Roy Heather: New Zealand Symphony Orchestra Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Roy Heather: New Zealand Symphony Orchestra Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:12324] 
HEATHER ROY (ACT) 
: 
 I rise to speak to Part 2 of the New Zealand Symphony Orchestra Bill. That was quite a rant and a rave that members have just heard from the Associate Minister for Arts Culture and Heritage. I would like to contest some of the points she was making. 
Dr Paul Hutchison 
: It’s called a crescendo. 
HEATHER ROY 
: That is right; it was a crescendo. We will come to the musical terms in a minute and see who knows some of them. She says that New Zealanders deserve the best and she is quite right—we do deserve the best. But this bill will not provide the New Zealand Symphony Orchestra with the best environment in which it can thrive. 
The clear fact of the matter is that the Government does not trust the players. Mr Alexander was quite right in the comments he made and the members from other parties who support Mike Ward’s amendment were also quite right. There is a very clear reason for a player not being part of the board—unless we can persuade the National Party to join our ranks over here—and it is that the players are not trusted. Quite why that is I do not know. The boards of trustees for schools have student representatives. Many boards have representatives of the people they represent and they are the best people to provide the good advice that the boards need. Nobody disputes that that advice is needed. The Minister said the players meet with the board 
anyway. Nobody gives better-quality advice than somebody who has voting rights on a board. If the Minister were honest with herself she would admit that. 
Clauses 8 and 9 in Part 2 are another indication that the players are not trusted. Clause 8 discusses the principal objectives of the orchestra. Clause 8(a) states: “to provide the public of New Zealand with live and recorded performances of symphonic music performed to an international standard:”. I ask the Minister how on earth we can legislate to reach an international standard. Will the Minister take responsibility for judging that? Will she say whether the first violins’ vibrato is vibratory enough? Will she say that the flautist is playing pianissimo instead of piano? What will she do to the pianist who inadvertently mixes his upper and lower mordents? Will it be the Minister in the chair who decides that? The definition of “Minister” states: “the Minister who under the authority of any warrant or with the authority of the Prime Minister” so perhaps the Prime Minister will decide whether the upper mordent was played correctly or whether it should have been the lower. Maybe she does not know the difference. It would be nice to know who will determine that. It is clearly unrealistic to legislate that the orchestra play to an international standard. 
Clause 8(b) states: “to provide an orchestra that—(i) is highly skilled and artistically imaginative;”. I notice that there is no definition of “artistically imaginative”. Perhaps the Minister would like to tell us what exactly that means. No she does not know. If it cannot be defined why has it been put in the bill as a principal objective that the orchestra must reach? 
Clause 9 “Functions of Orchestra” is just as absurd as the principal objectives. Clause 9(a) states: “to ensure that the orchestra presents a broad repertoire of orchestral performance including New Zealand works and recent works:”. Will we have a quota? Will we have a 25 percent New Zealand music quota in the same way that radio stations are supposed to play that amount? The Minister yawns. I ask her whether New Zealand music is not up to scratch or whether 25 percent is not the right level of quota that she is going to tell us we need to hear. Another function is “to encourage the development of New Zealand musicians:”. I contend that the people who pay good money to go and listen to the New Zealand Symphony Orchestra want good-quality music. Sometimes they like to hear New Zealand music but they want to go along and hear good-quality symphonic music. We know already that it is to be of an international standard. 
The ridiculousness of those two clauses is really beyond belief. The power of the Minister—from the definition of “Minister” the Prime Minister could be involved too—leaves this measure wide open for political interference as is much of the legislation that has come before this Parliament of late. The ACT party will not support this part of the bill. It will support the amendments.