Smith Nick: New Zealand Geographic Board (Nga Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa) Bill — In Committee 
Smith Nick: New Zealand Geographic Board (Nga Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:646;Page:15539] 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson) 
: 
 The fact that Parliament is even debating the New Zealand Geographic Board (Nga Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa) Bill speaks volumes about how weak the Government’s programme is. I ask the members opposite what the problem is. Parliament is sitting fewer days this year than in any year in recent history. An Order Paper that is so light on a programme shows a bereft Government that has run out of ideas. It will not be long before it joins the history books. In this bill we have a Government desperately trying to fix something that is not broken. I do not know how many of my colleagues have received desperate letters from their constituents saying: “Please reform the New Zealand Geographic Board.” 
Chris Auchinvole 
: Not a one! 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: Not a one. I challenge members opposite: have they been inundated? I have certainly had letters from constituents concerned about their interest rates going through the roof concerning the Government putting up taxes and concerning the bureaucracy of the Building Act and the Resource Management Act. I have not had a single letter expressing concern about the New Zealand Geographic Board. 
I note that the bill takes away the current right of the public to be notified when the Government proposes to change the name of a particular place or community. In clause 24 we see a sneaky wee provision to lock the public out. I want to know where the Government’s mandate is for that change. People get very attached to the names of the communities they live in whether it is the Brightwaters the Nelsons the Wellingtons— 
Chris Auchinvole 
: The St Arnauds. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: My colleague Chris Auchinvole will soon be the elected representative for the community of St Arnaud where there has been a very vigorous debate about whether that place should be called Rotoiti or St Arnaud. This sneaky little provision in clause 24 changes the existing law so that a change can be made by the Geographic Board to the name of a community without any public process at all. We think that is wrong. What is even more bizarre is that when this process began the Government said it would give a greater role to our local councils. That makes pretty good sense. They know their local communities. None of that is in the bill and National asks why not. If we are going to have a reform bill for the New Zealand Geographic Board— 
Darien Fenton 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. Can I clarify what exactly we are doing? I thought we were debating Part 1 including schedule 1 not clause 24 which is in Part 2. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: Thank you for raising that. I leave it to the Hon Dr Smith. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: I draw the member’s attention to what is referred to in the purpose clause. It is all about the public having a role. How can those members say in Part 1 that they are going to give the public a role in decision making about names then further down the track take it away? We are simply arguing that that is improper and that is why National is saying that this is just another desperate bill from a Government that is in trouble on the way out and trying to do something that will make it look busy even though it has run out of ideas. It is time for a new Government.