Beaumont Carol: Fair Trading (Soliciting on Behalf of Charities) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Beaumont Carol: Fair Trading (Soliciting on Behalf of Charities) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:659;Page:8401] 
CAROL BEAUMONT (Labour) 
: 
 I rise to speak in support of the Fair Trading (Soliciting on Behalf of Charities) Amendment Bill 2009—a member’s bill in the name of Amy Adams. As Labour’s consumer affairs spokesperson it gives me pleasure to support this bill. We agree very much with the aims of the bill which are to provide increased transparency and public accountability for professional third-party collectors who are in the business of collecting funds on behalf of registered charities. Like Ms Adams I recognise the very important contribution that those charities make to our country and overseas and I recognise the very hard environment that they operate in particularly in tough economic times like those we face now. 
As I have said Labour supports this bill’s referral to select committee and will look forward to discussing the mechanics of it and perhaps some of its definitions. It is a good bill and it addresses an area of concern for the public and that is why we are supporting it. Currently damage is being done to the non-profitable and charitable sector by what have been referred to as the “charity cowboys”. That is what the Fundraising Institute of New Zealand has called some of the third-party professional collectors. We do not want to see the very many reputable organisations that are providing the overwhelming amount of what is collected to the people they are aiming to help being damaged by these cowboys. 
It begs the question of why this is not a Government bill because there is widespread concern about this issue. I note that all the Government is prepared to do in this space is direct “the Office for the Community and Voluntary Sector to offer support to the Fundraising Institute of New Zealand as it develops its fundraising Standards”. Those are the words of Tariana Turia in a speech made to the Charities Commission just recently. The bill recognises the right of people to know where their hard-earned money will go whether it is going to the charity of their choice or to the profit-making third-party collectors and that is important. 
The bill is consistent with very sound consumer principles such as transparency and informed choice. People will be able to decide whether they want to give to charities where a significant portion of what they are giving is being retained by third-party collectors. We also need to see a Minister of Consumer Affairs who is addressing matters that are important to consumers. There are many important matters on which consumers need to see action and frankly they are not. Such areas include improving consumer knowledge and protection especially given that the consequences of bad decisions and rip-offs are more significant in tough economic times when people are already struggling to make ends meet. 
We also need to recognise the needs of vulnerable consumers those who are poor or have low literacy or low levels of English and our elderly and our young people. We need to improve services and information that targets them including I believe access to advocacy. We need to see action on targeting exploitation. Here I am thinking particularly of loan sharks and truck shops. As Labour’s consumer affairs spokesperson members will be seeing action from me in these areas because these people are specifically and systematically targeting low-income people who cannot afford the sorts of rip-offs that they are promoting. 
We need to see continuing updating of our consumer law to take account of changing relationships: for example online selling. We certainly need to recognise and this is where I think Ms Adams’ bill is so important that an increasing number of consumers desire to spend their money or invest in things in an ethical and sustainable way and to use their consumer choices effectively. I think this bill is part of that. We want to see more action in the area of consumer affairs and at the moment we are not seeing a great deal from the Minister of Consumer Affairs. 
As to the specifics of the bill as I said at the start of my speech it aims to improve transparency and disclosure to the public. Currently there are no rules on what has to be disclosed except that no misleading or deceptive statements may be made as is clearly outlined under the Fair Trading Act. The bill will require professional third-party collectors to disclose to potential donors that a portion of the donation will be retained by the collector and that will apply only as Ms Adams has outlined if the proportion retained is more than 20 percent. This does not apply if the donation is less than $20 and made by cash only. 
I think it interesting that a distinction has been made between the proportion retained between 20 and 50 percent which will mean that the collectors have to simply disclose that a portion is being retained and withheld by them but not the amount and where the proportion retained is more than 50 percent the collectors will have to disclose to the nearest percentage point what percentage is being retained. I think that is a matter that should be discussed in the select committee. I do not quite know what the reasoning is behind that distinction and I think that in lots of ways 20 percent is a pretty significant amount to be retaining. Perhaps the answer is to make it a requirement to disclose for any amount over 20 percent what proportion is being retained. 
Public accountability is really important in the credibility of our charity and voluntary sector. It is important to give people the confidence to donate. We need people to donate to support organisations. As has already been mentioned many of the MPs in this Chamber take part in collecting for charity and we want to know that these are reputable organisations and that the money is going where the need is. 
There are a few examples I want to raise. The one that Ms Adams raised concerned Epilepsy New Zealand. Again I think it is pretty appalling so I will put that on the record as well: $2.82 million was gathered in donations through telemarketing and approximately $2.1 million of that went straight back to the telemarketers. In other words $70000 went to Epilepsy New Zealand. That was described by the Fundraising Institute of New Zealand as absolutely scandalous and I agree; 2.5 percent of what was collected actually went to where people thought they were giving the money. The recent telethon on TV3 for the benefit of KidsCan Charitable Trust was also in the spotlight for claims that less than 20 percent of the money raised was being passed through to the disadvantaged children that KidsCan Charitable Trust was actually collecting for. The trust has recently announced that in fact 80 percent was passed through to the disadvantaged children but I think a bill like this one would make sure that there was not that uncertainty and that there was not any room for people arguing that the money was not going where it should be. 
The show on Television New Zealand (TVNZ) that I think is going to be canned and it is a shame that Mr Hide is not in the Chamber because we all recollect his performance on it— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: Order! 
CAROL BEAUMONT 
: I am sorry; excuse me. I know I cannot comment on the fact. I was merely reflecting on how we enjoyed his performance. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: The member cannot refer to the absence of any member from the Chamber and the member should not be trying to relitigate after I have already cautioned her. 
CAROL BEAUMONT 
: I am very sorry. As I was saying TVNZ’s show  
Dancing with the Stars 
 was also caught up in controversy not just because Rodney Hide was dancing on it but also because only 60 percent of the money raised by it actually made it to the recipients. So probably hundreds of thousands of New Zealanders donated to that show but only 60 percent of the money raised actually went to the recipients that people were fund-raising for. 
These examples show the need for this bill. As I have already mentioned there are probably some areas we could debate in the select committee. Again on behalf of Labour I congratulate Amy Adams on this bill. I will finish by saying that the important thing here is that this bill means we support those genuine organisations that are doing the right thing and are supporting the people who need that support. We do not want to see the reputations of those organisations undermined by some of the examples I have just given. Thank you. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: The next speaker will be Katrina Shanks. Before she begins I say to members that we are having 5-minute calls with a 1-minute bell.