Jones Dail: New Zealand Symphony Orchestra Bill — First Reading 
Jones Dail: New Zealand Symphony Orchestra Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:607;Page:4634] 
DAIL JONES (NZ First) 
: 
 This bill was introduced by the Government some 4 or 5 weeks ago—I have lost track of the time—and I have been waiting patiently for the opportunity to continue my speech. 
When the bill was introduced the Minister Steve Maharey conducted the introduction. In his speech of which I have obtained a copy he makes some comments that I think I should bring to the attention of the House so that we know precisely what we are talking about. He made it clear that currently the New Zealand Symphony Orchestra has its own Act of Parliament under which it is established as a limited liability company. It is the intention of the Crown to change the form of ownership to a Crown entity. The Minister indicated that “the bill signals the Government’s expectation that the New Zealand Symphony Orchestra will provide the public of New Zealand with performances of symphonic music of an international standard. It will be required to seek to contribute to the development of a distinctly New Zealand cultural environment and to encourage New Zealand musical composition.” In his speech he said on the one hand that “Nothing in this legislation diminishes the New Zealand Symphony Orchestra’s artistic independence or integrity.” and in the next sentence he stated it “will continue to act without ministerial or indeed parliamentary direction in artistic matters”. But he had indicated earlier in his speech that it must seek to contribute to the development of a distinctively New Zealand cultural environment. Indeed clauses 8 and 9 of the bill make it quite clear that the orchestra must act within certain legislative confines. 
I do ask why we are changing this New Zealand Symphony Orchestra structure from a limited liability company to a Crown entity. Why are we wasting the time of the House in urgency on this legislation? What is so important what is so necessary and what is the mischief currently being undertaken that requires us to get rid of the New Zealand Symphony Orchestra Act? There is absolutely no reason whatsoever other than a whim of the Prime Minister. There seems to be no point in it at all. The orchestra is carrying on perfectly well. It is doing its job brilliantly and there is no need for the Government to interfere. But here we are being forced in urgency at 10 past 10 on a Wednesday morning—and being deprived of question time on Wednesday and Thursday—to look at a totally unnecessary restructure of the New Zealand Symphony Orchestra. 
Why must we have yet another Crown entity? Many years ago I ranted and railed against quangos—quasi non-governmental organisations. There is a cause out there for someone to rant and rail against Crown entities. These things are being set up with a view to not having any governmental ministerial responsibility on the one hand but then the Government sets up Acts of Parliament that say they virtually must do what Parliament wants. 
I enjoy the New Zealand Symphony Orchestra. I actually do attend its performances. I read with interest its Wellington season programme for 2003 of which I have a copy here. In my last speech I read out some of its work. Of course in the bill there is a requirement that the orchestra have New Zealand performers and New Zealand performances. We had one David Farquhar’s third symphony just last week. But apart from that we seem to be struggling to get any New Zealand performers of any note. I know that in this year’s programme there are meant to be four performances of New Zealand work—work of people who won a prize in a local competition. But what happens if the winner happens to be from overseas? Will we limit the people who take part in New Zealand competitions? If the winner happens to be an overseas person will that person’s work get the opportunity to be played or will the performances be limited to work by a New Zealand person? Will we restrict in effect the development of classical-type music and of music generally in New Zealand? 
The New Zealand Symphony Orchestra programme for 2003 is a wonderful one a varied one. I noted the report on Monday 3 March of its programme  
A Great Orchestra A Great Journey 
. I listened to the radio programme where Peter Walls from the New Zealand Symphony Orchestra was talking about the wonderful programme the orchestra has this year. We are all looking forward to attending. 
One must not forget that there are other orchestras around the country. In the overall scene we must not forget that they also have needs. I will not go too much into the question of how they will be funded—for example through the Responsible Gambling Bill—or how controls will be imposed on how that money is used. That will be a debate in another area. But I notice that a press release from the Christchurch City Council compliments on the 30th anniversary of the Christchurch-Kurashiki sister city relationship the work of the Christchurch Youth Orchestra and the Kurashiki Junior Philharmonia of which 19 members were to be in Christchurch. We want to be sure that we continue supporting development of such orchestras in Christchurch the Waikato Auckland Dunedin or wherever they might be. 
We in New Zealand must at this point also express our indebtedness to Klaus Heymann and his Naxos label. We all know the recent Lilburn work which was put out by Naxos and won great praise in the United Kingdom—I think it was top of the charts. The New Zealand Symphony Orchestra’s work is now receiving international fame. I recall also that the New Zealand Symphony Orchestra will be funded to go Japan—fully funded I believe by the Japanese. We must all take great pride in its work. 
But again as I say we must not forget orchestras such as the Auckland Philharmonia and its wonderful Royal and SunAlliance series of 2003 which many of us will be attending and groups such as Bach Musica with its 2003 subscription series which is held from time to time at St Matthew’s in the City in Auckland. It is attended invariably by a full house. 
When we are passing this bill we must not ever overlook the fact that the New Zealand Symphony Orchestra owes its existence to a large extent to all those young girls and boys who go along to their piano practice their violin practice their cello practice and suchlike and work their way towards being in an orchestra. 
This bill also talks about the development of New Zealand performing art. I understand that once upon a time Dr Bruce Gregory a former member for Northern Maori gave us an exposition on an instrument called the nguru. It is an instrument that is inserted in the nostril; as the name implies snoring or snorting through it gives a whistling sound. I wonder whether today’s Minister of Maori Affairs would give us a demonstration on the nguru so that the development of this fine New Zealand instrument is continued by yet another member of this House. Maybe with the size of our Minister of Maori Affairs we might have a double concerto from the nguru—one from each nostril.