Shirley Ken: Public Records Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Shirley Ken: Public Records Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:625;Page:19990] 
Hon KEN SHIRLEY (ACT) 
: 
 It is quite clear that the member who just resumed his seat was not on the Government Administration Committee as he conceded and it is regrettable that he did not study the bill a bit more because I actually support Georgina te Heuheu. Everyone obviously recognises the importance of maintaining public records. That is important. It is important that we apply new technology to those elements of the bill that as Georgina te Heuheu of the National Party said are accepted. But this is classic Labour Government legislation. There is a massive increase in compliance costs for everyone and that is what the submitters said. A number of key questions were raised at the select committee by universities and other groups. They were aghast at the increased compliance costs associated with this legislation. 
The Labour Government is determined always to bump up compliance costs in central bureaucracies that do not work. In the modern world we apply new technologies to get cost savings. Most applications of new technology bring substantial savings but somehow this Labour Government—supported by New Zealand First in Mr Dail Jones—can introduce new technology and actually increase compliance costs. The digital revolution makes it much easier to keep records and much easier to record and recall but somehow this Government supported by New Zealand First is managing to apply new technology and increase compliance costs. That just beggars belief. 
The other point I would like to take up in response to Dail Jones’ comments is that he drew to our attention the fact that there is no reference to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi in clause 3. I support that—that is good because no one ever knew what that meant. It was confusion. But I say to him that in this legislation we have something that is even more dangerous: “the spirit of partnership”. That is new in legislation is it not? No Government has ever accepted that the treaty is a partnership. David Lange would not accept that. 
Dail Jones 
: It’s the spirit. 
Hon KEN SHIRLEY 
: Oh indeed—“the spirit” is just like “the principles”. They are weasel words. Someone has captured the agenda here because the Treaty of Waitangi is not a partnership. It is a deal that the Crown made with the iwi of New Zealand. We are all covered by the Crown—one cannot be in partnership with oneself. I ask Dail Jones whether New Zealand First having campaigned so strongly against the principles now promotes the thought that the treaty is a partnership because we know there is a very big agenda for calling it a partnership. It has got right out of control but no Government has accepted that concept. The elected Government of New Zealand is the elected Government of New Zealand. The Crown is all of us; we are the Crown. The concept of partnership is fundamentally flawed. But it would seem that New Zealand First is actually heralding and praising that concept and this is the first time I have seen it in legislation. 
Is that not interesting? It is in the Public Records Bill and that is how it starts. It slides in under the radar screen under urgency in the Public Records Bill. There is reference there to the spirit of partnership. I suspect that the Government has not realised the ramifications of that. The chair of the Government Administration Committee suggests that it is deliberate. I seek confirmation of whether that is the case. 
Dianne Yates 
: I didn’t say that. 
Hon KEN SHIRLEY 
: No she is now denying it. Well that is helpful. So if it is not a deliberate attempt made by this Government to introduce the concept of partnership—[ 
Interruption 
] Oh there is the Minister in charge of Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations Trevor Mallard I think now. Does he not have some new responsibility and did the Government not take a lot of portfolios from him? Well I think that someone from the Government should stand up and tell the House whether this is the new thrust of the Government and whether it is now saying that it will promote the partnership concept because unfortunately that concept like the principles of the treaty is right out of control. Local authorities up and down the country believe that there is this partnership concept and we are seeing some of the problems associated with that. We need to wind that belief back. I would like someone from the Government to tell us whether that concept is what it is now promoting whether this will be the first time that we see it in legislation and whether it will be a progressive trend between now and the election. I certainly hope not. 
So the ACT party is opposing this bill. We recognise the good intent of it and the need for good records and the application of new technology but we just cannot understand how the Labour Government has managed with this legislation to massively increase compliance costs when applying new technology.