Auchinvole Chris: Historic Places Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Auchinvole Chris: Historic Places Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:631;Page:3533] 
CHRIS AUCHINVOLE (National) 
: 
 I stand to speak against the Historic Places Amendment Bill. I am disappointed that the bill has come to this Committee stage still containing the aspects that were previously considered unsatisfactory by this side of the Chamber. I guess to some extent the reality is that in expecting change from the present Government with its ideological mindset it is the expectancy that is at fault for it is clear that the Government is locked in pursuing not the interests of Parliament of a balanced debate or of the country but only its own ideological programme. 
If we needed any clearer indication of the Government’s being besotted with its own agenda to the exclusion of all else we need only examine its response to the power blackout of yesterday. At best its response could be described as bland. It is as if the Government would prefer that the blackout had not happened but as it has happened has no intention of accepting ministerial responsibility or acknowledging that it is looking at a symptom of infrastructural disease caused by the last 6 years of neglect. Fixing this sort of problem is not on the ideologically driven agenda of Labour. 
How do we see the Government’s ideological bent displayed on this particular issue? The unacceptable and unexplained part of the bill is the sweeping change to the membership of the Historic Places Trust in two ways. Firstly the number of trustees is being reduced from eleven to nine. Secondly of the nine trustees six will be appointed by the Minister. Why does the Minister need to have such a dominant effect on the appointment of trustees? My caucus colleagues have given details of the initial legislation that brought this trust into being. It was never perceived to be a plaything of a Minister. 
The Government seems intent on taking control of every aspect of life it can in ever-increasing measures. Indeed I was told the other day [ 
Interruption 
]—and the party Mr Donnelly belongs to helps the Government—by someone on the West Coast a really good philosophical West Coaster that there are not many avenues in life left where the Government has left any life. The Government consumes everything and this measure is akin to many of the regulatory stands it has taken—for instance the food and safety regulations. Increasingly Government-controlled agencies seek to permeate the fibre of our society to ever greater degrees coming ever closer to controlling individuals in each aspect of their lives—because that I think is what it would like to do. 
The change to ministerial control of this trust is not justified. It is not even explained beyond the statement that it “better reflects the funding arrangements” for the New Zealand Historic Places Trust. This completely overlooks the value of having independent trustees and the time-honoured checks and balances and the input that independent trustees bring to organisations. 
Another concern with regard to these appointments is that it is now a matter of compulsion not just that three members have expertise in matters Maori but that three members be Maori. Again it is not the aspect of ethnicity that concerns me; it is the Government— 
Hon Brian Donnelly 
: That’s not exactly consistent with what Georgina was saying. 
CHRIS AUCHINVOLE 
: The member has not let me finish but then he never does. It is consistent with what Georgina has said because my concern is not—as I was just saying—with the ethnicity of the make-up of the trust; it is with the Labour Party’s absolute fixation with compulsion. It permeates everything. I heard today that it will now be compulsory for people to declare when their dog dies and that those who do not do so will face a $100 fine. I have not verified it yet but I understand that that is to happen.