on Supplementary Order Paper 57 cites sections 10 12 and 22. I am dealing with the consequences which are nil of a breach of part of that clause. I refer to the provision in the charter about programming that is intended for a mass audience and material that deals with minority interests. What will be the consequences if TVNZ breaches that part of the clause? The consequences will be zilch so why put that in there?  
I see that the Minister in the chair is restless. Could he please explain why clause 41 “Savings of certain transactions” has been tacked on at the end of the bill in Part 5 “Miscellaneous”—the clause that deals with the consequences of a breach of the legislation. Why have a clause that is ineffective and that basically states that if it is breached that will not affect the validity or enforceability of any deed etc.? Why have that if it will not mean anything? Why insist on programming for a mass audience? Presumably the news should be intended for a mass audience. If a news item does not include in it material that deals with a minority interest what will happen? 
Hon Member 
: The effect on whales. 
DEBORAH CODDINGTON 
: Exactly the effect on whales—the whale-saving brigade. The term “qualitative and quantitative” is used in clause 26 meaning how much and how effective. How many times does material to cater for a minority interest have to be there? If it is not there once a week is that a breach of the charter? If it is not there every day is that a breach? I call on the Minister to take a call and explain why we have clause 41 at all.