Hobbs Marian: Public Records Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Hobbs Marian: Public Records Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:625;Page:19999] 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS (Minister responsible for Archives New Zealand) 
: 
 I just want to take up a few issues that have been raised by the National Party in the last wee while. National’s concern is that State-owned enterprises are being treated differently from private enterprises. That is absolutely correct—they are State-owned. This is a matter of the public record of the State. I think it is a tremendous shame to New Zealand’s history that when the Bank of New Zealand became privatised those records were lost. When the railways were sold those records were lost. That was our history of New Zealand. That was a history of many people’s lives and it was lost. There is no intention that the history of the State-owned enterprises—of hydroelectricity and its development in New Zealand—is to be lost if we are to have any pride in the fact of how we manage power in this country and I could go on. 
Mr Lindsay Tisch raised a point and he used a lovely phrase. He said: “Businesses like to get rid of material that is no longer relevant.” Now the difference between a private business and a State business is that the State determines that the State’s story is relevant and it is relevant for generations to come because the State business is not just about making profit. Yes it is about being profitable and efficient but it is also a State business and it is important that its story remains to be told. Who will determine what gets kept? Obviously that is the job of the Chief Archivist. 
We have been doing an extraordinary amount of work in actually bringing up this whole philosophy again and putting it into the minds of State services through the practice of having a continuing education programme called Continuum. That programme has been really positively accepted by State servants and all power to the archivists who have been treated as a little branch tucked off at the side but whose job is so important that they are now accepted and understood. Their work has been taken on by public servants and as we will see it will be taken on by State-owned enterprises. 
 Mr Tisch also raised the point that there are no checks or balances on the Chief Archivist. I remind Mr Tisch that in a Westminster democracy—be it the United Kingdom Australia New Zealand or even I think Canada—a chief archivist is a statutory officer. The archivist must stay within the objectives of the legislation. As such in the archivist’s report to the Parliament if the parliamentary committee thinks the archivist is not staying within the objectives of the Acts then that is where the power of Parliament lies. It does not lie with the State Services Commissioner and certainly not with the Minister. If the Minister starts to interfere with which records should be kept and which records should be destroyed we will not have a safe public record. 
I really wanted to make those points clear. I do not see how there will be any additional costs where a business is keeping good records. I would also remind the National Party that I cannot see the huge problems of competition being troubled by a decision made 25 years ago that has now become public in the august debates of today. What happened in 1980 truly does not affect the market in electricity in 2005.