Hughes Gareth: Telecommunications (TSO Broadband and Other Matters) Amendment Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Hughes Gareth: Telecommunications (TSO Broadband and Other Matters) Amendment Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:673;Page:19474] 
GARETH HUGHES (Green) 
: 
 Kia ora Mr Chairperson. Nga mihi nui ki a koutou. Kia ora. I am going to take a quick call on the Telecommunications (TSO Broadband and Other Matters) Amendment Bill. I want to put into  
Hansard 
 the absolutely shocking and poor process this legislation has been through in this Chamber. The Minister has a name as the “Colossus of Roads” wearing his Ministry of Transport hat. Now as Minister for Communications and Information Technology he clearly has a name for himself as the “Minister of Poor Process”. This bill is being rushed through under a secret drafting process. We saw Supplementary Order Paper 204 slammed on the Table. The Supplementary Order Paper the size of a normal piece of legislation was slammed on the Table with only a limited time given to the public to have their say. Now we are seeing the same occur. The Minister has slammed another Supplementary Order Paper Supplementary Order Paper 247 on the Table. I missed it originally when I went to the Table because I thought it was a bill on the Table. But no in fact it is the Minister’s Supplementary Order Paper 247. 
Supplementary Order Paper 247 does some pretty large things. I do not think anyone out in the public or in the telecommunications sector except maybe Telecom was aware of the big changes happening in the Kiwi share obligation. My question to the Minister in the chair the Minister for Communications and Information Technology is that if the Minister is going to ensure the protections around Kiwi ownership and the protections around Kiwi telecommunication customers through the deed with Chorus why does that not exist in the legislation? Why is the Minister watering down these protections? The second question for the Minister is how many times he has been meeting with Telecom directly to discuss this issue. If we had a lobbying bill in Parliament like the one the member Sue Kedgley has we might know the answer to some of these questions. How many times was the Minister asked directly by Telecom to get this provision? 
The Kiwi share obligation protects Kiwi ownership of Telecom and protects Kiwi customers. We are seeing the Minister protect Telecom instead. Through this bill more than $900 million of the $1.35 billion for the Government’s Ultra-fast Broadband Initiative will be going to Telecom and will be going offshore in terms of profits. We saw the same thing with the regulatory forbearance. Members on the Finance and Expenditure Committee argued during deliberations to keep the regulatory forbearance; they argued for it passionately against the special access undertakings. My question for them is why they are now happy. Again through a poor process 2 days after the Finance and Expenditure Committee’s report was tabled in this House the Minister totally got rid of the regulatory forbearance the regulatory holiday. Why are those members who were such active advocates for regulatory forbearance in the select committee now quite prepared to see all that work literally wiped away? The Minister has through another poor process got rid of that forbearance period because of the work of the Maori Party and the last-minute stitch-up. 
We have gone from what was essentially a Wild West environment. The Government would not put in enough money to achieve its coverage ambitions of 75 percent so it decided to set up a Wild West environment whereby there would be no regulation or laws to foster civilisation out in the Wild West if we take that analogy. Now essentially the Government has still set up the Wild West but it is offering to underwrite all the costs and all the risks of the private companies trying to develop themselves in that Wild West environment. So my question for the Minister is simply like the question asked of Dr Mapp in the House today how much money he asked Cabinet for given that this was the second priority on the table for the Government at the election. Did the Minister ask for more than $1.35 billion; if so what was the figure? It should be an easy question to answer. 
Essentially the “Minister of Poor Process” continues that poor process. There is no analysis of the major changes in Supplementary Order Paper 247; there is no public input. The Minister just stands there and tells us to trust him trust the negotiations at Crown Fibre Holdings and trust the contracts. Quite frankly I do not trust the Minister at all.