Lole-Taylor Asenati: Arts Council of New Zealand Toi Aotearoa Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeLole-Taylor Asenati: Arts Council of New Zealand Toi Aotearoa Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 03 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15192. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Le’aufa’amulia ASENATI LOLE-TAYLOR (NZ First): I rise on behalf of New Zealand First to speak on one aspect of the Arts Council of New Zealand Toi Aotearoa Bill that pertains to the accessibility of funding through decision making for minority groups particularly for Pacific peoples. It is quite a concern for me when I look through this bill. I am also very pleased to hear that the Labour Party is actually supporting my colleague Tracey Martin’s Supplementary Order Paper 35.This bill contains exclusionary provisions that are not transparent and that limit the ability of certain communities to access the available funding at the right level because their voices will have to be channelled through another layer of bureaucracy. They have to go through a different layer because their voices are not considered good enough for them to be sitting round the same table or sitting on the same council as those whom the Minister has elected to be part of the Arts Council.Although New Zealand First supports the appointment of the Hon Luamanuvao Winnie Laban as chair of the council we are concerned about how this bill will be perceived by those who really need it the most. The restrictive process of attaining funding will inevitably make the process of accessing crucial funding more difficult. That funding could go a long way for the communities that need it the most. I am talking about the Pacific community here. Their arts their crafts and their dramas have been recognised by New Zealand in order to sell or to market itself at the international level. These restrictive provisions will make this bill futile and will create a barrier for many people that will stop them taking up funding opportunities that they deserve.I can see the vision that this bill aims to support but the vision is inconsistent with the bill we have before us today. If the Minister for Arts Culture and Heritage wants to create more funding opportunities then this bill should require some reassessing or reviewing in the area of allowing the voice of Pacific Island people at the decision-making table. But if the point of this bill is to make it more restrictive and exclusionary towards potential providers and community networks then the Minister is going about things the right way. That is the way that this bill is presented to us.I will read from the bill. In Part 1 clause 3(2)(c) and (d) states: “recognise the arts of the Pacific Island peoples of New Zealand; and … recognise and uphold the principles …”. It talks about principles. Which principles is the Minister referring to when he is not even considering the people or the voice of the Pacific Island people being part of this decision making? Also in order to get the distribution of funding to the right levelof the community Pacific Island peoples are going to have to go through a different layer.I think that I must call it a con artist attempt because that is what it is all about. There are many people out there who recognise Pacific arts as unique and who consider them invaluable to New Zealand’s culture yet this bill takes away the opportunity for ordinary Pacific New Zealanders to have fair access to the decision-making process of funding at the right level. This bill is nothing but a layer of con bureaucratic attempts that is being used to stop Pacific communities from having a voice through a committee. This bill aims to justify the Government’s efforts to eliminate Pacific organisations from being able to expand on their skills in Polynesian arts and also to recognise the culture and the unique contribution that they have made to this country for many years. It is appalling to see ethnic groups like Pacific people being treated so unfairly. I am saying “unfairly” because they have worked really hard for this country. They have made this country their home and yet their culture and their arts are just being used and taken for granted.The Ministers boast about the uniqueness of Pacific arts—if it is not music it is dance or drama or through a poem. One thing that I want to make clear is that the Pacific is not there for the purpose of exploitation. The Pacific people are resourceful and they have the innate abilities that often generate adequate resources of income. It is certainly an area that is fast becoming a platform for others to learn from. New Zealand has a pivotal role to play in ensuring that our Pacific people in New Zealand receive the means to be self-reliant self-efficient. Our Pacific people in Aotearoa do not want a handout; all they want is a hand up. That is what they want. This bill will fundamentally ensure that Pacific Islanders will require a platform from which to prosper and benefit from economic growth and development.This bill should be reviewed to avoid Pacific artists being marginalised and overwhelmed by the new structure the Arts Council is actually introducing. That is the reason why we believe Supplementary Order Paper 364 in the name of Jacinda Ardern which used to be Supplementary Order Paper 34 in the name of Charles Chauvel is a good Supplementary Order Paper and that it should be supported. It really recognises the loophole that this bill has created. I am going to be absolutely astounded if the bill passes as it is. It is a con artist in action and it has no regard for the benefit of the ordinary Pacific artists of our country. Thank you.