Curran Clare: Television New Zealand Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Curran Clare: Television New Zealand Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:672;Page:18685] 
CLARE CURRAN (Labour—Dunedin South) 
: 
 There has been quite a lot of philosophical discussion. There has been a lot of heated discussion and I think we have seen in this debate some fundamentally different philosophical positions on the Television New Zealand Amendment Bill reflected in the Committee. Some fundamentally important positions go to the heart of what public broadcasting is in New Zealand: the content of public broadcasting the content of broadcasting and how people receive it. 
In Part 2 of this bill we see the discussion about the rescreening of television programmes produced prior to 1989. We are seeing a claim that it is in the public interest that the programmes be seen again. I refer again to the concept of public interest because it is a critical concept and it shows the differences between the major parties and the philosophical fundamental divide we have on these issues. 
Although Television New Zealand has now launched its Heartland channel which screens programmes from our past it is exclusively for Sky to screen heritage programming. We are seeing and we have heard today from the Minister in the chair the Minister of Broadcasting the future for broadcasting in this country. The important programmes that reflect our culture and past and what goes to the heart of what and who we are will end up in locked-up content that people have to pay to see. That is a critical fundamental issue and I think we need to have a debate about it. 
An estimated 2 million households in New Zealand do not get Sky. That is quite a lot of households when one thinks about it; it is about half. The ones who do pay for it— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: There are three clauses in Part 2: “Spent sections of principal Act repealed” “Amendment to Copyright Act 1994” and a clause regarding access to archives. That is what we are debating. 
CLARE CURRAN 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I am talking about the archived works and the ability to see them on television. I think it is quite clear that that is what I am talking about. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: I will hear the member. 
CLARE CURRAN 
: I refer again to public interest. When those heritage programmes were made we were all paying licence fees for public television. The public had already paid for the production of those programmes through their fees and taxes. Those programmes are owned by the public of New Zealand and they should be seen by the public of New Zealand not just some of the public of New Zealand through a pay television channel. That is one of the key issues we are addressing in the bill with regard to the viewing of archived works and how they are seen by the public. 
I note the comments of the member from the Greens Sue Kedgley. She talked about the future that we are looking at as a country in terms of how we will view content. She talked about the ultimate plan that this Government has for us to see content and about whether it is archive content which is covered under Part 2 of the bill or whether it will cover more than the archived works and will end up being most of our content. 
The other point I will make because it is important is that most of the content that New Zealanders will end up watching will come from overseas. Less content will be produced here because the television channels are driven by commercial imperatives—particularly Television New Zealand which is being required to return a particular dividend to the Government—and have to find programmes they can get a commercial return on. Therefore the quality programmes that reflect the distinctive Kiwi sense of humour—the Fred Daggs the Lynnes of Tawa the David McPhails—