Locke Keith: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Locke Keith: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:645;Page:14309] 
11.  
KEITH LOCKE (Green) 
 to the  
Minister for Sport and Recreation 
: Has he received any reports as to whether the free speech rights of New Zealand athletes participating at the Olympic Games in Beijing are being violated by the New Zealand Olympic Committee’s demand that our athletes must agree in writing beforehand not to make statements or demonstrations regarding political religious or racial matters; if not why not? 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Minister for Sport and Recreation) 
: 
 I have received varying reports on this issue. I have expressed my reservations to the New Zealand Olympic Committee and can advise the House that the New Zealand Olympic Committee board today advised that it has agreed to recommend to the Athletes Commission that clause 7.1(c) in the athletes’ agreement be amended so that it is consistent with the Olympic Charter. 
Keith Locke 
: I appreciate the Minister’s intervention; will he be pushing for not only clause 7.1(c) but also clause 7.1(d) which prevents any of the athletes writing blogs while they are in Beijing to be eliminated as we have a situation where Australia and Canada do not prevent their athletes from writing blogs? 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: I am not aware of the particular clause that the member is referring to. I believe that the debate was around clause 7.1(c). I am advised that that clause was signed off over 8 years ago and is reviewed before and after each Olympics with the Athletes Commission but as I say I am advised today that the board will recommend to the commission that the clause be consistent—like other nations—with the Olympic Charter. 
Keith Locke 
: Does the Minister agree—and I think he might—that one of the benefits of giving the Olympics to China was to be able to put the spotlight on the human rights situation there and hopefully to improve it and that it would help if the athletes going there including New Zealand athletes are able to criticise any human rights abuses they see? 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: I am aware that Beijing’s winning of the hosting rights for the next Olympic Games provides a superb showcase for the Olympic movement and for world sport. As to the other issues that the member raises I have no responsibility for foreign policy. 
Hon Peter Dunne 
: In light of the last answer can the Minister advise the House why it is that successive New Zealand Governments and sporting bodies have been very keen to speak out when they have seen situations in other countries that they do not approve of but have been remarkably loathe over the years to speak out about similar situations in China; why is there such a double standard? 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: I think it would be appropriate for the member to address that question to the sporting bodies he seeks an answer from. 
Keith Locke 
: Would it not help the situation for sporting bodies if the Government were to set an example of encouraging free speech and not create a climate around the coming free trade agreement where it is all softly softly on criticism of the gross human rights abuses that occur in China today—and we have examples of the Nick Wang case and other cases? 
Madam SPEAKER 
: The last two questions have been quite broad and stretched the limits of ministerial responsibility and I think that one goes right outside it. Does the Minister wish to— 
Keith Locke 
: Well the Minister may wish to say something. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: But it is not his responsibility to say it. The member could ask him outside the Chamber however.