Power Simon: Privilege — Television New Zealand—Former Chief Executive Consideration of Interim Report of Privileges Committee 
Power Simon: Privilege — Television New Zealand—Former Chief Executive Consideration of Interim Report of Privileges Committee 
[Volume:630;Page:2574] 
SIMON POWER (Chairperson of the Privileges Committee) 
: 
 I move  
That this House— 
(1)resolves that the actions taken by Television New Zealand against Mr Ian Fraser following Mr Fraser’s appearance before the Finance and Expenditure Committee on 14 December 2005 constitute a contempt of the House 
(2)orders Television New Zealand to make a formal written apology to the House for those actions and 
(3)orders Television New Zealand to pay a fine of $1000. 
On the delivery of this the second but first full report from the Privileges Committee in this Parliament I take the opportunity to thank all members of that committee for their participation in this matter. The committee was required to meet at odd hours and I am grateful to its members for their approach and for the seriousness with which they dealt with this particular matter. The Privileges Committee has historically been a judicious and apolitical committee and I can report to the House today that this position continues. 
In respect of the report I would like to begin with some general comments then move to the specifics of the Television New Zealand (TVNZ) issue itself. This report is significant for three reasons. The first is that it sends an unequivocal message to State-owned enterprises and public organisations that Parliament will treat with the utmost seriousness any behaviour that impedes the proper process of accountability to the elected representatives of the people. That is a general warning. Secondly this is the first time in 103 years that the Privileges Committee of the New Zealand House of Representatives is recommending that a fine be imposed. This reaffirms Parliament’s rights in this regard and although token in quantum we note that future breaches of privilege may incur a higher fine. A line in the sand has now been drawn. State-owned enterprises and Crown agencies stand warned that Parliament will assert its rights and future shortcomings by those organisations will come at a cost. The Privileges Committee has run out of wet bus tickets. 
Thirdly a further report of the committee will be forthcoming on the general question of protection of witnesses before select committees and the Privileges Committee has made clear that a question remains as to whether it is realistic for the House or witnesses to assume that no consequences to relationships at all will arise from their giving evidence to a select committee. As the report states the extent of protection afforded by the House requires further inquiry by the committee. 
I turn now to the specific issues relating to TVNZ. Standing Order 400(w) provides as an example of contempt any “disadvantaging” of a witness before a committee of the House. On 7 December 2005 Mr Ian Fraser appeared before the Finance and Expenditure Committee for the financial review of Television New Zealand as outgoing chief executive. On 14 December 2005 Mr Fraser appeared again as part of a Finance and Expenditure Committee inquiry. It was at that particular meeting that Mr Fraser made some comments that were critical of the board and its members. On 22 December Mr Boyce Chairman of TVNZ wrote to Mr Fraser saying that his comments amounted to serious misconduct and that it would be inappropriate for him to continue to represent TVNZ for the balance of the notice period he was serving out since his resignation. The chairperson of TVNZ after Mr Fraser wrote to the Finance and Expenditure Committee complaining about the board’s actions withdrew the board’s comments about misconduct and apologised to the Finance and Expenditure Committee if it had “inadvertently” offended the committee as a result of its action. 
It was at that point that you Madam Speaker referred the matter to the Privileges Committee for its consideration and the Privileges Committee has found that the letter of 22 December does amount to a contempt as it disadvantaged Mr Fraser on account of his evidence given to the Finance and Expenditure Committee during that inquiry. The report does note that poor legal advice is not an excuse for the breach of the Standing Orders. 
I turn briefly to the wider issues relating to the protection of witnesses. This is a matter that I suspect will occupy some time for the committee in the near future. The committee intends to continue to examine this wider action and the extent to which any action may be taken against somebody providing evidence at a select committee when action taken against that person as a result of that appearance creates a difficulty. The matter is not clear cut. There is a question of balance and it may well be necessary for the House to develop some principles some guidance and possibly even some clarification around the Standing Orders on this matter. 
We do consider this to be an issue of significance to anyone who appears before a select committee. With this in mind in our final report on this issue that you Madam Speaker have referred to the committee we will consider whether or how far this protection should extend in particular to those witnesses who attempt to use privilege to their own advantage or to make allegations they cannot or will not substantiate. 
The report in concluding makes very clear that the Privileges Committee of this Parliament is not prepared merely to repeat its past warnings to State-owned enterprises and Crown agencies regarding their obligations to this Parliament and to its committees. The words contained in the report best sum up the committee’s feelings where it states: “We intend to leave those who serve on the boards or in management of such organisations in no doubt that Parliament will treat with the utmost seriousness any behaviour that impedes the proper process of accountability to the elected representatives of the people.” 
While we note that Mr Boyce as the Chairman of TVNZ did tender an apology the committee did not believe that this was sufficient to put an end to the matter. The Privileges Committee recommends that the contempt of TVNZ be punished by requiring from the board of TVNZ a formal written apology to this House and further be punished by imposing on the board of TVNZ a fine of $1000.