Nash Stuart: Rugby World Cup 2011 (Empowering) Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Nash Stuart: Rugby World Cup 2011 (Empowering) Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:668;Page:14886] 
STUART NASH (Labour) 
: 
 I was in my office listening to the television when I heard one of the National members stand up and say that Labour is anti-rugby. At that point I thought I had to come down to the House and defend the honour of my Labour colleagues. The reason I have a dodgy shoulder and a stuffed hamstring at the moment is that at my age I am still pulling on a rugby jersey and representing this House on rugby fields around the country. I love rugby. Every Saturday I take my son to play rugby but I am not unusual. This weekend will be based around rugby. It reminds me of a league player who was asked whether he liked the game of league and would die for it. He said that he did not know whether he would die for it—go into a deep coma maybe but not death. 
I have looked at the part of the Rugby World Cup 2011 (Empowering) Bill that provides for the make-up of the Rugby World Cup Authority. I love rugby but I also value democracy. Democracy is a fundamental principle that underpins everything we do in this House and that is what the authority represents. When I look at the make-up of the authority I understand why Labour is supporting Part 2. The chair of the authority must be a retired judge or a lawyer of at least 7 years’ standing. The deputy chair must be a lawyer of at least 7 years’ standing. This is not an authority that has been just thrown together made up of people who are passionate about rugby; this is an authority of people who have vast knowledge and competency in organising events in law in local town planning and everything. Clause 12(1) states “When any application is received by the Authority under this Act the chairperson must appoint—(a) a panel…”. Clause 12(2) states the panel “must comprise at least 3 members including as presiding officer a lawyer of at least 7 years’ standing (who may be the chairperson of the Authority).” Clause 12(3) states “the chairperson must have regard to the need for the panel to have available to it sufficient members with the knowledge skill and experience relevant to the particular application before it.” The process is very robust and the authority will not say it does not like rugby it does not like New Zealand and it will hold up the Rugby World Cup event for whatever reason. 
The reason the authority is being put in place is to ensure that due diligence is undertaken that due process is followed that the event is not a shambles and that we do not ride roughshod over the taxpayers and the citizens of New Zealand. That would be undemocratic. To have a clause in this bill that states the Minister can make decisions without input from any other person is so undemocratic as to be abhorrent. I love rugby but I also love democracy. 
I come back to the point made by my colleague Mr Hipkins. Napier will be a proud host. I am thinking the final might even be played in Napier! The bill says the Minister will appoint members of the authority in consultation etc. but it must have people who understand the local requirements of the region to which the application before it refers. The process is very robust. As it is it bypasses the standard legal procedure of this House but it is a very robust process. I cannot understand for the life of me why the Government would want to bypass the authority. It is set up it is supported by Labour and it is an authority whose members are supported I think by the Minister for the Rugby World Cup in consultation with three of his colleagues. The process is so robust as to be almost watertight. 
I also see that clause 9(2) states that “the Authority must to the extent relevant have regard to—(a) the desirability of making proper preparation for the Rugby World Cup;”. That is what we are all about. The authority needs “to ensure the efficient safe and lawful conduct of the Rugby World Cup;”. Efficient safe and lawful conduct? Goodness me! We are all for that. Every single member of Parliament supports that. Clause 9(2) also refers to “the desirability of supporting the appropriate delivery of services by or through Rugby New Zealand 2011 Limited;”. Every single member in this House supports the authority. It is what is needed to ensure that the Rugby World Cup event held in New Zealand is a very very successful venture. It will be successful—of that I have absolutely no doubt. 
Jacqui Dean 
: Labour doesn’t support it! 
STUART NASH 
: To hear that member say Labour does not support the Rugby World Cup 2011 is a dreadful statement.