Rurawhe Adrian; Jones ShanePart 2 New Zealand Infrastructure Commission/Te WaihangaCHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): Members we now come to the debate on Part 2: clauses 6 to 26 and Schedule 2. Hon SHANE JONES (Minister for Infrastructure): The term Waihanga" almost disappeared into another piece of legislation. I direct your attention to Part 2 identifying that in the establishment of this body it is indeed a Crown entity. As civic culture political culture and I'd like to think our popular culture has evolved we are embracing both languages although I would say to my Labour colleagues: we have fought the good fight for our reo over the years but to the best of my knowledge English is not an official language. I might have to do something about that very soon. On the question of the members of the commission you will see fellow parliamentarians that it will not be peopled by more than seven members. There is a vacancy. We deliberately left that vacancy for Dr Alan Bollard in the event he felt there was a conspicuous absence of a rare skill or there was a need to involve someone of a trans-Tasman character. The commission members reflect a range of skills and I have to acknowledge the Treasury officials sitting behind me; they provided a host of names. One or three of the names attracted a fair bit of attention out in the broader community that pays attention to these things but I stand by all of the people nominated on to this body. I only hope that my colleagues on the Opposition benches see sense in the very dim and distant point where they might enjoy the privileges that are currently bestowed on this side of the House to continue what I've endeavoured to do—look for people that enjoy a broad level of support on both sides of Parliament's House. Now this part is broken into three subparts. I'll just talk a little bit about the main function of the commission. What are the words that are used here?—develop promote coordinate encourage and wellbeing. Now wellbeing is a key feature that identifies the backdrop against which we are delivering our political mission by dint of holding the benches of Treasury. I think there is a case that where approaches need to be changed this entity would provide advice. It may actually be advice that the bureaucracy are not keen on receiving but a Minister should be able to turn to this organisation and request such a level of advice from them. That may pertain to how you get a better blend between private and public capital. It may also turn on providing an authoritative base of information that enables the politicians of the day to go out and defend certain projects or defend a decision that God forbid they were incapable of making themselves. In terms of additional functions the most important thing here I do feel—well of particular importance—is the right blend between efficiency and effectiveness. I think it's fairly evident to members of the House that I am totally unimpressed with how long it takes things to get done in New Zealand. Now it could be said that's a feature of what the nation voted for in 1996 when MMP came in. Earlier in 1986 there had obviously been a royal commission. So maybe that's the culture that has emerged since those days. But I am incredibly interested in seeing not only this bill contribute and the eventual powers that it'll have that will be enjoyed by the commission; we need to get things done a lot more quicker and a lot more effectively in New Zealand in the space of infrastructure.There are a host of other things that I will continue to elaborate upon but I'm conscious that there'd be one or three other members and I'll hear what they've got to say and probably correct their misapprehensions. Thank you very much."