Brownlee Gerry: Privilege — Television New Zealand—Former Chief Executive Consideration of Interim Report of Privileges Committee 
Brownlee Gerry: Privilege — Television New Zealand—Former Chief Executive Consideration of Interim Report of Privileges Committee 
[Volume:630;Page:2584] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 I think that the previous speaker should be given a commendation for creative use of a speaking opportunity. This debate is about the report of the Privileges Committee. I do not want to prolong the debate but I do want to make a couple of comments. Firstly I endorse the comments made by colleagues about Simon Power’s chairmanship of the Privileges Committee. 
The committee reached its interim determination very very quickly and we are able to move on the interim part of the report with this debate today. I stress that it is an interim report because there is more work for the committee to do and there will be more investigations for the committee to carry out. Others have said today that the work of the Privileges Committee essentially underpins the freedom we have in a democracy like ours to speak without constraint in certain circumstances. One of those circumstances is surely when one appears before a select committee of Parliament that is conducting an inquiry. Although we have heard today that various people have pleaded a defence that they did not know about the Standing Orders others stated that that is no defence in these circumstances. 
For anyone who might be sitting on a State board and worried about what this means it can be best summed up by suggesting that if a person appearing before a select committee does not mislead that select committee does treat that select committee with some respect and does not engage in any activity that may undermine or impede the activity of that select committee then that person will be fine. But if people engage in activities that do undermine and do mislead and if they generally fail to show the appropriate respect that is due to a committee of Parliament—the representatives of the people—then they will be in trouble. 
In that regard I think I would want to turn one or two comments to the legal counsel for Television New Zealand (TVNZ). He was mentioned by name by Mr Rodney Hide as being Mr Noel Vautier who has been in the job 16 years apparently without ever understanding what accountabilities the organisation he offers legal advice to has under law. It seems extraordinary to me that he is still in the job. 
I say very clearly that there will be further requests for information from TVNZ. This report is only an interim one and it would be extremely unwise for TVNZ to fail to fully cooperate with the further requests that will be made of it. It cannot be stressed enough and it has been stressed by all speakers so far that the penalty brought down in this case is somewhat less than it might have been had it not been for the long gap between fines imposed by this committee. Also I think there is a consideration here of the fact that TVNZ is re-establishing the board. There is to be a new chairman and there will be new board members so in that interim period it seemed that the penalties set down by the select committee are most appropriate. But no one in the State sector should underestimate the intention behind the message these penalties send. 
I say again to the in-house counsel for TVNZ: “Do not frustrate further attempts to gain access to information that the select committee is rightfully entitled to.”