Hide Rodney: Charities Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Hide Rodney: Charities Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:625;Page:19962] 
RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 Judith Collins has drawn our attention to clause 26 “Grounds for removal from register”. Clause 26(1)(e) states: “any person has engaged in serious wrongdoing in connection with the entity;”. Judith Collins drew our attention to that then she said that wrongdoing is defined in clause 4 in this way. It is: “(d) an act omission or course of conduct by a person that is oppressive improperly discriminatory or grossly negligent or that constitutes gross mismanagement”; or (c): “an act omission or course of conduct that constitutes an offence;”. 
I would love the Minister to speak on this bill and explain what is an act or omission that is oppressive improperly discriminatory or grossly negligent or that constitutes gross mismanagement. I think we need an explanation in this Committee of what that entails and I will give examples. The Waipareira Trust would just fold because we know that the chief financial officer has admitted to the Serious Fraud Office that he forged six invoices to rob the trust of $80000. On that basis he has committed a course of conduct that constitutes an offence so the whole Waipareira Trust would be deregistered. Is that what the Government wants? I look to the Minister in the chair the Hon Judith Tizard to explain that if we have someone like Mike Tolich who has admitted forging six fake invoices to get $80000 out of the trust while John Tamihere was the chief executive officer— 
Dail Jones 
: He did that more than 7 years ago so he is eligible to be on a trust now. 
RODNEY HIDE 
: No he did not do it 7 years ago. It was in 1989. 
Dail Jones 
: So he can still be on a trust now. 
RODNEY HIDE 
: OK but that example— 
Dail Jones 
: He can still be on a trust now. 
RODNEY HIDE 
: But what happens to the trust itself— 
Dail Jones 
: It’s irrelevant. This bill allows him to be on the trust. 
RODNEY HIDE 
: —if it happened 5 years ago? I do not know why Mr Jones is voting for the bill he has so many complaints about it but there we go. Then I go to this provision that states “oppressive improperly discriminatory or grossly negligent” and I ask about Mr Steven Ching. Is it grossly negligent for example that he did not reveal to the Labour Party or to the JP society that he had obstructed justice? Is that an example of gross negligence or gross mismanagement? I do not know. We need to know what it is that gets a charity deregistered. [ 
Interruption 
] Peter Hodgson is laughing; he must know the answer. He is voting for this. What does it mean to have a person in a charity who is grossly negligent whose behaviour constitutes gross mismanagement or who is improperly discriminatory? What does that mean? [ 
Interruption 
] Peter Hodgson says that if I sit down he will take the call. He will get an opportunity when I do sit down. I would love him to take the call because he is a Minister. We have a Minister in the chair who has resolutely refused to speak to this bill or to explain a thing. So I am pleased that Peter Hodgson has told the Committee that when I sit down he will take the call. 
Hon Pete Hodgson 
: If you sit down I will take a call. 
RODNEY HIDE 
: Well I am allowed my 5 minutes; there are no conditions on that. We know that over there on the Labour benches it is rosy on the outside but on the inside it is all miserable fisticuffs and the rest of it. 
Hon Judith Tizard 
: You wish! 
RODNEY HIDE 
: Judith Tizard says: “I wish”. I can tell her that I would not want to go 10 rounds with her—no way. I would even agree to this bill if that were the prospect—fisticuffs with Ms Tizard! 
But I say to members that I just want an explanation from the Minister in the chair as to what is meant under clause 4(1) in relation to “serious wrongdoing” of “(d) an act omission or course of conduct by a person that is oppressive improperly discriminatory or grossly negligent or that constitutes gross mismanagement”—because what we have seen in the Labour Party is that almost anything goes. With Steven Ching and John Tamihere the Prime Minister is infinitely forgiving but when it comes to a charity the whole charity gets deregistered. I ask Mr Copeland whether that is right. 
Gordon Copeland 
: Not necessarily. 
RODNEY HIDE 
: Oh not necessarily! Well why not? 
Gordon Copeland 
: It is not necessarily. It doesn’t necessarily follow. 
RODNEY HIDE 
: What does he mean when he says that it does not necessarily follow because— 
Gordon Copeland 
: It could be. 
RODNEY HIDE 
: It could be. Well this is great! We are passing law here tonight—and I wish I could vote against it twice now— 
Gordon Copeland 
: Read the clause. 
RODNEY HIDE 
: Well I am reading the clause and Mr Copeland is saying that it might apply it might not apply they might be deregistered or they might not be deregistered and the Minister will not stand and take a call to explain what it all means.