Rich Katherine: Television New Zealand Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Rich Katherine: Television New Zealand Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:606;Page:3723] 
KATHERINE RICH (NZ National) 
: 
 The first point I would like to make is that this bill is misnamed. Bills should always be named relevantly. What we have here is something quite different. I suspect that this bill is not about television at all. It is about control and control of the media. What we have seen over the last 3 years— 
Darren Hughes 
: Ha ha! 
KATHERINE RICH 
: Mr Hughes may giggle—he may be the only member on that side of the House who actually watches television I suspect— 
Gerry Brownlee 
: Not after 10 o’clock. 
KATHERINE RICH 
: That is his bedtime I say to Mr Brownlee. We have seen a slow movement towards greater control of television. The reason for that is the revenge that the Prime Minister is seeking on Television New Zealand for her treatment throughout the election campaigns preceding her election as Prime Minister. This legislation is not about television but about social engineering. It is about deciding what is good for other New Zealanders to watch on television and deciding for them what they should select on their remote controls. It is also about deciding a better use for a limited State resource.  
There are a number of reasons that the name of this bill is insufficient. My first suggestion is that we do not call the bill the Television New Zealand Bill at all. Let us call it the “Let’s All Watch What Helen Wants Us to Watch Bill” or the “Labour Party Propaganda Bill”. Or we could call it the “How to Wreck Television New Zealand in Five Easy Steps Bill” because that is what is being done here. They have taken what was a very robust successful business and throttled it so that it is no longer the financial success that it was. There was certainly every expectation that Television New Zealand would be able to retain some of its dividend which is one of Labour’s election promises that it has not delivered on. Nobody thought for one minute that the way that TVNZ would be able to keep its dividend would be through losses rather than through having a part of the dividend retained.  
I also think we should call it the “Let’s Come up with the Most Bizarre Structure Possible That’s Never Been Tried Anywhere Else in the World and Impose it on What is Already a Fragile Business Bill”. Submitter after submitter came before the select committee and suggested that the structure was not a good one for TVNZ. I am pleased to see that the Minister has agreed with the Opposition and has decided to make some changes to the bill on a Supplementary Order Paper. We should call this bill the “Let’s Impose a Whole Raft of Vague and Unachievable Objectives and Then Expect the Business to Compete Bill” because that is more appropriate to this legislation. If we were to use that title it would be a better description of what this bill is about.  
The statements about television through the bill are very vague. Although Marian Hobbs the previous Minister suggests that the charter is a very detailed focused document members will see that the statements are very vague and nebulous.  
My last suggestion is that we should call this bill “Marian Hobbs’ Folly Bill” mainly because it has taken nearly 4 years to get it introduced to the House. I was not surprised at all that she decided to hand over the reins to the new Minister. This was probably the least successful of the tasks that she has not completed since she has been in Parliament. Quite clearly this bill is not about television at all. It is about imposing control on what was once a successful State-owned enterprise and imposing a new regime that can only damage the entity.