Curran Clare: Commerce Commission (International Co-operation and Fees) Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Curran Clare: Commerce Commission (International Co-operation and Fees) Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 03 May 2012. Volume:679;Page:1978. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
CLARE CURRAN (Labour—Dunedin South) 
: 
 I rise to speak in the second reading of this bill the Commerce Commission (International Co-operation and Fees) Bill. I would like to make some comments on the importance of this bill and on what the Commerce Committee sought to achieve where there were a number of considerations following the submitters that appeared before us and then I would like to make some comments taking up from the previous speaker Jonathan Young on the importance of harmonisation. I would like to make the point up front that the way I see it this Government actually pursues harmonisation with our closest geographical neighbour across the Ditch when it suits it on very light-handed legislation and not on other issues that are probably of equal importance to New Zealand’s economic situation and its future particularly in fostering innovation within its own environment and competition.  
But first of all I would like just to acknowledge as I think previous speakers have that this bill was introduced initially by the Hon Lianne Dalziel. It is important to acknowledge that. It was adopted by Simon Power and now by the new Minister of Commerce Craig Foss. The select committee that heard it I think nearly 2 years ago was actually chaired by Lianne Dalziel—and very well chaired. It is good that we now have a new chair in place who seems to be doing a very good job. The Commerce Committee is a sensible committee. It treats every piece of legislation that comes before it very seriously and takes into account the views of the submitters.  
Although this bill aligns us with Australia there were some quite serious issues raised during the discussion on it which I want to just briefly touch on. There were some important submitters that came before it—namely the Meat Industry Association Meridian Energy Vodafone and Telecom. They pointed out some as they saw them significant issues in terms of the risks of having information being provided one way but not necessarily coming across the other way and the risks for those organisations of feeling vulnerable in that situation and possibly being opened up to adverse circumstances.  
The committee took that very seriously and although you will see that there is a Supplementary Order Paper being put before the House on addressing the anomaly on the importance of including the Telecommunications Act under the ambit of this bill the select committee also recommended that there should be a consultative procedure where the Commerce Commission had concerns that any request for assistance might have significant international trade implications that might adversely affect organisations within New Zealand. In those cases the commission may consult the Minister of Trade after consultation with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade and then rely on a statement by the Minister of Trade as to whether providing that information or assistance would significantly prejudice New Zealand’s international trade interests.  
I think that was probably the most significant thing that came out of discussions in the select committee because although we were committed to the harmonisation principle we certainly did not want to see companies that trade and are active in New Zealand feeling disadvantaged by such a piece of legislation. The commission has to be satisfied that any information provided to comparable regulators overseas would not significantly prejudice New Zealand’s international trade interests. So that was seen as being pretty important and I think it is important to acknowledge the good work that the committee did on this.  
I would like to turn though to consideration of the harmonisation principle because I have heard a previous speaker across the House talking about the importance of cooperating across the Tasman. I would certainly concur with that particularly where we can have an advantageous arrangement and relationship with our Australian cousins. But the most important thing to acknowledge is that there is an awful lot of legislation and there is an awful lot in our current regulatory environment where there is clearly not harmonisation and instead we are seriously out of step.  
I would contend we have got our heads buried in the sand on a number of issues. I actually want to mention some of them because with regard to this particular bill which is based on a principle of harmonisation that is pretty important particularly around taking us into the 21st century and ensuring that we have got a competitive environment that truly fosters innovation with new technologies. There are some serious examples.  
First of all let us look at this Government’s refusal to countenance a converged regulatory environment for the telecommunications and broadcasting environments. We have currently got two Ministers across the House. We have got regulation for the telecommunications sector but no regulation in the broadcasting sector and instead we have got an absolute refusal to acknowledge the clamour for change that is coming right from across industry from concern from the public and from a number of other places.  
When you look particularly at how this is affecting new technology platforms where their success depends on companies for instance in the broadcasting sphere having access to premium content with the take-up of ultra-fast broadband currently most of the rights to this content in New Zealand are held by a very small number of market participants. Instead what we see from the current Minister for Communications and Information Technology and from the Minister of Broadcasting who happens to also be the Minister of Commerce with the carriage of this particular bill that is concerned with the principle of harmonisation is an absolute refusal to acknowledge that there needs to be any change whereas across the Ditch in Australia we see a converged regulator we see regulation for content and we see a serious acknowledgment of the importance to embrace change.  
In fact right at this very moment in the last couple of days there has been a new review come out that was driven by the Minister over there the converged Minister on convergence which is a huge step forward. Of course it is not going to be perfect. There is going to be a lot of public debate and discussion around it but at least they are having that public debate and discussion whereas here this Government is actually trying to quash it and pretend it does not exist. The Convergence Review’s final report was released on Monday and its task was to develop a framework where all media communications could be regulated equally regardless of whether it was distributed by radio television or the internet.  
If we wanted to take harmonisation seriously that is where we would be looking. We would be looking at ensuring that a similar review was undertaken here that we were addressing these issues that we were taking them seriously and that we were not burying our heads in the sand. You have got to ask yourself why we are burying our heads in the sand because essentially we will not go near these issues and the reason I put it to you is that it is because there are too many vested interests involved. There are too many vested interests involved with too much power by too few organisations that can disproportionately influence Government policy.  
With regard to the harmonisation and principle within this bill that is being debated today upon which there is agreement across the House it would be good to see some agreement across the House on some other issues. The lobbying bill—I would just like to mention the Lobbying Disclosure Bill which is being put forward by the Greens. That is certainly supported by Labour and a number of parties across the House that see that it is actually going to drive some important change and put the spotlight on the organisations that have disproportionate access to Ministers who are making decisions important decisions around policy and legislation and it may actually start to reduce the cronyism and deal-doing that has dogged this Government’s behaviour in the last 3½ years. I put it to you that although politics is certainly about influence and influence is important it should also be about conscience and ethics and it is a sad fact that under this Government we are seeing very little of that.  
So just returning to this bill that is before us today Labour certainly supports it. We support the values behind harmonisation and we would like to see harmonisation occurring on other issues such as the convergence of broadcasting and telecommunications.