English Bill: Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
English Bill: Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Sitting date: 14 December 2004. Volume:622;Page:17891. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (National—Clutha-Southland) 
: 
 Here we have in clause 71 another example of pointless legislation. If we read the heading of clause 71 it gives us the impression that there are some criteria for appointments or recommendations made by the responsible Minister. 
John Key 
: What are they? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: Well there are not any. When we read through the clause we see that it states: “(2) A responsible Minister—(a) may only appoint … a person who in the responsible Minister’s opinion has the appropriate knowledge skills and experience …”. That has not prevented the president of the Labour Party from being appointed to eight different Crown entities with a rumoured salary of about half that of Television One’s favourite newsreader. 
Deborah Coddington 
: How much? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: Well it is just rumour. I would not want to represent it to the Committee as fact. 
So that part of clause 71 means that there are actually no criteria. I ask the Minister in the chair Trevor Mallard to ask his officials what the criteria are so that he can advise the Committee. “Criteria” means exclusion. “Criteria” has no meaning unless it excludes some things. I guess that is a matter of the philosophy of logic or something but in this clause it includes everything. So the Minister can get up and tell us who could be excluded from being appointed to any Crown entity by clause 71 which is headed: “Criteria for appointments or recommendations by responsible Minister”. Of course there is a set of unofficial criteria. 
Then the Minister can tell me what clause 71(2)(b) means. Talk about weasel words! Clause 71(2)(b) provides that a responsible Minister: “(b) subject to subsection (1)”—which means he must appoint the people consistent with the criteria which do not exist—“in appointing or recommending an appointment must”—there is strong language—“take into account the desirability of promoting diversity in the membership of Crown entities.” So it does not state that he must ensure diversity. If it were to do so at least that particular clause would then have some integrity because it would be a directive to the Minister or a requirement in the law that he must ensure diversity—but it does not say that. 
So one could breach that clause. It could actually mean something because one might not do it but the clause states that the Minister must take into account the desirability of promoting diversity. So it is not even the desirability of diversity itself; it is the desirability of promoting diversity. It actually means nothing. How could one ever show that a Minister has not taken into account the desirability of promoting diversity? I desire to promote diversity—absolutely! Who would not? It does not mean that I am compelled to appoint anyone in particular for any reason at all. 
So clause 71 is a complete waste of time. It has no legal effect. I would welcome it if the Minister could get up and tell us. He has four officials here at half past 11 at night. He should go and ask them some questions. What is the legal effect of clause 71? Who does it exclude and who cannot be appointed? What behaviour of a Minister would amount to a breach of clause 71 and if there is a breach of that clause what would happen then? Who will take action against the Minister over the provision that mentions the desirability of promoting diversity? 
The old Labour Party used to be just for diversity. It used to ensure it and it used to make one do it. 
John Key 
: This is the third way! 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: It is the fourth way actually. The third way was to promote diversity and the fourth way is to ensure the desirability of promoting diversity. 
Of course what Labour members do when they get up in front of diverse audiences is say something quite different. If they stood up in front of the Maori community and said: “This is the section that guarantees you are going to get appointed to Crown entities.” the audience would laugh because they would know it means nothing. What Labour members get up and say is: “We will make sure absolutely that you are going to get there.”